Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model MD-11 and MD-11F Airplanes, 35785-35788 [06-5550]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
35785
Actions
Compliance
Procedures
(1) Modify the fuel system to improve the venting between the collector tank, the main wing
tanks, and the engine.
(i) For Group 1 Airplanes: Within the next 3
calendar months after July 13, 1998 (the effective date of AD 98–12–01), unless already done.
(ii) For Group 2 Airplanes: Within the next 3
calendar months after August 7, 2006 (the
effective date of this AD, unless already
done.
For all airplanes: As of August 7, 2006 (the
effective date of this AD).
Follow Pilatus PC–6 Service Bulletin No. PC–
6–SB–171, dated October 18, 1995.
(2) Do not install any collector tank or fuel vent
system unless the modification requirements
of paragraph (e)(1) are done.
Follow Pilatus PC–6 Service Bulletin No. PC–
6–SB–171, dated October 18, 1995.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SW., Nassif Building, room PL–401,
Washington, DC.
(f) The Manager, Standards Office, ATTN:
Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust,
Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106;
telephone: (816) 329–4059; facsimile: (816)
329–4090, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(g) AMOCs approved for AD 98–12–01 are
approved for this AD.
Federal Aviation Administration
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 service information
identified in this AD.
Related Information
(h) Swiss AD Number HB 2005–289,
effective date August 23, 2005, also addresses
the subject of this AD.
Material Incorporated by Reference
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES
(i) You must do the actions required by this
AD following the instructions in Pilatus PC–
6 Service Bulletin No. PC–6–SB–171, dated
October 18, 1995.
(1) As of July 13, 1998 (63 FR 30370, June
4, 1998), the Director of the Federal Register
previously approved the incorporation by
reference of Pilatus Service Bulletin No. PC–
6–SB–171, dated October 18, 1995, in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51.
(2) To get a copy of this service
information, contact Pilatus Aircraft Ltd.,
Customer Liaison Manager, CH–6371 Stans,
Switzerland; telephone: +41 41 619 63 19;
facsimile: +41 41 619 6224. To review copies
of this service information, go to the National
Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability
of this material at NARA, go to: https://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/
code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html or call (202) 741–6030. To
view the AD docket, go to the Docket
Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Nassif Building, Room PL–401, Washington,
DC 20590–0001 or on the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov. The docket number is FAA–
2006–24091; Directorate Identifier 2006–CE–
17–AD.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on June
14, 2006.
James E. Jackson,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 06–5583 Filed 6–21–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:57 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2005–22557; Directorate
Identifier 2005–NM–147–AD; Amendment
39–14660; AD 2006–13–07]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell
Douglas Model MD–11 and MD–11F
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an
existing airworthiness directive (AD)
that applies to certain McDonnell
Douglas Model MD–11 and MD–11F
airplanes. That AD currently requires
replacement of the upper and lower
reading lights in the forward crew rest
area with a redesigned light fixture. This
new AD adds airplanes to the
applicability of the existing AD. This
AD results from a report of the old
reading lights being inadvertently sent
to an additional ten airplanes. We are
issuing this AD to prevent a possible
flammable condition, which could
result in smoke and fire in the forward
crew rest area.
DATES: This AD becomes effective July
27, 2006.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of a certain publication listed in the AD
as of July 27, 2006.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of a certain other publication listed in
the AD as of August 23, 2000 (65 FR
44672, July 19, 2000).
ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD
docket on the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov or in person at the Docket
Management Facility, U.S. Department
of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street,
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Ken
Sujishi, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin
Safety/Mechanical and Environmental
Systems Branch, ANM–150L, FAA, Los
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office,
3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,
California 90712–4137; telephone (562)
627–5353; fax (562) 627–5210.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Examining the Docket
You may examine the airworthiness
directive (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 street address stated in the
ADDRESSES section.
Discussion
The FAA issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that
supersedes AD 2000–14–12, amendment
39–11822 (65 FR 44672, July 19, 2000).
The existing AD applies to certain
McDonnell Douglas MD–11 series
airplanes. That NPRM was published in
the Federal Register on September 30,
2005 (70 FR 57219). That NPRM
proposed to continue to require
replacement of the upper and lower
reading lights in the forward crew rest
area with a redesigned light fixture.
