[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 232 (Wednesday, December 3, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 67618-67622]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-30114]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2003-NM-60-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-15, DC-9-
31, and DC-9-32 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This document proposes the adoption of a new airworthiness 
directive (AD) that is applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model 
DC-9-15, DC-9-31, and DC-9-32 airplanes. This proposal would require 
repetitive visual and x-ray inspections to detect cracks of the upper 
and lower corners and upper center of the door cutout of the aft 
pressure bulkhead; corrective actions, if necessary; and follow-on 
actions. For certain airplanes, the proposal also would require 
modification of the ventral aft pressure bulkhead. This action is 
necessary to detect and correct fatigue cracks in the corners and upper 
center of the door cutout of the aft pressure bulkhead, which could 
result in rapid decompression of the fuselage and consequent reduced 
structural integrity of the airplane. This action is intended to 
address the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by January 20, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, 
Attention: Rules Docket No. 2003-NM-60-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 
Renton, Washington 98055-4056. Comments may be inspected at this 
location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 
Federal holidays. Comments may be submitted via fax to (425) 227-1232. 
Comments may also be sent via the Internet using the following address: 
[email protected]. Comments sent via fax or the Internet must 
contain ``Docket No. 2003-NM-60-AD'' in the subject line and need not 
be submitted in triplicate. Comments sent via the Internet as attached 
electronic files must be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 or 2000 or 
ASCII text.
    The service information referenced in the proposed rule 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 FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind 
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft 
Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wahib Mina, Aerospace Engineer, 
Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification 
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; 
telephone (562) 627-5324; fax (562) 627-5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the 
proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as 
they may desire. Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number 
and be submitted in triplicate to the address specified above. All 
communications received on or before the closing date for comments, 
specified above, will be considered before taking action on the

[[Page 67619]]

proposed rule. The proposals contained in this action may be changed in 
light of the comments received.
    Submit comments using the following format:
    [sbull] Organize comments issue-by-issue. For example, discuss a 
request to change the compliance time and a request to change the 
service bulletin reference as two separate issues.
    [sbull] For each issue, state what specific change to the proposed 
AD is being requested.
    [sbull] Include justification (e.g., reasons or data) for each 
request.
    Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All 
comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing 
date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested 
persons. A report summarizing each FAA-public contact concerned with 
the substance of this proposal will be filed in the Rules Docket.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments 
submitted in response to this action must submit a self-addressed, 
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments 
to Docket Number 2003-NM-60-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and 
returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request 
to the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, Attention: Rules 
Docket No. 2003-NM-60-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 
98055-4056.

Discussion

    The FAA has received reports indicating that the repetitive x-ray 
inspections required by AD 85-01-02 R1, amendment 39-5241 (51 FR 6101, 
February 20, 1986), do not adequately detect fatigue cracks in all 
layers of a repaired or modified aft pressure bulkhead on certain Model 
DC-9 airplanes. Fatigue cracks in the corners and upper center of the 
door cutout of the aft pressure bulkhead, if not detected and 
corrected, could
result in rapid decompression of the fuselage and consequent reduced 
structural integrity of the airplane.

Related Rulemaking

    The FAA normally would issue an AD to supersede AD 85-01-02 R1 to 
continue to require the existing requirements, until the new proposed 
actions that address the identified unsafe condition are done. This 
involves restating the existing requirements of AD 85-01-02 R1 in the 
new AD. Because of the complexity of the requirements of AD 85-01-02 
R1, we previously issued AD 2002-07-06 as a ``stand--alone'' AD that 
did not supersede AD 85-01-02 R1. We included a paragraph in AD 2002-
07-06 that terminates the repetitive inspection requirements of AD 85-
01-02 R1.
    AD 2002-07-06, amendment 39-12700 (67 FR 16987, April 9, 2002), is 
applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-10, -20, -30, -40, 
and -50 series airplanes, and C-9 airplanes. That AD requires 
repetitive visual and x-ray inspections to detect cracks of the upper 
and lower corners and upper center of the door cutout of the aft 
pressure bulkhead; corrective actions, if necessary; and follow-on 
actions. The actions specified by that AD are intended to detect and 
correct fatigue cracks in the corners and upper center of the door 
cutout of the aft pressure bulkhead which could result in rapid 
decompression of the fuselage and consequent reduced structural 
integrity of the airplane.

