[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 233 (Thursday, December 4, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67794-67796]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-30111]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000-NM-150-AD; Amendment 39-13383; AD 2003-24-14]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-81 (MD-
81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), DC-9-87 (MD-87), and MD-88 
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), 
applicable to all McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-
82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), DC-9-87 (MD-87), and MD-88 airplanes. This action 
requires one-time inspections to detect discrepancies of electrical 
wiring installations in various areas of the airplane, and corrective 
action if necessary. The actions specified by this AD are intended to 
prevent smoke and fire in various areas of the airplane due to heat 
damage and/or electrical arcing of improperly installed wiring. This 
action is intended to address the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Effective January 8, 2004.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in 
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as 
of January 8, 2004.

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 K. 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 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), DC-9-87 (MD-87), and 
MD-88 airplanes was published as a supplemental notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register on July 24, 2003 (68 FR 
43690). That action proposed to require one-time inspections to detect 
discrepancies of electrical wiring installations in various areas of 
the airplane, and corrective action 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.

Shorten Compliance Time

    One commenter requests that the proposed six-year compliance time 
for performing a detailed inspection to detect discrepancies of exposed 
electrical wiring installations be shortened to between six months and 
one year. This commenter suggests that the proposed compliance time may 
be too long to fly safely with a potential unsafe condition for 
passengers and for people living under the flight paths. The commenter 
also suggests that airplane operators will likely delay necessary 
repairs until the final part of the proposed compliance time.
    The FAA does not agree with the need for a shorter compliance time. 
In developing the proposed compliance time, we found that the six-year 
compliance time accommodates operators' schedules while still 
maintaining an adequate level of safety.

[[Page 67795]]

We also considered that if discrepancies are found during the proposed 
inspections, corrective action must be taken before further flight. In 
consideration of these factors, we determined that the compliance time, 
as proposed, represents an appropriate interval. Operators are always 
permitted to accomplish the requirements of an AD at a time earlier 
than the specified compliance time. If additional data are presented 
that would justify a shorter compliance time, we may consider further 
rulemaking on this issue.

Revise Costs Based on Operator Experience

    One commenter, on behalf of an airline operator, noted that the 
cost estimate of 46 work hours per airplane presented in the 
supplemental NPRM is too low and does not take into account operator 
experience in accomplishing the required detailed inspections. 
According to one commenter's experience, 92 work hours per airplane 
better represents the amount of time needed to complete the detailed 
inspections required by the proposed AD.
    We infer that the commenter is requesting that the Cost Impact 
section of the supplemental NPRM be revised. We partially agree with 
the commenter's rationale. We agree that the specified work hours may 
not always accurately reflect the amount of time necessary to complete 
the required work for every airplane or for every operator. We also 
recognize that material and labor costs to fix any discrepancy cannot 
be accurately estimated for each airplane. However, as explained in the 
Cost Impact section of the supplemental NPRM, the economic analysis of 
the AD is limited to the cost of actions that would actually be 
required by the AD. The economic analysis does not consider the costs 
of conditional actions, such as repairing discrepancies found during a 
required inspection. Such conditional actions would be required to be 
accomplished--regardless of AD direction--to correct an unsafe 
condition identified in an airplane and to ensure operation of that 
airplane in an airworthy condition, as required by the Federal Aviation 
Regulations. No change to this AD is necessary regarding this issue.

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 as proposed.

Cost Impact

    There are approximately 1,191 airplanes of the affected design in 
the worldwide fleet. Estimates of the costs of the required actions are 
provided in the following table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Work hours     Labor  rate/      Cost per          U.S.         U.S.  fleet
        Service bulletin           per airplane        hour          airplane        airplanes         cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MD80-24-176.....................               8             $65            $520             732        $380,640
MD80-24-177.....................               5              65             325             732         237,900
MD80-24-178.....................               8              65             520             732         380,640
MD80-24-179.....................               8              65             520             732         380,640
MD80-24-180.....................               8              65             520             732         380,640
MD80-24-181.....................               6              65             390             732         285,480
MD80-24-182.....................               3              65             195             732         142,740
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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. 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. Manufacturer warranty remedies may be available 
for labor costs associated with this AD. As a result, the costs 
attributable to the AD may be less than stated above.