E:\FR\FM\22JNR1.SGM
22JNR1
35786
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
That NPRM also proposed to add
airplanes to the applicability of the
existing AD.
Comments
We provided the public the
opportunity to participate in the
development of this AD. We have
considered the comments from one
commenter that have been received on
the NPRM.
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES
Request for Clarification of Parts
Installation Paragraph
The Modification and Replacement
Parts Association (MARPA) asks
whether the prohibition in the Parts
Installation paragraph is against the
combination of reading lamp and light
fixture, or are both parts being
prohibited independent of each other.
From this comment, we infer that
MARPA would like us to clarify the
Parts Installation paragraph regarding
the prohibition of the subject reading
lamp and light fixture. We agree that
clarification is necessary. It is the
combination of the lamp and light
fixture that is prohibited. The design of
the subject lamp and light fixture could
allow articles, such as a blanket, to
become embedded in the fixture
assembly, which could result in a
possible fire. The new design has a
much smaller lamp and the fixture
assembly has ventilation holes. The
lamp, part number (P/N) 2232, is used
in other areas of the airplane without
causing any safety issues. We have
revised paragraph (h) of this AD to
clarify the intent of that paragraph.
Request to Reference Parts
Manufacturer Approval (PMA) Parts
MARPA also asks what lamp is to be
used in place of lamp P/N 2232 and
requests that the language in the NPRM
be changed to permit installation of
PMA equivalent parts. MARPA states
that the mandated installation of a
certain P/N in the NPRM ‘‘would appear
to not meet the requirements of 14 CFR
Section 21.303.’’ To avoid these
conflicting requirements, MARPA
suggests appending the phrase ‘‘or other
FAA-approved equivalent part’’ to any
mandated part installation.
We infer that MARPA would like the
AD to permit installation of any
equivalent PMA parts so that it is not
necessary for an operator to request
approval of an alternative method of
compliance (AMOC) in order to install
an ‘‘equivalent’’ PMA part. Whether an
alternative part is ‘‘equivalent’’ in
adequately resolving the unsafe
condition can only be determined on a
case-by-case basis based on a complete
understanding of the unsafe condition.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:23 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
Our policy is that, in order for operators
to replace a part with one that is not
specified in the AD, they must request
an AMOC. This is necessary so that we
can make a specific determination that
an alternative part is or is not
susceptible to the same unsafe
condition. Therefore, we also do not
agree to add the qualifying statement
‘‘or other FAA approved part.’’
The AD provides a means of
compliance for operators to ensure that
the identified unsafe condition is
addressed appropriately. For an unsafe
condition attributable to a part, the AD
normally identifies the replacement
parts necessary to obtain that
compliance. As stated in section 39.7 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 39.7), ‘‘Anyone who operates a
product that does not meet the
requirements of an applicable
airworthiness directive is in violation of
this section.’’ Unless an operator obtains
approval for an AMOC, replacing a part
with one not specified by the AD would
make the operator subject to an
enforcement action and result in a civil
penalty. We acknowledge that there may
be other ways of addressing this issue.
Once we have thoroughly examined all
aspects of this issue, including input
from industry, and have made a final
determination, we will consider
whether our policy regarding PMA parts
in ADs needs to be revised. However,
we consider that to delay this AD action
would be inappropriate, since we have
determined that an unsafe condition
exists and that replacement of certain
parts must be accomplished to ensure
continued safety. Therefore, no change
to the AD is necessary in this regard.
In response to the MARPA’s statement
regarding a deviation from FAR 21.303,
under which the FAA issues PMAs, this
statement appears to reflect a
misunderstanding of the relationship
between ADs and the certification
procedural regulations of part 21 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR
part 21). Those regulations, including
§ 21.303 of the Federal Aviation
Regulations (14 CFR 21.203), are
intended to ensure that aeronautical
products comply with the applicable
airworthiness standards. But ADs are
issued when, notwithstanding those
procedures, we become aware of unsafe
conditions in these products or parts.