Other Related Rulemaking

    The FAA also has previously issued AD 96-10-11, amendment 39-9618 
(61 FR 24675, May 16, 1996), applicable to McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9 
and DC-9-80 series airplanes, Model MD-88 airplanes, and C-9 (military) 
series airplanes. That AD requires certain inspections and structural 
modifications. Accomplishment of the modification (reference Boeing 
(McDonnell Douglas) Service Bulletin DC9-53-166) required by paragraph 
(d) or (e) of AD 96-10-11 (which references ``DC-9/MD-80 Aging Aircraft 
Service Action Requirements Document'' (SARD), McDonnell Douglas Report 
No. MDC K1572, Revision A, dated June 1, 1990, or Revision B, dated 
January 15, 1993, as the appropriate source of service information for 
accomplishing the modification) terminates the repetitive inspection 
requirements of paragraphs (b) and (c) of this proposed AD.

Explanation of Applicability

    Since issuance of AD 2002-07-06, the FAA was advised that 13 Model 
DC-9-15, DC-9-31, and DC-9-32 airplanes (manufacturer's fuselage 
numbers 0030, 0094, 0220, 0221, 0863, 0900, 0901, 0913, 0914, 0918, 
0923, 0926, and 0930) were excluded inadvertently from the effectivity 
of paragraph 1.A. of McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC9-53-137, 
Revision 07, dated February 6, 2001, which was referenced in the 
applicability of that AD as the appropriate source of service 
information for determining the affected airplanes. Therefore, we have 
determined that the additional airplanes are also subject to the same 
unsafe condition addressed in AD 2002-07-06. This proposed AD follows 
from that determination.

Explanation of Relevant Service Information

    The FAA has reviewed and approved McDonnell Douglas Service 
Bulletin DC9-53-137, Revision 09, dated January 30, 2003, which 
describes procedures that are essentially the same as those procedures 
included in McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC9-53-137, Revision 07, 
dated February 6, 2001, as cited in AD 2002-07-06. This revision also 
adds 13 additional airplane fuselage numbers to the effectivity. The 
airplanes were inadvertently omitted from Revision 07 of the service 
bulletin. No more work is necessary on airplanes changed as shown in 
Revision 07 of the service bulletin.
    The FAA also has reviewed and approved McDonnell Douglas DC-9 
Service Bulletin 53-165, Revision 3, dated May 3, 1989, which describes 
procedures for modification of the ventral aft pressure bulkhead 
structure (including cutting and removing flange of the upper; cutting 
and removing the lower flange of formers and replacing it with a clip; 
installing pads at the outboard end clips of formers; and replacing 
clearance fit bolts at the upper corner doubler angles with 
interference fit Hi-Lok pins and monel rivets).
    In addition, the FAA has reviewed and approved McDonnell Douglas 
DC-9 Service Bulletin 53-157, Revision 1, dated January 7, 1985, which 
describes, for certain airplanes, procedures for modification of the 
ventral aft pressure bulkhead (including encapsulating the head and nut 
of the attachments and applying a fillet seal of sealant around parts 
located on the forward and aft sides of the aft pressure bulkhead; and 
applying a soft film corrosion inhibiting compound to the forward and 
aft sides of the aft pressure bulkhead). For certain airplanes, these 
procedures must be done in conjunction with those in McDonnell Douglas 
DC-9 Service Bulletin 53-165.
    Accomplishment of the actions specified in the service bulletins is 
intended to adequately address the identified unsafe condition.
    Accomplishment of the actions specified in AD 2002-07-06 is 
acceptable for compliance with the requirements of this proposed AD.

[[Page 67620]]

FAA's Determination

    The FAA finds that if, after the effective date of this AD, the 
airplane is operated without cabin pressurization and a placard that 
prohibits operation with cabin pressurization is installed in the 
cockpit in full view of the pilot, the inspections and modification 
specified in the service bulletins described previously are not 
necessary.

