[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 89 (Friday, May 7, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25507-25511]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-10382]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2001-NM-293-AD]
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: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This document proposes the supersedure of an existing 
airworthiness directive (AD), 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), MD-88,

[[Page 25508]]

and MD-90-30 airplanes. That AD currently requires repetitive 
inspections to detect cracking of the main landing gear (MLG) shock 
strut pistons, and replacement of a cracked piston with a new or 
serviceable part. This action would remove certain airplanes but would 
require that the existing inspections, and corrective actions if 
necessary, be accomplished on additional MLG shock strut pistons. This 
action also would require replacing the MLG shock strut pistons with 
new improved parts, which would terminate the repetitive inspections. 
This action is necessary to prevent fatigue cracking of the MLG 
pistons, which could result in failure of the pistons and consequent 
damage to the airplane structure or injury to airplane occupants. This 
action is intended to address the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by June 21, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, 
Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001-NM-293-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. 2001-NM-293-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: Mike Lee, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe 
Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 
Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone (562) 
627-5325; 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 
proposed rule. The proposals contained in this action may be changed in 
light of the comments received.
    Submit comments using the following format:
     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.
     For each issue, state what specific change to the proposed 
AD is being requested.
     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 2001-NM-293-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. 2001-NM-293-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 
98055-4056.

Discussion

    On June 15, 1999, the FAA issued AD 99-13-07, amendment 39-11201 
(64 FR 33392, June 23, 1999), 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), MD-88, and MD-90-30 airplanes. That action requires repetitive 
inspections to detect cracking of the main landing gear (MLG) shock 
strut pistons, and replacement of a cracked piston with a new or 
serviceable part. That action was prompted by reports indicating that, 
while an airplane was positioned on the taxiway, the right MLG shock 
strut piston failed due to fatigue cracking. The requirements of that 
AD are intended to detect and correct such fatigue cracking, which 
could result in failure of the piston, and consequent damage to the 
airplane structure or injury to the passengers and flightcrew.
    In the preamble of the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for AD 
99-13-07, we stated that the proposed AD was considered interim action, 
and that the manufacturer was developing a modification to address the 
unsafe condition. We indicated that we might consider further 
rulemaking action once the modification was developed, approved, and 
available. The manufacturer now has developed such a modification, and 
we have determined that further rulemaking action is indeed necessary. 
This proposed AD follows from that determination.

Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rule

    Since the issuance of AD 99-13-07, we have issued AD 2002-10-03, 
amendment 39-12749 (67 FR 34823), which applies 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), MD-88, and MD-90-30 airplanes. That AD requires replacement 
of certain MLG shock strut piston assemblies with new or serviceable 
improved assemblies, in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin MD80-
32-309, Revision 01, dated April 25, 2001 (for 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); or Boeing Service Bulletin MD90-32-031, Revision 01, dated 
April 25, 2001 (for Model MD-90-30 airplanes). Accomplishment of that 
replacement will terminate the requirements of this AD, as noted in 
paragraph (b) of AD 2002-10-03. Therefore, we have included in 
paragraph (h) of this proposed AD the requirements of paragraph (a) of 
AD 2002-10-03 that apply to airplanes subject to this proposed AD. The 
compliance time for the replacement specified in this proposed AD 
(``Before the accumulation of 30,000 total landings on the MLG shock 
strut piston assemblies, or within 5,000 landings after June 20, 2002 
(the effective date of AD 2002-10-03, amendment 39-12749), whichever 
occurs later'') is the same as the compliance time in paragraph (a) of 
AD 2002-10-03. Once this proposed AD becomes effective, we may consider 
further rulemaking to revise or rescind

[[Page 25509]]

AD 2002-10-03 to remove the duplicate requirement.

Explanation of Related AD

    Since the issuance of AD 99-13-07, we have issued AD 2004-05-18, 
amendment 39-13513 (69 FR 10915, March 9, 2004). That AD requires 
certain actions for certain McDonnell Douglas Model MD-90-30 airplanes. 
The actions required by that AD include:
     Repetitive fluorescent penetrant and magnetic particle 
inspections to detect fatigue cracking of the MLG piston, and repair if 
necessary.
     Repetitive inspections for evidence of cracking in the 
paint topcoat of the MLG pistons.
     Replacement of certain MLG shock strut piston assemblies 
with new or serviceable improved assemblies.
    We find that the actions required by that AD for Model MD-90-30 
airplanes overlap with the requirements of AD 99-13-07 for the same 
airplanes. Thus, we have not included Model MD-90-30 airplanes in the 
applicability of this proposed AD.

