Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-10-30, DC-10-30F (KDC-10), DC-10-40, and DC-10-40F Airplanes, 30086-30088 [E6-8010]
Download as PDF
30086
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 2006 / Proposed Rules
(g) If Lycoming Engines manufactured new,
rebuilt, overhauled, or repaired your engine,
or replaced the crankshaft in your engine
before March 1, 1997, and you haven’t had
the crankshaft replaced, no further action is
required.
(h) If Table 1, Table 2, Table 3, or Table
4 of Lycoming MSB No. 569A, dated April
11, 2006, lists your engine serial number
(SN), and Table 5 of MSB No. 569A, dated
April 11, 2006, does not list your crankshaft
SN, no further action is required.
Engines Not Exempted From the AD
(i) If Table 1, Table 2, Table 3, or Table 4
of Lycoming MSB No. 569A, dated April 11,
2006, lists your engine SN, and Table 5 of
MSB No. 569A, dated April 11, 2006, lists
your crankshaft SN, replace the affected
crankshaft with a crankshaft that is not listed
in Table 5 of MSB No. 569A at either of the
following:
(1) The next engine overhaul as specified
in Lycoming Engines Service Instruction No.
1009AR, dated June 22, 2004; or
(2) The next separation of the crankcase,
whichever is earlier.
(j) If Table 1, Table 2, Table 3, or Table 4
of Lycoming MSB No. 569A, dated April 11,
2006, does not list your engine SN, and Table
5 of MSB No. 569A does list your crankshaft
SN (an affected crankshaft was installed as a
replacement), replace the affected crankshaft
with a crankshaft that is not listed in Table
5 of MSB No. 569A at either of the following:
(1) The next engine overhaul as specified
in Lycoming Engines Service Instruction No.
1009AR, dated June 22, 2004; or
(2) The next separation of the crankcase,
whichever is earlier.
Prohibition Against Installing Certain
Crankshafts
(k) After the effective date of this AD, do
not install any crankshaft that has a SN listed
in Table 5 of Lycoming MSB No. 569A, dated
April 11, 2006, into any engine.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(l) The Manager, New York Aircraft
Certification Office, has the authority to
approve alternative methods of compliance
for this AD if requested using the procedures
found in 14 CFR 39.19.
Related Information
(m) None.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on
May 19, 2006.
Robert J. Ganley,
Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 06–4850 Filed 5–24–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:43 May 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2006–24864; Directorate
Identifier 2006–NM–072–AD]
Contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855
Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach,
California 90846, Attention: Data and
Service Management, Dept. C1–L5A
(D800–0024), for the service information
identified in this proposed AD.
Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell
Douglas Model DC–10–10, DC–10–10F,
DC–10–30, DC–10–30F (KDC–10), DC–
10–40, and DC–10–40F Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Samuel Lee, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Branch, ANM–140L, FAA,
Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard,
Lakewood, California 90712–4137;
telephone (562) 627–5262; fax (562)
627–5210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
RIN 2120–AA64
AGENCY:
The FAA proposes to adopt a
new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain McDonnell Douglas airplanes,
identified above. This proposed AD
would require reducing the length of the
sump drain collar and replacing the fuel
tank sump drain lockring for fuel tanks
1, 2, and 3; and reducing the length of
the drain outlet barrel for the auxiliary
fuel tank, if applicable. For airplanes
with an auxiliary fuel tank, this
proposed AD also would require
relocating the sump drain outlet to
allow draining the sumps without
opening the doors of the main landing
gear wheel well. This proposed AD
results from fuel system reviews
conducted by the manufacturer. We are
proposing this AD to reduce the
potential of ignition sources inside fuel
tanks in the event of a lightning strike,
which, in combination with flammable
fuel vapors, could result in arcing in the
fuel tank, fuel tank explosions, and
consequent loss of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by July 10, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following
addresses to submit comments on this
proposed AD.
• DOT Docket Web site: Go to https://
dms.dot.gov and follow the instructions
for sending your comments
electronically.
• Government-wide rulemaking Web
site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov
and follow the instructions for sending
your comments electronically.
• Mail: Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building,
room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590.
• Fax: (202) 493–2251.
• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on
the plaza level of the Nassif Building,
400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Comments Invited
We invite you to submit any relevant
written data, views, or arguments
regarding this proposed AD. Send your
comments to an address listed in the
ADDRESSES section. Include the docket
number ‘‘FAA–2006–24864; Directorate
Identifier 2006–NM–072–AD’’ at the
beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the
overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of
the proposed AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date
and may amend the proposed AD in
light of those comments.