Therefore, an AD takes precedence over
design approvals when we identify an
unsafe condition, and mandating
installation of a certain P/N in an AD is
not at variance with § 21.303.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Request To Address Defective PMA
Parts
MARPA also requests that the NPRM
be revised to cover possible defective
PMA alternative parts, rather than just
a single P/N, so that those defective
PMA parts also are subject to the
proposed AD. MARPA notes that there
are known PMA parts with different P/
Ns for a reading lamp with P/N 2232,
and requests that the NPRM account for
any PMA parts that might contain the
same deficiencies as the OEM part and
be installed in its place.
We agree with MARPA’s general
request that, if we know that an unsafe
condition also exists in PMA parts, the
AD should address those parts, as well
as the original parts. The commenter’s
remarks are timely in that the Transport
Airplane Directorate currently is in the
process of reviewing this issue as it
applies to transport category airplanes.
We acknowledge that there may be other
ways of addressing this issue to ensure
that unsafe PMA parts are identified and
addressed. Once we have thoroughly
examined all aspects of this issue,
including input from industry, and have
made a final determination, we will
consider whether our policy regarding
addressing PMA parts in ADs needs to
be revised. We consider that to delay
this AD action would be inappropriate,
since we have determined that an
unsafe condition exists and that
replacement of certain parts must be
accomplished to ensure continued
safety. No change to the AD is necessary
in this regard.
Request To Consider Broader Aspects
of an Identified Problem
MARPA admonishes the FAA for
‘‘simply echoing the requirements of
manufacturer service documents and
believes that it is the ‘‘obligation of AD
writers to look more deeply.’’ MARPA
concludes that simply adopting the
manufacturers’ service bulletins could
result in a commercial advantage to one
manufacturer over another, even though
both manufacturers produce approved
parts.
Although MARPA’s remarks above do
not specifically request a change to this
AD, we would like to clarify that we do
use service bulletins as starting points
for our research into the development of
an AD, when they are available, because
of the original equipment manufacturer
(OEM’s) expertise and broad knowledge
of the product. Often, service
information may not even be available
that addresses a particular identified
unsafe condition. In all cases, we may
also consult with other aeronautical
experts, specialists, and vendors, and
E:\FR\FM\22JNR1.SGM
22JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
that is likely to exist or develop on
products identified in this rulemaking
action.
we may research databases, reports,
testing results, etc., to ensure that the
unsafe condition is addressed in an
appropriate and timely manner. No
change has been made to the AD as a
result of MARPA’s remarks in the
previous paragraph.
Regulatory Findings
Explanation of Change to Service
Bulletin Citation
We have revised the citation of Alert
Service Bulletin MD11–25A233,
Revision 1, dated May 10, 2005,
throughout the AD to reflect the current
manufacturer name, Boeing, instead of
McDonnell Douglas. This change
reflects the information published in the
most recent type certificate data sheet
for the affected models.
Conclusion
We have carefully reviewed the
available data, including the comments
that have been received, and determined
that air safety and the public interest
require adopting the AD with the
changes described previously. We have
determined that these changes will
neither increase the economic burden
on any operator nor increase the scope
of the AD.
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES
Costs of Compliance
There are about 81 airplanes of the
affected design in the worldwide fleet.
The existing AD affects about 14
airplanes of U.S. registry. This AD
affects an additional 10 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
The actions that are required by AD
2000–14–12 and retained in this AD
take about 1 work hour per airplane, at
an average labor rate of $65 per work
hour. Required parts cost about $933 per
airplane. Based on these figures, the
estimated cost of the currently required
actions is $998 per airplane.
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:23 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
We have determined that this AD will
not have federalism implications under
Executive Order 13132. This AD 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify that this AD:
(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.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation
of the estimated costs to comply with
this 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, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as
follows:
I
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13
by removing amendment 39–11822 (65
FR 44672, July 19, 2000) and by adding
the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
I
2006–13–07 McDonnell Douglas:
Amendment 39–14660. Docket No.
FAA–2005–22557; Directorate Identifier
2005–NM–147–AD.
Effective Date
(a) This AD becomes effective July 27,
2006.
Affected ADs
(b) This AD supersedes AD 2000–14–12.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
35787
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas
Model MD–11 and MD–11F airplanes,
certificated in any category, as identified
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11–25A233,
Revision 1, dated May 10, 2005.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from reports of burning
and smoldering blankets in the forward crew
rest area due to a reading light fixture that
came into contact with the blankets after the
light was inadvertently left on. We are
issuing this AD to prevent a possible
flammable condition, which could result in
smoke and fire in the forward crew rest area.