Explanation of Requirements of Proposed Rule

    Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to 
exist or develop on other products of this same type design, the 
proposed AD would require accomplishment of the actions specified in 
the service bulletins described previously, except as discussed below.
    Since this AD expands the applicability of AD 2002-07-06, the FAA 
has considered a number of factors in determining whether to issue a 
new AD or to supersede the ``old'' AD. The FAA has considered the 
entire fleet size that would be affected by superseding AD 2002-07-06 
and the consequent workload associated with revising maintenance record 
entries. In light of this, the FAA has determined that a less 
burdensome approach is to issue a separate AD applicable only to the 
additional airplanes. This proposed AD would not supersede AD 2002-07-
06 or AD 85-01-02 R1; airplanes listed in the applicability of AD 2002-
07-06 and AD 85-01-02 R1 are required to continue to comply with the 
requirements of those ADs. This proposed AD is a separate AD action, 
and is applicable only to the McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-15, DC-9-31, 
and DC-9-32 airplanes, manufacturer's fuselage numbers 0030, 0094, 
0220, 0221, 0863, 0900, 0901, 0913, 0914, 0918, 0923, 0926, and 0930. 
Once the final rule has been issued and it becomes effective, we plan 
to rescind AD 85-01-02 R1.

Differences Between the Proposed AD and a Certain Referenced Service 
Bulletin

    McDonnell Douglas DC-9 Service Bulletin 53-165, Revision 3, dated 
May 3, 1989; and McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC9-53-137, 
Revision 09, dated January 30, 2003; recommend compliance times with 
only a ``threshold'' (i.e., before the airplane accumulates 15,000 
total landings, within 15,000 landings after the bulkhead modification, 
and at the earliest practical maintenance period feasible on airplanes 
that have accumulated more than 15,000 landings, respectively). These 
service bulletins do not provide a ``grace period'' for airplanes that 
have already reached (or will soon reach) the 15,000-landing threshold, 
which would result in some airplanes being in immediate non-compliance 
with the rule upon reaching the stated number of landings. Therefore, 
the compliance times specified in paragraphs (a), (d)(1), and (d)(2) of 
this proposed AD include a grace period of ``within 4,000 landings 
after the effective date of this AD.'' The FAA finds such a grace 
period for completing the required actions to be warranted, in that it 
represents an appropriate interval of time allowable for affected 
airplanes to continue to operate without compromising safety.
    Operators should note that, although the Accomplishment 
Instructions of McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC9-53-137, Revision 
09, dated January 30, 2003, describe procedures for reporting results 
of inspections, this proposed AD would not require those actions. The 
FAA does not need this information from operators.

Cost Impact

    There are 13 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide 
fleet. The FAA estimates that seven airplanes of U.S. registry would be 
affected by this proposed AD.
    It would take approximately 5 work hours per airplane to accomplish 
the proposed inspections, at an average labor rate of $65 per work 
hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the proposed AD on 
U.S. operators is estimated to be $2,275 or $325 per airplane.
    For certain airplanes, it would take approximately between 21 and 
26 work hours per airplane depending on the airplane configuration to 
accomplish the proposed modification specified in McDonnell Douglas DC-
9 Service Bulletin 53-165, Revision 3, dated May 3, 1989, at an average 
labor rate of $65 per work hour. Required parts would cost 
approximately between $3,470 and $11,831 per airplane, depending on the 
airplane configuration. Based on these figures, the cost impact of this 
proposed modification on U.S. operators is estimated to be between 
$4,835, or $13,521 per airplane.
    For certain airplanes, it would take approximately 9 work hours per 
airplane to accomplish the proposed modification specified in McDonnell 
Douglas DC-9 Service Bulletin 53-157, Revision 1, dated January 7, 
1985, at an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these 
figures, the cost impact of this proposed modification on U.S. 
operators is estimated to be $585 per airplane.
    The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions 
that no operator has yet accomplished any of the proposed requirements 
of this AD action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions 
in the future if this proposed 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 proposed herein 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. Therefore, it 
is determined that this proposal would not have federalism implications 
under Executive Order 13132.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that 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); 
and (3) if promulgated, 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 copy of the draft 
regulatory evaluation prepared for this action is contained in the 
Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by contacting the Rules 
Docket at the location provided under the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 
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:


[[Page 67621]]