We will post all comments we
receive, without change, to https://
dms.dot.gov, including any personal
information you provide. We will also
post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed AD.
Using the search function of that Web
site, anyone can find and read the
comments in any of our dockets,
including the name of the individual
who sent the comment (or signed the
comment on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19477–78), or you may visit https://
dms.dot.gov.
Examining the Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov, or in
person at the Docket Management
Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The Docket
Management Facility office (telephone
(800) 647–5227) is located on the plaza
level of the Nassif Building at the DOT
street address stated in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in
the AD docket shortly after the Docket
Management System receives them.
E:\FR\FM\25MYP1.SGM
25MYP1
30087
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Discussion
The FAA has examined the
underlying safety issues involved in fuel
tank explosions on several large
transport airplanes, including the
adequacy of existing regulations, the
service history of airplanes subject to
those regulations, and existing
maintenance practices for fuel tank
systems. As a result of those findings,
we issued a regulation titled ‘‘Transport
Airplane Fuel Tank System Design
Review, Flammability Reduction and
Maintenance and Inspection
Requirements’’ (67 FR 23086, May 7,
2001). In addition to new airworthiness
standards for transport airplanes and
new maintenance requirements, this
rule included Special Federal Aviation
Regulation No. 88 (‘‘SFAR 88,’’
Amendment 21–78, and subsequent
Amendments 21–82 and 21–83).
Among other actions, SFAR 88
requires certain type design (i.e., type
certificate (TC) and supplemental type
certificate (STC)) holders to substantiate
that their fuel tank systems can prevent
ignition sources in the fuel tanks. This
requirement applies to type design
holders for large turbine-powered
transport airplanes and for subsequent
modifications to those airplanes. It
requires them to perform design reviews
and to develop design changes and
maintenance procedures if their designs
do not meet the new fuel tank safety
standards. As explained in the preamble
to the rule, we intended to adopt
airworthiness directives to mandate any
changes found necessary to address
unsafe conditions identified as a result
of these reviews.
In evaluating these design reviews, we
have established four criteria intended
to define the unsafe conditions
associated with fuel tank systems that
require corrective actions. The
percentage of operating time during
which fuel tanks are exposed to
flammable conditions is one of these
criteria. The other three criteria address
the failure types under evaluation:
Single failures, single failures in
combination with a latent condition(s),
and in-service failure experience. For all
four criteria, the evaluations included
consideration of previous actions taken
that may mitigate the need for further
action.
We have determined that the actions
identified in this AD are necessary to
reduce the potential of ignition sources
inside fuel tanks, which, in combination
with flammable fuel vapors, could result
in fuel tank explosions and consequent
loss of the airplane.
Review of the lightning protection for
the valve installation for the sump drain
of the fuel tanks showed that the drain
valves must be insulated. If the fuel
level is below the drain valve body, and
there is a lightning strike, electrical
current could travel from the airplane
skin up the sump drain collar into the
valve housing. This condition, in
combination with a lightning strike and
flammable fuel vapors, could result in
arcing in the fuel tank, fuel tank
explosions, and consequent loss of the
airplane.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed McDonnell
Douglas DC–10 Service Bulletin 28–61,
dated January 17, 1978. The service
bulletin describes procedures for
reducing the length of the sump drain
collar and replacing the fuel tank sump
drain lockring for fuel tanks 1, 2, and 3
with an improved lockring; and
reducing the length of the drain outlet
barrel for the auxiliary fuel tank, if
applicable.
McDonnell Douglas DC–10 Service
Bulletin 28–61 specifies that for certain
airplanes, before or concurrently with
the modification of the sump drain
outlets described above, the sump drain
outlet for the auxiliary tank must be
relocated to allow draining the sumps
without opening the doors of the main
landing gear wheel well. The
procedures for doing this action are
described in McDonnell Douglas DC–10
Bulletin 28–19, Revision 1, dated
October 15, 1973. This action applies
only to those airplanes identified as
Group II in McDonnell Douglas DC–10
Service Bulletin 28–61, that are also
contained in the effectivity of
McDonnell Douglas DC–10 Bulletin 28–
19, Revision 1.
Accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information is intended to
adequately address the unsafe
condition.