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.
Restatement of the Requirements of AD
2000–14–12
Replacement
(f) For airplanes identified in McDonnell
Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD11–
25A233, dated June 9, 1999: Within 6 months
after August 23, 2000 (the effective date of
AD 2000–14–12), replace the upper and
lower reading lights in the forward crew rest
area with a redesigned light fixture, in
accordance with McDonnell Douglas Alert
Service Bulletin MD11–25A233, dated June
9, 1999; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
MD11–25A233, Revision 1, dated May 10,
2005. After the effective date of this AD, do
the replacement in accordance with Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin MD11–25A233,
Revision 1, dated May 10, 2005.
Note 1: McDonnell Douglas Alert Service
Bulletin MD11–25A233 refers to AIM
Aviation Service Incorporated Service
Bulletin AIM–MD11–25–2, Revision C, dated
March 8, 1999; and Revision D, dated March
16, 2005; as additional sources of service
information for replacing the upper and
lower reading lights in the forward crew rest
area.
New Requirements of This AD
Replacement
(g) For all airplanes except those identified
in paragraph (f) of this AD: Within 6 months
after the effective date of this AD, do the
replacement specified in paragraph (f) of this
AD.
Parts Installation
(h) As of the effective date of this AD, no
person may install, on any airplane, a reading
lamp, part number (P/N) 2232, in
combination with light fixture, P/N 0200500–
001.
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(i)(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 14 CFR 39.19 on any
airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify
E:\FR\FM\22JNR1.SGM
22JNR1
35788
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
the appropriate principal inspector in the
FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding
District Office.
(3) AMOCs approved previously in
accordance with AD 2000–14–12,
amendment 39–11822, are approved as
AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of
this AD.
Material Incorporated by Reference
(j) You must use McDonnell Douglas Alert
Service Bulletin MD11–25A233, dated June
9, 1999; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
MD11–25A233, Revision 1, dated May 10,
2005, as applicable, to perform the actions
that are required by this AD, unless the AD
specifies otherwise.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11–25A233,
Revision 1, dated May 10, 2005, in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51.
(2) On August 23, 2000 (65 FR 44672, July
19, 2000), the Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference of
McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin
MD11–25A233, dated June 9, 1999.
(3) 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 a copy of this
service information. You may review copies
at the Docket Management Facility, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh
Street SW., room PL–401, Nassif Building,
Washington, DC; on the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov; or at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this
material at the NARA, call (202) 741–6030,
or go to https://www.archives.gov/
federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 14,
2006.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 06–5550 Filed 6–21–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2006–24121; Directorate
Identifier 2005–NM–248–AD; Amendment
39–14662; AD 2006–13–09]
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with RULES
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing
Model 747–400 and 747–400D Series
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:23 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Boeing Model 747–400 and 747–400D
series airplanes. This AD requires
replacing specified tie rods of the center
overhead stowage bins. This AD results
from manufacturer analysis of the
overhead storage bin support structure
that demonstrated that the capability of
certain existing tie rods does not meet
emergency landing load requirements.
We are issuing this AD to prevent
detachment of the center overhead
stowage bins during an extreme forward
load event, which could cause injury to
passengers and hinder emergency
evacuation procedures.
DATES: This AD becomes effective July
27, 2006.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of a certain publication listed in the AD
as of July 27, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD
docket on the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov or in person at the Docket
Management Facility, U.S. Department
of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street,
SW., Nassif Building, Room PL–401,
Washington, DC.
Contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124–2207, for service
information identified in this AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patrick Gillespie, Aerospace Engineer,
Cabin Safety and Environmental
Systems Branch, ANM–150S, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055–4056; telephone
(425) 917–6429; fax (425) 917–6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Examining the Docket
You may examine the airworthiness
directive (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 street address stated in the
ADDRESSES section.
Discussion
The FAA issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would
apply to certain Boeing Model 747–400
and 747–400D series airplanes. That
NPRM was published in the Federal
Register on March 14, 2006 (71 FR
13060). That NPRM proposed to require
replacing specified tie rods of the center
overhead stowage bins.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Comments
We provided the public the
opportunity to participate in the
development of this AD. We have
considered the comments received.