Explanation of Relevant Service Information

    Since the issuance of AD 99-13-07, the FAA has reviewed and 
approved Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-32A308, Revision 04, dated 
June 12, 2001 (for 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). (AD 99-13-07 refers to 
McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletins MD80-32A308, dated March 5, 
1998, and Revision 01, dated May 12, 1998; as appropriate sources of 
service information for accomplishing the actions in that AD.) That 
service bulletin describes procedures for repetitive fluorescent dye 
penetrant and fluorescent magnetic particle inspections to detect 
cracking of the MLG shock strut piston, and replacement of any cracked 
piston with a new or serviceable improved assembly. Revision 04 of the 
service bulletin includes additional part numbers of MLG shock strut 
pistons subject to the inspections described therein.

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 supersede AD 99-13-07 to continue to require 
repetitive inspections to detect cracking of the MLG shock strut 
pistons, and replacement of a cracked piston with a new or serviceable 
part. The proposed AD would remove Model MD-90-30 airplanes from the 
applicability, but would require the existing inspections, and 
corrective actions if necessary, to be accomplished on additional MLG 
shock strut pistons. The inspections would be required to be 
accomplished in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-
32A308, Revision 04, except as discussed below. The proposed AD also 
would require replacing the MLG shock strut pistons with new improved 
assemblies, which would terminate the repetitive inspections. The 
replacement would be required to be accomplished in accordance with 
Boeing Service Bulletin MD80-32-309, Revision 01.

Differences Between Service Bulletins and Proposed AD

    Although Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-32A308, Revision 04, 
describes procedures for fluorescent penetrant and magnetic particle 
inspections, this service bulletin does not emphasize the sequence of 
these inspections. We find that, in each inspection cycle, it is 
necessary for the fluorescent penetrant inspection to precede the 
magnetic particle inspection. This sequencing is important because we 
are aware of cases in which accomplishment of a magnetic particle 
inspection before a fluorescent penetrant inspection interfered with 
the results of the fluorescent penetrant inspection. Therefore, a new 
paragraph (d) has been included in this proposed AD to clarify that, 
for inspections performed after the effective date of this AD, 
accomplishment of the fluorescent penetrant inspection must precede 
accomplishment of the magnetic particle inspection.
    Although Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-32A308, Revision 04, 
specifies that operators may contact the manufacturer for disposition 
of certain repair conditions, this proposed AD would require operators 
to repair those conditions per a method approved by the FAA.
    Operators should note that, although Figure 1 of Boeing Alert 
Service Bulletin MD80-32A308, Revision 04, specifies to report certain 
inspection results to the airplane manufacturer, this proposed AD would 
not require such reporting. We do not need this information from 
operators.

Explanation of Change to Existing Requirements

    We have revised certain wording from the existing AD to identify 
model designations as they are published in the most recent type 
certificate data sheet for the affected models.

Changes to 14 CFR Part 39/Effect on the AD

    On July 10, 2002, the FAA issued a new version of 14 CFR part 39 
(67 FR 47997, July 22, 2002), which governs the FAA's airworthiness 
directives system. The regulation now includes material that relates to 
altered products, special flight permits, and alternative methods of 
compliance (AMOCs). Because we have now included this material in part 
39, only the office authorized to approve AMOCs is identified in each 
individual AD. Therefore, Note 1 and paragraph (f) of AD 99-13-07 are 
not included in this proposed AD, and paragraph (e) of AD 99-13-07 
(which appears as paragraph (m)(1) of this proposed AD) has been 
revised in this proposed AD. Also, we have added paragraph (m)(2) to 
this AD to provide credit for AMOCs approved previously per AD 99-13-
07.

