Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-10-15, DC-10-30, and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) Airplanes; Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F Airplanes Equipped With Pratt & Whitney JT9-20 or JT9-20J Engines; and Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F Airplanes, 60448-60450 [E6-17003]

Download as PDF 60448 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 198 / Friday, October 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules Affected ADs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (b) None. Federal Aviation Administration Applicability (c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas Model 717–200 airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 717–28–0011, Revision 2, dated July 19, 2006. 14 CFR Part 39 Unsafe Condition Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC–10–10, DC–10–10F, DC–10–15, DC–10–30, and DC–10–30F (KC–10A and KDC–10) Airplanes; Model DC–10–40 and DC–10–40F Airplanes Equipped With Pratt & Whitney JT9–20 or JT9–20J Engines; and Model MD–10–10F and MD–10–30F Airplanes (d) This AD results from fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We are issuing this AD to provide a conductive path, from the bulkhead nipple assemblies of the left and right wing vent boxes to the airframe structure inside the wing fuel tanks, to dissipate high amperage lightning-induced currents, which might otherwise create an ignition source for fuel vapors inside the wing vent boxes and lead to an explosion of the fuel tanks. 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. Installing Electrical Bonding, and Resistance and Fuel Leakage Testing (f) Within 78 months after the effective date of this AD, replace certain attaching hardware of the bulkhead nipple assemblies of the left and right wing vent boxes with new electrical bonding attaching hardware, do resistance testing of the new electrical bonds, and do fuel leakage testing of the reworked nipple assemblies; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 717–28–0011, Revision 2, dated July 19, 2006. Actions Accomplished According to Previous Issue of Service Bulletin (g) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 717–28–0011, Revision 1, dated January 24, 2006, are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding actions specified in this AD. mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS (h)(1) The Manager, ANM–116, International Branch, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has, 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 October 3, 2006. Kalene C. Yanamura, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6–17004 Filed 10–12–06; 8:45 am] VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:51 Oct 12, 2006 Jkt 211001 RIN 2120–AA64 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). AGENCY: SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the McDonnell Douglas airplanes previously described. This proposed AD would require replacing the control modules of the fire detection systems of the propulsion engines with new, improved control modules. This proposed AD results from a report of broken or severed wiring between engine fire detectors and the fire detection system control module, which caused the fire detection system to become non-functional without flightcrew awareness. We are proposing this AD to prevent unannunciated fire in a propulsion engine, which could cause injury to flightcrew and passengers or loss of the airplane. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 27, 2006. 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. ADDRESSES: Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) BILLING CODE 4910–13–P [Docket No. FAA–2006–26049; Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–177–AD] PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Contact Meggitt Safety Systems Inc., 1915 Voyager Avenue, Simi Valley, California 93063, 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–2006–26049; Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–177–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. Discussion We have received a report indicating that an unsafe condition may exist on E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM 13OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 198 / Friday, October 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules all McDonnell Douglas Model DC–10– 10, DC–10–10F, DC–10–15, DC–10–30, and DC–10–30F (KC–10A and KDC–10) airplanes; Model DC–10–40 and DC–10– 40F airplanes equipped with Pratt & Whitney JT9–20 or JT9–20J engines; and all Model MD–10–10F and MD–10–30F airplanes. The report stated that a Model DC–10–10F airplane experienced an undetected, uncontained engine failure upon takeoff, which severed the wiring between the engine fire detectors and the fire detection system control module. As the fire detection system control module was not designed to register wiring or component failures when not in test mode, the fire detection system became non-functional without flightcrew awareness. Upon landing, the flightcrew employed the thrust reversers for all engines, which caused an unannunciated fire in the failed engine that required ground support to extinguish. A fire detection system not known to be malfunctioning could, if not repaired, result in unannunciated fire in a propulsion engine, which could cause injury to flightcrew and passengers or loss of the airplane. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed Meggitt Safety Systems Service Bulletin 26–34, Revision 2, dated August 15, 2006. The service bulletin describes procedures for replacing the fire detection system control modules of the main propulsion engines and auxiliary power unit (APU) with new, improved control modules. 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 ‘‘Differences Between Proposed AD and Service Bulletin.’’ mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS Differences Between Proposed AD and Service Bulletin The service bulletin describes procedures for replacing the control modules of the fire detection systems of the propulsion engines and of the APU. However, we have determined that mandating replacement of the control module of the fire detection system of the APU is not critical to fleet safety. VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:51 Oct 12, 2006 Jkt 211001 60449 Therefore, this proposed AD would not require this action. The service bulletin does not specify a compliance time for accomplishing the described actions. However, we have determined that a compliance time of 60 months after the effective date of this proposed AD would provide an appropriate amount of time to accomplish the actions while maintaining an adequate level of fleet safety. We have coordinated these differences with Boeing. 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. Costs of Compliance There are about 305 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 233 airplanes of U.S. registry. The proposed actions would take about 6 work hours per airplane, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Required parts would cost about $9,900 per airplane. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the proposed AD for U.S. operators is $2,418,540, or $10,380 per airplane. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. 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; PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 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. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA–2006– 26049; Directorate Identifier 2006–NM– 177–AD. Comments Due Date (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by November 27, 2006. Affected ADs (b) None. Applicability (c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas airplanes, certificated in any category; as specified in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of this AD. (1) All Model DC–10–10, DC–10–10F, DC– 10–15, DC–10–30, and DC–10–30F (KC–10A and KDC–10) airplanes; (2) Model DC–10–40 and DC–10–40F airplanes equipped with Pratt & Whitney JT9–20 or JT9–20J engines; and (3) All Model MD–10–10F and MD–10–30F airplanes. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from a report of broken or severed wiring between engine fire detectors and the fire detection system control module, which caused the fire detection system to become non-functional without flightcrew awareness. We are issuing this AD to prevent unannunciated fire in a propulsion engine, which could cause injury to flightcrew and passengers or loss of the airplane. E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM 13OCP1 60450 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 198 / Friday, October 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules 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. Control Module Replacement (f) Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, replace the control modules of the fire detection systems of the propulsion engines with new, improved control modules, in accordance with paragraph 2., ‘‘Main Engine Control Module Replacement Instructions,’’ of Meggitt Safety Systems Service Bulletin 26–34, Revision 2, dated August 15, 2006. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (g)(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 October 3, 2006. Kalene C. Yanamura, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6–17003 Filed 10–12–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2006–26050; Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–078–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model DHC–8–400 Series Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS AGENCY: SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness directive (AD) that applies to certain Bombardier Model DHC–8–400 series airplanes. The existing AD currently requires revising the airplane flight manual (AFM) to advise the flightcrew of appropriate procedures to follow in the event that a main landing gear (MLG) fails to extend following a geardown selection. The existing AD also currently requires repetitive replacement of the left and right MLG uplock assemblies with new assemblies; VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:51 Oct 12, 2006 Jkt 211001 and an inspection of the left and right MLG uplock rollers for the presence of an inner low friction liner, and corrective actions if necessary. This proposed AD would revise the requirement for replacing the left and right MLG uplock assemblies by allowing replacement with alternative parts. For a certain MLG uplock assembly, this proposed AD would require repetitive inspections of the uplock hatch lower jaw for the presence of a wear groove and replacement with an improved part if necessary. For a certain MLG uplock assembly, this proposed AD also would require repetitive inspections of the uplock roller to ensure that it rotates freely and replacement with a new part if necessary. This proposed AD would allow optional replacement of the left and right MLG uplock assemblies with improved parts, which ends the requirements of the AFM revision and repetitive replacement and inspections. This proposed AD would remove airplanes from the applicability. This proposed AD results from development of a terminating action. We are proposing this AD to ensure that the flightcrew has the procedures necessary to address failure of an MLG to extend following a gear-down selection; and to detect and correct such failure, which could result in a gear-up landing and possible injury to passengers and crew. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 13, 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 Bombardier, Inc., Bombardier Regional Aircraft Division, 123 Garratt Boulevard, Downsview, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada, for service information identified in this proposed AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ezra Sasson, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Flight Test Branch, ANE–172, FAA, PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 New York Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; telephone (516) 228–7320; fax (516) 794–5531. 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 ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2006–26050; Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–078– 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 the 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. Discussion On April 11, 2002, we issued AD 2002–08–05, amendment 39–12713 (67 FR 19101, April 18, 2002), for certain Bombardier Model DHC–8–400 series airplanes. That AD requires revising the airplane flight manual (AFM) to advise the flightcrew of appropriate procedures to follow in the event that a main landing gear (MLG) fails to extend following a gear-down selection. That AD also requires repetitive replacement E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM 13OCP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 198 (Friday, October 13, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 60448-60450]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-17003]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2006-26049; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-177-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, DC-
10-10F, DC-10-15, DC-10-30, and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) 
Airplanes; Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F Airplanes Equipped With Pratt & 
Whitney JT9-20 or JT9-20J Engines; and Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F 
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 the McDonnell Douglas airplanes previously described. This proposed 
AD would require replacing the control modules of the fire detection 
systems of the propulsion engines with new, improved control modules. 
This proposed AD results from a report of broken or severed wiring 
between engine fire detectors and the fire detection system control 
module, which caused the fire detection system to become non-functional 
without flightcrew awareness. We are proposing this AD to prevent 
unannunciated fire in a propulsion engine, which could cause injury to 
flightcrew and passengers or loss of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 27, 
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 Meggitt Safety Systems Inc., 1915 Voyager Avenue, Simi 
Valley, California 93063, 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-
26049; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-177-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.