McDonnell Douglas: Docket 2003-NM-60-AD

    Applicability: Model DC-9-15, DC-9-31, and DC-9-32 airplanes, 
manufacturer's fuselage numbers 0030, 0094, 0220, 0221, 0863, 0900, 
0901, 0913, 0914, 0918, 0923, 0926, and 0930; certificated in any 
category; equipped with a floor level hinged (ventral) door of the 
aft pressure bulkhead; as listed in McDonnell Douglas Service 
Bulletin DC9-53-137, Revision 09, dated January 30, 2003; except for 
those airplanes on which the modification required by paragraph (d) 
or (e) of AD 96-10-11, amendment 39-9618, or paragraph K of AD 85-
01-02 R1, amendment 39-5241, has been done.
    Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished 
previously.
    To detect and correct fatigue cracks in the corners and upper 
center of the door cutout of the aft pressure bulkhead, which could 
result in rapid decompression of the fuselage and consequent reduced 
structural integrity of the airplane, accomplish the following:

Visual and X-Ray Inspection

    (a) For airplanes on which the modification has not been 
accomplished per paragraph (i) of this AD: Except as provided by 
paragraph (j) of this AD, prior to the accumulation of 15,000 total 
landings, or within 4,000 landings after the effective date of this 
AD, whichever occurs later, do a visual inspection and an x-ray 
inspection to detect cracks of the upper and lower corners and upper 
center of the door cutout of the aft pressure bulkhead, per the 
Accomplishment Instructions of McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin 
DC9-53-137, Revision 09, dated January 30, 2003.

No Crack Detected: Repetitive Inspections

    (b) If no crack is detected during any inspection required by 
paragraph (a) of this AD, do the action specified in either 
paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this AD per the Accomplishment 
Instructions of McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC9-53-137, 
Revision 09, dated January 30, 2003, as applicable.
    (1) If interim prevention repairs have been performed per the 
service bulletin; AD 85-01-02 R1, or AD 96-10-11: Do a visual 
inspection and an eddy current inspection at the times specified in 
the service bulletin. Repeat the applicable repetitive inspections 
thereafter at intervals not to exceed the times specified in the 
service bulletin, until accomplishment of the action required by 
paragraph (d) or (i) of this AD.
    (2) If interim preventive repairs have not been performed per 
the service bulletin, do either paragraph (b)(2)(i) or (b)(2)(ii) of 
this AD:
    (i) Before further flight, install an interim preventive repair 
identified in Conditions I through XLIII inclusive, excluding 
Conditions XXI, XXXVII, and XXXVIII (not used at this time), per the 
service bulletin. At the times specified in the service bulletin, do 
a visual inspection and an eddy current inspection. At intervals not 
to exceed the times specified in the service bulletin, repeat the 
visual and eddy current inspections until accomplishment of the 
action specified in paragraph (d) or (i) of this AD; or
    (ii) At intervals not to exceed the times specified in the 
service bulletin, repeat the visual inspection and x-ray inspection 
required by paragraph (a) of this AD, until accomplishment of the 
action specified in paragraph (d) or (i) of this AD.

Any Crack Detected: Corrective Actions and Repetitive Inspections

    (c) If any crack is detected during any inspection required by 
paragraph (a) or (b) of this AD, do the actions specified in 
paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD per the Accomplishment 
Instructions of McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC9-53-137, 
Revision 09, dated January 30, 2003.
    (1) Before further flight, do the applicable corrective actions 
(i.e., modification of the bulkhead; trim forward facing flange; 
stop drill ends of cracks; install repair kit; replacement of 
cracked part with new parts; and install additional doublers) 
identified in Conditions I through XLIII inclusive, excluding 
Conditions XXI, XXXVII, and XXXVIII (not used at this time), of the 
Accomplishment Instructions of the service bulletin; and
    (2) At the times specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of 
the service bulletin, do the applicable repetitive inspections, 
until accomplishment of the action specified in paragraph (d) or (i) 
of this AD.

