[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 8 (Monday, January 13, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1521-1523]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-327]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000-NM-166-AD; Amendment 39-13009; AD 2002-26-20]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-81 (MD-
81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), and DC-9-83 (MD-83) Airplanes, and Model MD-88 
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-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 
(MD-82), and DC-9-83 (MD-83) airplanes, and Model MD-88 airplanes, that 
requires an inspection of the disconnect panel area above the aft left 
lavatory for chafed or damaged wires or unacceptable clearance between 
the wires and adjacent structure, and corrective actions, if necessary. 
The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent chafing of 
wires at the disconnect panel above the aft left lavatory, which could 
result in electrical arcing, and consequent fire in the cabin. This 
action is intended to address the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Effective February 18, 2003.

[[Page 1522]]

    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in 
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as 
of February 18, 2003.

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: Data 
and Service Management, Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024). This information may 
be examined at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport 
Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 
Washington; or at the FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 
3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California; or at the Office of the 
Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, 
DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elvin Wheeler, Aerospace Engineer, 
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft 
Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 
90712-4137; telephone (562) 627-5344; 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-9-81, -82, and -83 series airplanes, and Model MD-88 airplanes was 
published in the Federal Register on March 14, 2002 (67 FR 11453). That 
action proposed to require an inspection of the disconnect panel area 
above the aft left lavatory for chafed or damaged wires or unacceptable 
clearance between the wires and adjacent structure, and corrective 
actions, if necessary.

Comments

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

Request To Withdraw Proposed AD

    One commenter suggests that the FAA reconsider mandating the 
service bulletin referenced in the proposed AD until other methods of 
resolution are investigated. Specifically, the commenter would like the 
FAA to work with Jamco and Boeing to develop a better solution, such as 
modifying the connector bracket and protecting the adjacent wire 
bundle. The commenter states that its airplanes have had wire chafing 
in the disconnect panel area above the aft left lavatory, and necessary 
precautions were taken to preclude further damage. The commenter notes 
that removing the corner of the electrical connector bracket and 
protecting the affected wire bundle with Teflon tape has provided an 
effective resolution to eliminate wire chafing on its airplanes. The 
commenter adds that the corrective action specified in the proposed AD 
that would require adjusting the clearance to 0.50 inch with the use of 
``tie-wraps,'' cannot be attained without creating a preload condition 
that could cause additional wire damage. A second commenter supports 
these concerns and suggests that the FAA withdraw the proposed AD and 
develop a more effective solution.
    We do not agree with the commenters. We investigated the 
commenters' concerns and found that the airplane manufacturer did, in 
fact, inspect the wires in the aft left disconnect panel for a preload 
condition. The inspection revealed that a preload condition should not 
exist on the wires if they are ``properly secured'' with tie-wraps to 
obtain the 0.50-inch minimum clearance between the wires and the 
adjacent structure. If a preload condition is in some way created by 
adding the tie-wraps to the wires per the instructions in the service 
bulletin, the tie-wraps on the wire bundle, including the tie-wraps 
above the bundle, should be cut and reinstalled to obtain the 0.50-inch 
clearance, which will eliminate the preload condition. The manufacturer 
also investigated the possibility of cutting off the corner of the 
electrical connector bracket to eliminate the possibility of wire 
chafing, but there was a risk of damaging the existing wires with the 
tooling device used. No change to the final rule is necessary in this 
regard. However, if data are submitted that provide an alternative 
procedure that will offer an acceptable level of safety, we would 
consider this under the provisions for an alternative method of 
compliance, as provided in paragraph (b) of this final rule.

Explanation of Editorial Change

    We have changed the service bulletin citation throughout this final 
rule to exclude the Appendix (and Evaluation Form). The service 
bulletin recommends that report findings be submitted to the 
manufacturer using the Appendix of the service bulletin. However, this 
AD does not require that operators submit reports of inspection 
findings.

Explanation of Change to Applicability

    We have changed the applicability of the proposed AD to identify 
model designations as published in the most recent type certificate 
data sheet for the affected models.

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 1,198 airplanes of the affected design in 
the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 586 airplanes of U.S. 
registry will be affected by this AD, that it will take approximately 1 
work hour per airplane to accomplish the required inspection, 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 $35,160, 
or $60 per airplane.
    The 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. The cost impact figures discussed 
in AD rulemaking actions represent only the time necessary to perform 
the specific actions actually required by the AD. These figures 
typically do not include incidental costs, such as the time required to 
gain access and close up, planning time, or time necessitated by other 
administrative actions.

Regulatory Impact

    The regulations adopted herein will 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. Therefore, it 
is determined that this final rule does not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132.
    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

[[Page 1523]]

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:

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:

2002-26-20 McDonnell Douglas: Amendment 39-13009. Docket 2000-NM-
166-AD.

    Applicability: Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), and DC-9-
83 (MD-83) airplanes, and Model MD-88 airplanes; certificated in any 
category; as listed in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-24A184, 
dated October 26, 2000; equipped with Jamco lavatories.

    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 (b) 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 chafing of wires at the disconnect panel above the 
aft left lavatory, which could result in electrical arcing, and 
consequent fire in the cabin, accomplish the following:

Inspection and Corrective Actions

    (a) Within 120 days from the effective date of this AD, perform 
a general visual inspection of the disconnect panel area above the 
aft left lavatory for damaged or chafed wires or unacceptable 
clearance between the wires and structure, in accordance with Boeing 
Alert Service Bulletin MD80-24A184, excluding Appendix and 
Evaluation Form, all dated October 26, 2000.

    Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a general visual inspection 
is defined as: ``A visual examination of an interior or exterior 
area, installation, or assembly to detect obvious damage, failure, 
or irregularity. This level of inspection is made from within 
touching distance unless otherwise specified. A mirror may be 
necessary to enhance visual access to all exposed surfaces in the 
inspection area. This level of inspection is made under normally 
available lighting conditions such as daylight, hangar lighting, 
flashlight, or droplight and may require removal or opening of 
access panels or doors. Stands, ladders, or platforms may be 
required to gain proximity to the area being checked.''

    (1) Condition 1. If no damaged or chafed wire and if acceptable 
clearance (i.e., 0.50-inch minimum) between the wires and adjacent 
structure is found, no further action is required by this AD.
    (2) Condition 2. If no chafed or damaged wire and if 
unacceptable clearance between the wires and adjacent structure is 
found, before further flight, secure wires using tie-wraps to obtain 
a 0.50-inch minimum clearance, in accordance with the service 
bulletin.
    (3) Condition 3. If any chafed or damaged wire and unacceptable 
clearance between the wires and adjacent structure is found, before 
further flight, repair or replace any chafed or damaged wire with a 
new wire and secure wires using tie-wraps to obtain a 0.50-inch 
minimum clearance, in accordance with the service bulletin.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (b) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the 
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be 
used if approved by the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification 
Office (ACO), FAA. 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 3: 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

    (c) 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

    (d) The actions shall be done in accordance with Boeing Alert 
Service Bulletin MD80-24A184, excluding Appendix and Evaluation 
Form, all dated October 26, 2000. 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: Data and Service 
Management, Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024). 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, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California; or at the 
Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 
700, Washington, DC.

Effective Date

    (e) This amendment becomes effective on February 18, 2003.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 2, 2003.
Neil D. Schalekamp,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 03-327 Filed 1-10-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P