Support for the NPRM
Boeing expresses support for the
NPRM.
Request To Revise Costs of Compliance
The Air Transport Association (ATA),
on behalf of its member Northwest
Airlines (NWA), requests that we revise
the costs of compliance shown in the
NPRM. NWA states that the cost of the
parts kit has increased from $1,090 to
$2,301.
We agree with this request. We have
confirmed that the cost of the parts kit
has increased as specified and have
revised the costs of compliance of this
AD accordingly.
Conclusion
We have carefully reviewed the
available data, including the comments
received, and determined that air safety
and the public interest require adopting
the AD as proposed. We have
determined that the changes in cost will
not significantly increase the economic
burden on any operator.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 380 airplanes of the
affected design in the worldwide fleet.
This AD will affect about 62 airplanes
of U.S. registry. The required actions,
depending on whether an airplane has
tie rods on both sides or one side only,
will take between 2 and 3 work hours
per airplane, at an average labor rate of
$65 per work hour. Required parts will
cost about $2,301 per tie rod
replacement kit (one kit per side). Based
on these figures, the estimated cost of
the AD for U.S. operators is between
$150,722 and $297,414, or between
$2,431 and $4,797 per airplane.
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
E:\FR\FM\22JNR1.SGM
22JNR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 120 (Thursday, June 22, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35785-35788]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-5550]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2005-22557; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-147-AD;
Amendment 39-14660; AD 2006-13-07]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model MD-11 and MD-
11F Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an existing airworthiness directive
(AD) that applies to certain McDonnell Douglas Model MD-11 and MD-11F
airplanes. That AD currently requires replacement of the upper and
lower reading lights in the forward crew rest area with a redesigned
light fixture. This new AD adds airplanes to the applicability of the
existing AD. This AD results from a report of the old reading lights
being inadvertently sent to an additional ten airplanes. We are issuing
this AD to prevent a possible flammable condition, which could result
in smoke and fire in the forward crew rest area.
DATES: This AD becomes effective July 27, 2006.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of July 27,
2006.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain other publication listed in the AD as of August
23, 2000 (65 FR 44672, July 19, 2000).
ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov or in person at the Docket Management Facility, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building,
room PL-401, Washington, DC.
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 service information
identified in this AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken Sujishi, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin
Safety/Mechanical and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM-150L, FAA, Los
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard,
Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone (562) 627-5353; fax (562)
627-5210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Examining the Docket
You may examine the airworthiness directive (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 street address stated in the ADDRESSES section.
Discussion
The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 to include an AD that supersedes AD 2000-14-12, amendment
39-11822 (65 FR 44672, July 19, 2000). The existing AD applies to
certain McDonnell Douglas MD-11 series airplanes. That NPRM was
published in the Federal Register on September 30, 2005 (70 FR 57219).
That NPRM proposed to continue to require replacement of the upper and
lower reading lights in the forward crew rest area with a redesigned
light fixture.
[[Page 35786]]
That NPRM also proposed to add airplanes to the applicability of the
existing AD.
Comments
We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the
development of this AD. We have considered the comments from one
commenter that have been received on the NPRM.
Request for Clarification of Parts Installation Paragraph
The Modification and Replacement Parts Association (MARPA) asks
whether the prohibition in the Parts Installation paragraph is against
the combination of reading lamp and light fixture, or are both parts
being prohibited independent of each other.
From this comment, we infer that MARPA would like us to clarify the
Parts Installation paragraph regarding the prohibition of the subject
reading lamp and light fixture. We agree that clarification is
necessary. It is the combination of the lamp and light fixture that is
prohibited. The design of the subject lamp and light fixture could
allow articles, such as a blanket, to become embedded in the fixture
assembly, which could result in a possible fire. The new design has a
much smaller lamp and the fixture assembly has ventilation holes. The
lamp, part number (P/N) 2232, is used in other areas of the airplane
without causing any safety issues. We have revised paragraph (h) of
this AD to clarify the intent of that paragraph.
Request to Reference Parts Manufacturer Approval (PMA) Parts
MARPA also asks what lamp is to be used in place of lamp P/N 2232
and requests that the language in the NPRM be changed to permit
installation of PMA equivalent parts. MARPA states that the mandated
installation of a certain P/N in the NPRM ``would appear to not meet
the requirements of 14 CFR Section 21.303.'' To avoid these conflicting
requirements, MARPA suggests appending the phrase ``or other FAA-
approved equivalent part'' to any mandated part installation.