FAA’s Determination and Requirements
of the Proposed AD
We have evaluated all pertinent
information and identified an unsafe
condition that is likely to exist or
develop on other airplanes of this same
type design. For this reason, we are
proposing this AD, which would require
accomplishing the actions specified in
the service information described
previously, except as discussed under
‘‘Difference Between the Proposed AD
and Service Bulletin 28–61.’’
Difference Between the Proposed AD
and Service Bulletin 28–61
McDonnell Douglas DC–10 Service
Bulletin 28–61 recommends doing the
modification at the operator’s
convenience, which would not ensure
an adequate level of safety for the
affected fleet. In developing an
appropriate compliance time for this
AD, we considered the manufacturer’s
recommendation, the degree of urgency
associated with the subject unsafe
condition, and the average utilization of
the affected fleet. In light of all of these
factors, we find that a compliance time
of 60 months after the effective date of
this AD represents an appropriate
interval of time for affected airplanes to
continue to operate without
compromising safety. This difference
has been coordinated with Boeing, and
Boeing concurred.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 135 airplanes of the
affected design in the worldwide fleet.
The following table provides the
estimated costs for U.S. operators to
comply with this proposed AD. The
labor rate is $80 per work hour.
ESTIMATED COSTS
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Work
hours
Parts
For all airplanes: Reduce the length of the
sump drain collar and replace the fuel tank
sump drain for fuel tanks 1, 2, and 3.
For airplanes with an auxiliary fuel tank: Reduce the length of the drain outlet barrel for
the auxiliary fuel tank.
3 to 15
$720 to $4,858 ...........
$960 to $6,058
109 ...................
$104,640 to
$660,322.
6 to 15
$0 to $720 ..................
$480 to $1,920
Up to 109 ..........
$52,320 to $209,280.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:43 May 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Cost per
airplane
Number of U.S.registered
airplanes
Action
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\25MYP1.SGM
25MYP1
Fleet cost
30088
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 2006 / Proposed Rules
ESTIMATED COSTS—Continued
Cost per
airplane
Number of U.S.registered
airplanes
$80 to $480 ......
Up to 109 .........
Action
Work
hours
Prior requirement for certain airplanes ............
1 to 6 ...
Authority for This Rulemaking
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Safety.
Title 49 of the United States Code
specifies the FAA’s authority to issue
rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I,
Section 106, describes the authority of
the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the Agency’s
authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under
the authority described in Subtitle VII,
Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701,
‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that
section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in
air commerce by prescribing regulations
for practices, methods, and procedures
the Administrator finds necessary for
safety in air commerce. This regulation
is within the scope of that authority
because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on
products identified in this rulemaking
action.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Regulatory Findings
We have determined that this
proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order
13132. This proposed AD 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify that the 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. 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.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation
of the estimated costs to comply with
this proposed AD and placed it in the
AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section
for a location to examine the regulatory
evaluation.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:43 May 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
Parts
The manufacturer
states that it will
supply required
parts to the operators at no cost.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part
39 as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
[Amended]
2. The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13
by adding the following new
airworthiness directive (AD):
McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA–2006–
24864; Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–
072–AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The FAA must receive comments on
this AD action by July 10, 2006.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas
Model DC–10–10, DC–10–10F, DC–10–30,
DC–10–30F (KDC–10), DC–10–40, and DC–
10–40F airplanes, certificated in any
category; as identified in McDonnell Douglas
DC–10 Service Bulletin 28–61, dated January
17, 1978.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from fuel system
reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We
are issuing this AD to reduce the potential of
ignition sources inside fuel tanks in the event
of a lightning strike, which, in combination
with flammable fuel vapors, could result in
arcing in the fuel tank, fuel tank explosions,
and consequent loss of the airplane.
sump drain collar and replace the fuel tank
sump drain lockring for fuel tanks 1, 2, and
3; and reduce the length of the drain outlet
barrel for the auxiliary fuel tank, as
applicable; by doing all the applicable
actions in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of McDonnell
Douglas DC–10 Service Bulletin 28–61, dated
January 17, 1978.