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 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

0
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

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

2003-24-14 McDonnell Douglas: Amendment 39-13383. Docket 2000-NM-
150-AD.

    Applicability: All Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-
83 (MD-83), DC-9-87 (MD-87), and MD-88 airplanes; certificated in 
any category.
    Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished 
previously.

    Note 1: The FAA recommends that the actions required by this AD 
be accomplished after replacing the metallized 
polyethyleneteraphthalate (MPET) insulation blankets, as required by 
AD 2000-11-02, amendment 39-11750.

    To prevent smoke and fire in various areas of the airplane due 
to heat damage and/or electrical arcing of improperly installed 
wiring, accomplish the following:

[[Page 67796]]

Inspection

    (a) Within 6 years after the effective date of this AD: Perform 
a detailed inspection to detect discrepancies of exposed electrical 
wiring installations as specified in Table 1 of this AD. Specific 
discrepancies are listed in paragraph 3.B.3. of each service 
bulletin. Prior to further flight thereafter, perform corrective 
actions in accordance with the service bulletin, as applicable.

                    Table 1.--Inspection Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              In accordance with the
     Inspect the electrical wiring           following Boeing Service
         installations in the--                     Bulletin--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Flight compartment and forward drop  MD80-24-176, Revision 02,
 ceiling.                                 Excluding Appendix, dated
                                          January 21, 2003.
(2) Electrical/electronic compartment..  MD80-24-177, Revision 02,
                                          Excluding Appendix, dated
                                          January 21, 2003.
(3) Forward passenger compartment from   MD80-24-178, Revision 02,
 stations Y = 218.000 to Y = 846.000.     Excluding Appendix, dated
                                          January 21, 2003.
(4) Aft passenger compartment from       MD80-24-179, Revision 02,
 stations Y = 846.000 to Y = 1338.000.    Excluding Appendix, dated
                                          January 21, 2003.
(5) Forward and mid cargo compartments   MD80-24-180, Revision 02,
 from stations Y = 218.000 to Y =         Excluding Appendix, dated
 811.000.                                 January 21, 2003.
(6) Aft cargo compartment from stations  MD80-24-181, Revision 02,
 Y = 1033.000 to Y = 1338.000.            Excluding Appendix, dated
                                          January 21, 2003.
(7) Forward accessory compartment from   MD80-24-182, Revision 02,
 stations Y = 41.000 to Y = 70.000.       Excluding Appendix, dated
                                          January 21, 2003.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is 
defined as: ``An intensive visual examination of a specific 
structural area, system, installation, or assembly to detect damage, 
failure, or irregularity. Available lighting is normally 
supplemented with a direct source of good lighting at intensity 
deemed appropriate by the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror, 
magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface cleaning and elaborate 
access procedures may be required.''

    (b) Although the service bulletins identified in Table 1 of this 
AD specify that operators provide a report of inspection findings, 
this AD does not require such information.
    (c) An inspection done before the effective date of this AD is 
acceptable for compliance with the inspection requirements of this 
AD, if accomplished in accordance with the corresponding service 
bulletin identified in Table 1 of this AD, the original version, 
dated July 14, 2000, or July 14, 2000; or Revision 01, dated June 
12, 2001.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (d) 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.

Incorporation by Reference

    (e) Unless otherwise specified in this AD, the actions shall be 
done in accordance with the Boeing Service Bulletins in Table 2 of 
this AD, as applicable:

                   Table 2.--Boeing Service Bulletins
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Revision
        Service bulletin             level                Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 MD80-24-176, Excluding Appendix           02  January 21, 2003.
 MD80-24-177, Excluding Appendix           02  January 21, 2003.
 MD80-24-178, Excluding Appendix           02  January 21, 2003.
 MD80-24-179, Excluding Appendix           02  January 21, 2003.
 MD80-24-180, Excluding Appendix           02  January 21, 2003.
 MD80-24-181, Excluding Appendix           02  January 21, 2003.
 MD80-24-182, Excluding Appendix           02  January 21, 2003.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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

    (f) This amendment becomes effective on January 8, 2004.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 26, 2003.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 03-30111 Filed 12-3-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P