Concurrent Requirements

    (d) Except as provided by paragraph (j) of this AD, modify the 
ventral aft pressure bulkhead structure by accomplishing all actions 
specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of McDonnell Douglas 
DC-9 Service Bulletin 53-165, Revision 3, dated May 3, 1989, per the 
service bulletin; at the applicable time specified in paragraph 
(d)(1), (d)(2), or (d)(3) of this AD.
    (1) For airplanes on which the bulkhead modification specified 
in McDonnell Douglas DC-9 Service Bulletin 53-139, dated September 
26, 1980; or Revision 1, dated April 30, 1981, has been done, except 
as provided by paragraph (d)(3) of this AD: Modify within 15,000 
landings after accomplishment of the bulkhead modification, or 
within 4,000 landings after the effective date of this AD, whichever 
occurs later. Accomplishment of this modification constitutes 
terminating action for the repetitive inspection requirements of 
paragraphs (b) and (c)(2) of this AD.
    (2) For airplanes on which the production equivalent of the 
modification specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this AD has been done 
before delivery, except as provided by paragraph (d)(3) of this AD: 
Modify before the accumulation of 15,000 total landings, or within 
4,000 landings after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 
later. Accomplishment of this modification constitutes terminating 
action for the repetitive inspection requirements of paragraphs (b) 
and (c)(2) of this AD.
    (3) For airplanes listed in McDonnell Douglas DC-9 Service 
Bulletin 53-165, Revision 3, dated May 3, 1989, that are specified 
in paragraph (f) of this AD: Modify in conjunction with the 
requirements of paragraph (f) of this AD, or within 18 months after 
accomplishment of the requirements of paragraph (f) of this AD.
    (e) Modification before the effective date of this AD per 
McDonnell Douglas DC-9 Service Bulletin 53-165, dated January 31, 
1983; Revision 1, dated February 20, 1984; or Revision 2, dated 
August 29, 1986; is considered acceptable for compliance with the 
requirements of paragraph (d) of this AD.

Modification: Ventral Aft Pressure Bulkhead

    (f) For Model DC-9-30 and -50 series airplanes, and C-9 
airplanes, as listed in McDonnell Douglas DC-9 Service Bulletin 53-
157, Revision 1, dated January 7, 1985: Except as provided by 
paragraph (j) of this AD, within 18 months after the effective date 
of this AD, modify the ventral aft pressure bulkhead per the service 
bulletin.
    (g) Modification before the effective date of this AD per 
McDonnell Douglas DC-9 Service Bulletin 53-157, dated August 11, 
1981, is considered acceptable for compliance with the requirements 
of paragraph (f) of this AD.

Compliance With AD 85-01-02 R1

    (h) Accomplishment of the visual and x-ray inspections required 
by paragraph (a) of this AD constitutes terminating action for the 
repetitive inspection requirements of AD 85-01-02 R1.

Terminating Modification

    (i) Accomplishment of the modification (reference McDonnell 
Douglas DC-9 Service Bulletin 53-166) required by paragraph (d) or 
(e) of AD 96-10-11 (which references ``DC-9/MD-80 Aging Aircraft 
Service Action Requirements Document'' (SARD), McDonnell Douglas 
Report No. MDC K1572, Revision A, dated June 1, 1990; or Revision B, 
dated January 15, 1993; as the appropriate source of service 
information for accomplishing the modification) terminates the 
repetitive inspection requirements of paragraphs (b) and (c) of this 
AD.

Exception to Inspections and Modifications

    (j) As of the effective date of this AD, the inspections and 
modifications required by this AD do not need to be done during any 
period that the airplane is operated without cabin pressurization 
and a placard is installed in the cockpit in full view of the pilot 
that states the following:
    ``OPERATION WITH CABIN PRESSURIZATION IS PROHIBITED.''

Actions Accomplished Per Previous Issue of Service Bulletin

    (k) Inspections, corrective actions, and follow-on actions 
accomplished before the effective date of this AD per McDonnell 
Douglas Service Bulletin DC9-53-137, Revision 07, dated February 6, 
2001; or McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC9-53-137, Revision 08, 
dated November 22, 2002; are considered acceptable for compliance 
with the corresponding action specified in this AD.

Credit for AD 2002-07-06, Amendment 39-12700

    (l) Accomplishment of the actions specified in AD 2002-07-06 is 
acceptable for compliance with the requirements of this AD.

[[Page 67622]]

Submission of Information to Manufacturer Not Required

    (m) Although McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC9-53-137, 
Revision 09, dated January 30, 2003, specifies to submit certain 
information to the manufacturer, this AD does not include such a 
requirement.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (n)(1) In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, the Manager, Los Angeles 
Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, is authorized to approve 
alternative methods of compliance for this AD.
    (2) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 85-01-02 R1, 
amendment 39-4978; or AD 96-10-11, amendment 39-9618; are approved 
as AMOCs for paragraph (a) or (c) of this AD, as appropriate.
    (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 a 
Boeing Company Engineering Representative (DER) who has been 
authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to make such findings.


    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 26, 2003.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 03-30114 Filed 12-2-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P