(g) For airplanes identified as Group II
airplanes in McDonnell Douglas DC–10
Service Bulletin 28–61, dated January 17,
1978, that are also contained in the effectivity
of McDonnell Douglas DC–10 Bulletin 28–19,
Revision 1, dated October 15, 1973: Before
the actions in paragraph (f) of this AD,
relocate the sump drain outlet for the
auxiliary tank in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of McDonnell
Douglas DC–10 Bulletin 28–19, Revision 1,
dated October 15, 1973.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(h)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested in accordance with the procedures
found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2) Before using any AMOC approved in
accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to
which the AMOC applies, notify the
appropriate principal inspector in the FAA
Flight Standards Certificate Holding District
Office.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 17,
2006.
Kevin M. Mullin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E6–8010 Filed 5–24–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
Compliance
(e) You are responsible for having the
actions required by this AD performed within
the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.
Corrective Actions
(f) Within 60 months after the effective
date of this AD: Reduce the length of the
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
$8,720 to $52,320.
Prior Requirement
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
§ 39.13
Fleet cost
E:\FR\FM\25MYP1.SGM
25MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 101 (Thursday, May 25, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30086-30088]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-8010]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2006-24864; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-072-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, DC-
10-10F, DC-10-30, DC-10-30F (KDC-10), DC-10-40, and DC-10-40F Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain McDonnell Douglas airplanes, identified above. This
proposed AD would require reducing the length of the sump drain collar
and replacing the fuel tank sump drain lockring for fuel tanks 1, 2,
and 3; and reducing the length of the drain outlet barrel for the
auxiliary fuel tank, if applicable. For airplanes with an auxiliary
fuel tank, this proposed AD also would require relocating the sump
drain outlet to allow draining the sumps without opening the doors of
the main landing gear wheel well. This proposed AD results from fuel
system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We are proposing this AD
to reduce the potential of ignition sources inside fuel tanks in the
event of a lightning strike, which, in combination with flammable fuel
vapors, could result in arcing in the fuel tank, fuel tank explosions,
and consequent loss of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 10, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on
this proposed AD.
DOT Docket Web site: Go to https://dms.dot.gov and follow
the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, room PL-401,
Washington, DC 20590.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855
Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Data and
Service Management, Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024), for the service
information identified in this proposed AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Samuel Lee, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Branch, ANM-140L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137;
telephone (562) 627-5262; fax (562) 627-5210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number ``FAA-2006-
24864; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-072-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the
proposed AD in light of those comments.
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https://
dms.dot.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will
also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of
that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our
dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or
signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union,
etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you
may visit https://dms.dot.gov.
Examining the Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket Management Facility office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The Docket Management Facility office (telephone (800) 647-
5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at the DOT
street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System
receives them.
[[Page 30087]]
Discussion
The FAA has examined the underlying safety issues involved in fuel
tank explosions on several large transport airplanes, including the
adequacy of existing regulations, the service history of airplanes
subject to those regulations, and existing maintenance practices for
fuel tank systems. As a result of those findings, we issued a
regulation titled ``Transport Airplane Fuel Tank System Design Review,
Flammability Reduction and Maintenance and Inspection Requirements''
(67 FR 23086, May 7, 2001). In addition to new airworthiness standards
for transport airplanes and new maintenance requirements, this rule
included Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 88 (``SFAR 88,''
Amendment 21-78, and subsequent Amendments 21-82 and 21-83).
Among other actions, SFAR 88 requires certain type design (i.e.,
type certificate (TC) and supplemental type certificate (STC)) holders
to substantiate that their fuel tank systems can prevent ignition
sources in the fuel tanks. This requirement applies to type design
holders for large turbine-powered transport airplanes and for
subsequent modifications to those airplanes. It requires them to
perform design reviews and to develop design changes and maintenance
procedures if their designs do not meet the new fuel tank safety
standards. As explained in the preamble to the rule, we intended to
adopt airworthiness directives to mandate any changes found necessary
to address unsafe conditions identified as a result of these reviews.
In evaluating these design reviews, we have established four
criteria intended to define the unsafe conditions associated with fuel
tank systems that require corrective actions. The percentage of
operating time during which fuel tanks are exposed to flammable
conditions is one of these criteria. The other three criteria address
the failure types under evaluation: Single failures, single failures in
combination with a latent condition(s), and in-service failure
experience. For all four criteria, the evaluations included
consideration of previous actions taken that may mitigate the need for
further action.
We have determined that the actions identified in this AD are
necessary to reduce the potential of ignition sources inside fuel
tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result
in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane.