We infer that MARPA would like the AD to permit installation of any
equivalent PMA parts so that it is not necessary for an operator to
request approval of an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in order
to install an ``equivalent'' PMA part. Whether an alternative part is
``equivalent'' in adequately resolving the unsafe condition can only be
determined on a case-by-case basis based on a complete understanding of
the unsafe condition. Our policy is that, in order for operators to
replace a part with one that is not specified in the AD, they must
request an AMOC. This is necessary so that we can make a specific
determination that an alternative part is or is not susceptible to the
same unsafe condition. Therefore, we also do not agree to add the
qualifying statement ``or other FAA approved part.''
The AD provides a means of compliance for operators to ensure that
the identified unsafe condition is addressed appropriately. For an
unsafe condition attributable to a part, the AD normally identifies the
replacement parts necessary to obtain that compliance. As stated in
section 39.7 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 39.7),
``Anyone who operates a product that does not meet the requirements of
an applicable airworthiness directive is in violation of this
section.'' Unless an operator obtains approval for an AMOC, replacing a
part with one not specified by the AD would make the operator subject
to an enforcement action and result in a civil penalty. We acknowledge
that there may be other ways of addressing this issue. Once we have
thoroughly examined all aspects of this issue, including input from
industry, and have made a final determination, we will consider whether
our policy regarding PMA parts in ADs needs to be revised. However, we
consider that to delay this AD action would be inappropriate, since we
have determined that an unsafe condition exists and that replacement of
certain parts must be accomplished to ensure continued safety.
Therefore, no change to the AD is necessary in this regard.
In response to the MARPA's statement regarding a deviation from FAR
21.303, under which the FAA issues PMAs, this statement appears to
reflect a misunderstanding of the relationship between ADs and the
certification procedural regulations of part 21 of the Federal Aviation
Regulations (14 CFR part 21). Those regulations, including Sec. 21.303
of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.203), are intended to
ensure that aeronautical products comply with the applicable
airworthiness standards. But ADs are issued when, notwithstanding those
procedures, we become aware of unsafe conditions in these products or
parts. Therefore, an AD takes precedence over design approvals when we
identify an unsafe condition, and mandating installation of a certain
P/N in an AD is not at variance with Sec. 21.303.
Request To Address Defective PMA Parts
MARPA also requests that the NPRM be revised to cover possible
defective PMA alternative parts, rather than just a single P/N, so that
those defective PMA parts also are subject to the proposed AD. MARPA
notes that there are known PMA parts with different P/Ns for a reading
lamp with P/N 2232, and requests that the NPRM account for any PMA
parts that might contain the same deficiencies as the OEM part and be
installed in its place.
We agree with MARPA's general request that, if we know that an
unsafe condition also exists in PMA parts, the AD should address those
parts, as well as the original parts. The commenter's remarks are
timely in that the Transport Airplane Directorate currently is in the
process of reviewing this issue as it applies to transport category
airplanes. We acknowledge that there may be other ways of addressing
this issue to ensure that unsafe PMA parts are identified and
addressed. Once we have thoroughly examined all aspects of this issue,
including input from industry, and have made a final determination, we
will consider whether our policy regarding addressing PMA parts in ADs
needs to be revised. We consider that to delay this AD action would be
inappropriate, since we have determined that an unsafe condition exists
and that replacement of certain parts must be accomplished to ensure
continued safety. No change to the AD is necessary in this regard.
Request To Consider Broader Aspects of an Identified Problem
MARPA admonishes the FAA for ``simply echoing the requirements of
manufacturer service documents and believes that it is the ``obligation
of AD writers to look more deeply.'' MARPA concludes that simply
adopting the manufacturers' service bulletins could result in a
commercial advantage to one manufacturer over another, even though both
manufacturers produce approved parts.