Discussion

    We have received a report indicating that an unsafe condition may 
exist on

[[Page 60449]]

all McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-10-15, DC-10-30, 
and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) airplanes; Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-
40F airplanes equipped with Pratt & Whitney JT9-20 or JT9-20J engines; 
and all Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes. The report stated that 
a Model DC-10-10F airplane experienced an undetected, uncontained 
engine failure upon takeoff, which severed the wiring between the 
engine fire detectors and the fire detection system control module. As 
the fire detection system control module was not designed to register 
wiring or component failures when not in test mode, the fire detection 
system became non-functional without flightcrew awareness. Upon 
landing, the flightcrew employed the thrust reversers for all engines, 
which caused an unannunciated fire in the failed engine that required 
ground support to extinguish. A fire detection system not known to be 
malfunctioning could, if not repaired, result in unannunciated fire in 
a propulsion engine, which could cause injury to flightcrew and 
passengers or loss of the airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Meggitt Safety Systems Service Bulletin 26-34, 
Revision 2, dated August 15, 2006. The service bulletin describes 
procedures for replacing the fire detection system control modules of 
the main propulsion engines and auxiliary power unit (APU) with new, 
improved control modules. 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 
``Differences Between Proposed AD and Service Bulletin.''

Differences Between Proposed AD and Service Bulletin

    The service bulletin describes procedures for replacing the control 
modules of the fire detection systems of the propulsion engines and of 
the APU. However, we have determined that mandating replacement of the 
control module of the fire detection system of the APU is not critical 
to fleet safety. Therefore, this proposed AD would not require this 
action.
    The service bulletin does not specify a compliance time for 
accomplishing the described actions. However, we have determined that a 
compliance time of 60 months after the effective date of this proposed 
AD would provide an appropriate amount of time to accomplish the 
actions while maintaining an adequate level of fleet safety.
    We have coordinated these differences with Boeing.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 305 airplanes of the affected design in the 
worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 233 airplanes of 
U.S. registry. The proposed actions would take about 6 work hours per 
airplane, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Required parts 
would cost about $9,900 per airplane. Based on these figures, the 
estimated cost of the proposed AD for U.S. operators is $2,418,540, or 
$10,380 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 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-2006-26049; Directorate Identifier 
2006-NM-177-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by November 
27, 2006.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas airplanes, certificated 
in any category; as specified in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and 
(c)(3) of this AD.
    (1) All Model DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-10-15, DC-10-30, and DC-
10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) airplanes;
    (2) Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F airplanes equipped with Pratt & 
Whitney JT9-20 or JT9-20J engines; and
    (3) All Model MD-10-10F and MD-10-30F airplanes.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from a report of broken or severed wiring 
between engine fire detectors and the fire detection system control 
module, which caused the fire detection system to become non-
functional without flightcrew awareness. We are issuing this AD to 
prevent unannunciated fire in a propulsion engine, which could cause 
injury to flightcrew and passengers or loss of the airplane.

[[Page 60450]]

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.

Control Module Replacement

    (f) Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, 
replace the control modules of the fire detection systems of the 
propulsion engines with new, improved control modules, in accordance 
with paragraph 2., ``Main Engine Control Module Replacement 
Instructions,'' of Meggitt Safety Systems Service Bulletin 26-34, 
Revision 2, dated August 15, 2006.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (g)(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 October 3, 2006.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. E6-17003 Filed 10-12-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.