Review of the lightning protection for the valve installation for
the sump drain of the fuel tanks showed that the drain valves must be
insulated. If the fuel level is below the drain valve body, and there
is a lightning strike, electrical current could travel from the
airplane skin up the sump drain collar into the valve housing. This
condition, in combination with a lightning strike and flammable fuel
vapors, could result in arcing in the fuel tank, fuel tank explosions,
and consequent loss of the airplane.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Service Bulletin 28-61,
dated January 17, 1978. The service bulletin describes procedures for
reducing the length of the sump drain collar and replacing the fuel
tank sump drain lockring for fuel tanks 1, 2, and 3 with an improved
lockring; and reducing the length of the drain outlet barrel for the
auxiliary fuel tank, if applicable.
McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Service Bulletin 28-61 specifies that for
certain airplanes, before or concurrently with the modification of the
sump drain outlets described above, the sump drain outlet for the
auxiliary tank must be relocated to allow draining the sumps without
opening the doors of the main landing gear wheel well. The procedures
for doing this action are described in McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Bulletin
28-19, Revision 1, dated October 15, 1973. This action applies only to
those airplanes identified as Group II in McDonnell Douglas DC-10
Service Bulletin 28-61, that are also contained in the effectivity of
McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Bulletin 28-19, Revision 1.
Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is
intended to adequately address the unsafe condition.
FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD
We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes
of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD,
which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service
information described previously, except as discussed under
``Difference Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin 28-61.''
Difference Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin 28-61
McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Service Bulletin 28-61 recommends doing the
modification at the operator's convenience, which would not ensure an
adequate level of safety for the affected fleet. In developing an
appropriate compliance time for this AD, we considered the
manufacturer's recommendation, the degree of urgency associated with
the subject unsafe condition, and the average utilization of the
affected fleet. In light of all of these factors, we find that a
compliance time of 60 months after the effective date of this AD
represents an appropriate interval of time for affected airplanes to
continue to operate without compromising safety. This difference has
been coordinated with Boeing, and Boeing concurred.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 135 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for
U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD. The labor rate is $80
per work hour.
Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of U.S.-
Action Work hours Parts Cost per airplane registered airplanes Fleet cost
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For all airplanes: Reduce the 3 to 15....... $720 to $4,858..... $960 to $6,058.......... 109..................... $104,640 to $660,322.
length of the sump drain collar
and replace the fuel tank sump
drain for fuel tanks 1, 2, and
3.
For airplanes with an auxiliary 6 to 15....... $0 to $720......... $480 to $1,920.......... Up to 109............... $52,320 to $209,280.
fuel tank: Reduce the length of
the drain outlet barrel for the
auxiliary fuel tank.
[[Page 30088]]
Prior requirement for certain 1 to 6........ The manufacturer $80 to $480............. Up to 109............... $8,720 to $52,320.
airplanes. states that it
will supply
required parts to
the operators at
no cost.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
Regulatory Findings
We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the 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. 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.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the
ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 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. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec. 39.13 by
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):
McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA-2006-24864; Directorate Identifier
2006-NM-072-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by July 10,
2006.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, DC-10-
10F, DC-10-30, DC-10-30F (KDC-10), DC-10-40, and DC-10-40F
airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified in McDonnell
Douglas DC-10 Service Bulletin 28-61, dated January 17, 1978.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from fuel system reviews conducted by the
manufacturer. We are issuing this AD to reduce the potential of
ignition sources inside fuel tanks in the event of a lightning
strike, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could
result in arcing in the fuel tank, fuel tank explosions, and
consequent loss of the airplane.
Compliance
(e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.
Corrective Actions
(f) Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD: Reduce
the length of the sump drain collar and replace the fuel tank sump
drain lockring for fuel tanks 1, 2, and 3; and reduce the length of
the drain outlet barrel for the auxiliary fuel tank, as applicable;
by doing all the applicable actions in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Service
Bulletin 28-61, dated January 17, 1978.
Prior Requirement
(g) For airplanes identified as Group II airplanes in McDonnell
Douglas DC-10 Service Bulletin 28-61, dated January 17, 1978, that
are also contained in the effectivity of McDonnell Douglas DC-10
Bulletin 28-19, Revision 1, dated October 15, 1973: Before the
actions in paragraph (f) of this AD, relocate the sump drain outlet
for the auxiliary tank in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Bulletin 28-19, Revision 1,
dated October 15, 1973.
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(h)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with Sec.
39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the
appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards
Certificate Holding District Office.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 17, 2006.
Kevin M. Mullin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E6-8010 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P