Although MARPA's remarks above do not specifically request a change
to this AD, we would like to clarify that we do use service bulletins
as starting points for our research into the development of an AD, when
they are available, because of the original equipment manufacturer
(OEM's) expertise and broad knowledge of the product. Often, service
information may not even be available that addresses a particular
identified unsafe condition. In all cases, we may also consult with
other aeronautical experts, specialists, and vendors, and
[[Page 35787]]
we may research databases, reports, testing results, etc., to ensure
that the unsafe condition is addressed in an appropriate and timely
manner. No change has been made to the AD as a result of MARPA's
remarks in the previous paragraph.
Explanation of Change to Service Bulletin Citation
We have revised the citation of Alert Service Bulletin MD11-25A233,
Revision 1, dated May 10, 2005, throughout the AD to reflect the
current manufacturer name, Boeing, instead of McDonnell Douglas. This
change reflects the information published in the most recent type
certificate data sheet for the affected models.
Conclusion
We have carefully reviewed the available data, including the
comments that have been received, and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD with the changes described
previously. We have determined that these changes will neither increase
the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 81 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The existing AD affects about 14 airplanes of U.S.
registry. This AD affects an additional 10 airplanes of U.S. registry.
The actions that are required by AD 2000-14-12 and retained in this
AD take about 1 work hour per airplane, at an average labor rate of $65
per work hour. Required parts cost about $933 per airplane. Based on
these figures, the estimated cost of the currently required actions is
$998 per airplane.
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 AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(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.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this 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, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 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. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec. 39.13 by
removing amendment 39-11822 (65 FR 44672, July 19, 2000) and by adding
the following new airworthiness directive (AD):
2006-13-07 McDonnell Douglas: Amendment 39-14660. Docket No. FAA-
2005-22557; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-147-AD.
Effective Date
(a) This AD becomes effective July 27, 2006.
Affected ADs
(b) This AD supersedes AD 2000-14-12.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas Model MD-11 and MD-11F
airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin MD11-25A233, Revision 1, dated May 10, 2005.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from reports of burning and smoldering
blankets in the forward crew rest area due to a reading light
fixture that came into contact with the blankets after the light was
inadvertently left on. We are issuing this AD to prevent a possible
flammable condition, which could result in smoke and fire in the
forward crew rest area.
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.
Restatement of the Requirements of AD 2000-14-12
Replacement
(f) For airplanes identified in McDonnell Douglas Alert Service
Bulletin MD11-25A233, dated June 9, 1999: Within 6 months after
August 23, 2000 (the effective date of AD 2000-14-12), replace the
upper and lower reading lights in the forward crew rest area with a
redesigned light fixture, in accordance with McDonnell Douglas Alert
Service Bulletin MD11-25A233, dated June 9, 1999; or Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin MD11-25A233, Revision 1, dated May 10, 2005. After
the effective date of this AD, do the replacement in accordance with
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11-25A233, Revision 1, dated May 10,
2005.
Note 1: McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD11-25A233
refers to AIM Aviation Service Incorporated Service Bulletin AIM-
MD11-25-2, Revision C, dated March 8, 1999; and Revision D, dated
March 16, 2005; as additional sources of service information for
replacing the upper and lower reading lights in the forward crew
rest area.
New Requirements of This AD
Replacement
(g) For all airplanes except those identified in paragraph (f)
of this AD: Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, do
the replacement specified in paragraph (f) of this AD.
Parts Installation
(h) As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install,
on any airplane, a reading lamp, part number (P/N) 2232, in
combination with light fixture, P/N 0200500-001.
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(i)(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 14 CFR
39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify
[[Page 35788]]
the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards
Certificate Holding District Office.
(3) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2000-14-12,
amendment 39-11822, are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding
provisions of this AD.
Material Incorporated by Reference
(j) You must use McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD11-
25A233, dated June 9, 1999; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11-
25A233, Revision 1, dated May 10, 2005, as applicable, to perform
the actions that are required by this AD, unless the AD specifies
otherwise.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11-
25A233, Revision 1, dated May 10, 2005, in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) On August 23, 2000 (65 FR 44672, July 19, 2000), the
Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD11-25A233,
dated June 9, 1999.
(3) 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 a copy of
this service information. You may review copies at the Docket
Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh
Street SW., room PL-401, Nassif Building, Washington, DC; on the
Internet at https://dms.dot.gov; or at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability
of this material at the NARA, call (202) 741-6030, or go to https://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 14, 2006.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 06-5550 Filed 6-21-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