Cost Impact

    There are approximately 1,364 airplanes of the affected design in 
the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 849 airplanes of U.S. 
registry would be affected by this proposed AD.
    The inspections that are currently required by AD 99-13-07 take 
approximately 4 work hours per airplane to accomplish, at an average 
labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost 
impact of the currently required inspections on U.S. operators is 
estimated to be $220,740, or $260 per airplane, per inspection cycle.
    The new inspections that are proposed in this AD action would take 
approximately 4 work hours per airplane to accomplish, at an average 
labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost 
impact of the currently required inspections on U.S. operators is 
estimated to be $220,740, or $260 per airplane, per inspection cycle.
    As explained previously, the new replacement included in this AD 
action is already required by AD 2002-10-03. Therefore, the new 
proposed requirement will not add any additional economic burden on 
affected operators. The current costs associated with this proposed AD 
are reiterated in their entirety (as follows) for the convenience of 
affected operators.
    The replacement of MLG pistons that is included in this AD action 
and currently required by AD 2002-10-03 takes approximately 28 work 
hours per airplane to accomplish, at an average labor rate of $65 per 
work hour. Required parts cost approximately $263,438 per airplane. 
Based on these figures, the cost impact of this

[[Page 25510]]

requirement on U.S. operators subject to this proposed AD is estimated 
to be $225,204,042, or $265,258 per airplane.
    The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions 
that no operator has yet accomplished any of the current or proposed 
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. The manufacturer may 
cover the cost of replacement parts associated with this proposed AD, 
subject to warranty conditions. Manufacturer warranty remedies may also 
be available for labor costs associated with this proposed AD. As a 
result, the costs attributable to the proposed AD may be less than 
stated above.

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 removing amendment 39-11201 (64 FR 
33392, June 23, 1999), and by adding a new airworthiness directive 
(AD), to read as follows:

McDonnell Douglas: Docket 2001-NM-293-AD. Supersedes AD 99-13-07, 
Amendment 39-11201.

    Applicability: 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; as listed in Boeing 
Alert Service Bulletin MD80-32A308, Revision 04, dated June 12, 
2001; certificated in any category.
    Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished 
previously.
    To prevent fatigue cracking of the main landing gear (MLG) 
pistons, which could result in failure of the pistons and consequent 
damage to the airplane structure or injury to airplane occupants, 
accomplish the following:

Requirements of AD 99-13-07

Initial Inspection

    (a) For airplanes equipped with an MLG shock strut piston having 
part number (P/N) 5935347-1 through -509 inclusive, 5935347-511, or 
5935347-513: Perform fluorescent dye penetrant and fluorescent 
magnetic particle inspections to detect cracking of an MLG shock 
strut piston, in accordance with McDonnell Douglas Alert Service 
Bulletin MD80-32A308, dated March 5, 1998, or Revision 01, dated May 
12, 1998; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-32A308, Revision 04, 
dated June 12, 2001 (for 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). Perform the 
inspections at the later of the times specified in paragraphs (a)(1) 
and (a)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Prior to the accumulation of 10,000 total landings on an MLG 
shock strut piston, or within 6 months after July 28, 1999 (the 
effective date of AD 99-13-07, amendment 39-11201), whichever occurs 
later.
    (2) Within 2,500 landings after a major overhaul and initial 
inspection of the MLG shock strut piston accomplished prior to July 
28, 1999, in accordance with McDonnell Douglas All Operator Letter 
9-2153 (for 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).

Corrective Actions

    (b) For airplanes equipped with an MLG shock strut piston having 
P/N 5935347-1 through-509 inclusive, 5935347-511, or 5935347-513: 
Condition 1. If any cracking is detected, prior to further flight, 
replace any cracked MLG shock strut piston with a new or serviceable 
piston, in accordance with McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin 
MD80-32A308, dated March 5, 1998, or Revision 01, dated May 12, 
1998; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-32A308, Revision 04, 
dated June 12, 2001 (for 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). Thereafter, 
repeat the inspections required by paragraph (a) of this AD prior to 
the accumulation of 10,000 total landings on the MLG shock strut 
piston.

Repetitive Inspections

    (c) For airplanes equipped with an MLG shock strut piston having 
P/N 5935347-1 through-509 inclusive, 5935347-511, or 5935347-513: 
Condition 2. If no cracking is detected, repeat the fluorescent dye 
penetrant and fluorescent magnetic particle inspections thereafter 
at intervals not to exceed 2,500 landings, in accordance with 
McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD80-32A308, dated March 5, 
1998, or Revision 01, dated May 12, 1998; or Boeing Alert Service 
Bulletin MD80-32A308, Revision 04, dated June 12, 2001 (for 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); as applicable; until the replacement required 
by paragraph (h) of this AD has been accomplished.

New Requirements of This AD

Clarification of Inspection Sequence

    (d) For inspections accomplished after the effective date of 
this AD: Where this AD requires fluorescent penetrant and magnetic 
particle inspections, accomplishment of the fluorescent penetrant 
inspection must precede accomplishment of the magnetic particle 
inspection.

Inspection of MLG Piston P/Ns SR09320081-3 through -13

    (e) For any MLG piston having P/N SR09320081-3 through -13 
inclusive: Perform fluorescent penetrant and magnetic particle 
inspections to detect fatigue cracking of the MLG pistons, in 
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 
Service Bulletin MD80-32A308, Revision 04, dated June 12, 2001. Do 
the initial inspections at the later of the times specified in 
paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(2) of this AD. Repeat the inspections 
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 2,500 landings, until the 
requirements of paragraph (f) or (h) of this AD have been 
accomplished.
    (1) Prior to the accumulation of 10,000 total landings on the 
MLG piston.
    (2) Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD.

Corrective Actions

    (f) For airplanes equipped with an MLG shock strut piston having 
P/N SR09320081-3 through -13 inclusive: If any cracking is detected 
during the inspections required by paragraph (e) of this AD, prior 
to further flight, replace any cracked MLG shock strut piston with a 
new or serviceable improved assembly, in accordance with the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-
32A308, Revision 04, dated June 12, 2001. Such replacement

[[Page 25511]]

terminates the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (e) of 
this AD for the replaced shock strut piston only.
    (g) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-32A308, Revision 
04, dated June 12, 2001; specifies to contact Boeing-Long Beach for 
disposition of certain repair conditions: Before further flight, 
repair per a method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft 
Certification Office (ACO), FAA. For a repair method to be approved 
by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, as required by this paragraph, the 
Manager's approval letter must specifically refer to this AD.

Replacement of MLG Shock Strut Piston Assemblies

    (h) Replace the MLG shock strut piston assemblies, left- and 
right-hand sides, with new or serviceable improved assemblies, in 
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service 
Bulletin MD80-32-309, Revision 01, dated April 25, 2001. Do this 
replacement at the applicable compliance time specified in paragraph 
(h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD. Such replacement terminates the 
repetitive inspections required by this AD. If the MLG shock strut 
piston is not serialized, or the number of landings on the piston 
cannot be conclusively determined, consider the total number of 
landings on the piston assembly to be equal to the total number of 
landings accumulated by the airplane with the highest total number 
of landings in the operator's fleet.
    (1) For airplanes listed in Boeing Service Bulletin MD80-32-309, 
Revision 01, dated April 25, 2001: Do the replacement before the 
accumulation of 30,000 total landings on the MLG shock strut piston 
assemblies, or within 5,000 landings after June 20, 2002 (the 
effective date of AD 2002-10-03, amendment 39-12749), whichever 
occurs later.
    (2) For airplanes other than those identified in paragraph 
(h)(1) of this AD: Do the replacement before the accumulation of 
30,000 total landings on the MLG shock strut piston assemblies, or 
within 5,000 landings after the effective date of this AD, whichever 
occurs later.

    Note 1: Paragraph (a) of AD 2002-10-03, amendment 39-12749, 
requires the same actions as paragraph (h) of this AD.

Actions Accomplished Previously in Accordance With Other Service 
Information

    (i) Accomplishment of the replacement specified in Boeing 
Service Bulletin MD80-32-309, dated January 31, 2000, before June 
20, 2002, is considered acceptable for compliance with the 
requirement of paragraph (h) of this AD.

Parts Installation

    (j) As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install 
an MLG shockstrut piston having P/N 5935347-1 through -509 
inclusive, 5935347-511, 5935347-513, or SR09320081-3 through -13 
inclusive, on any airplane.

No Requirement To Submit Information

    (k) Although Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-32A308, Revision 
04, dated June 12, 2001, specifies to submit certain inspection 
results to the manufacturer, this AD does not include such a 
requirement.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (l)(1) In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, the Manager, Los Angeles 
ACO, is authorized to approve alternative methods of compliance for 
this AD.
    (2) Alternative methods of compliance, approved previously per 
AD 99-13-07, amendment 39-11201, are approved as alternative methods 
of compliance with this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 27, 2004.
Kevin M. Mullin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 04-10382 Filed 5-6-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P