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; and Model MD-11 and MD-11F Airplanes, 40090-40094 [E7-14042]

Download as PDF 40090 * * Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 140 / Monday, July 23, 2007 / Proposed Rules * * * Done in Washington, DC, this 18th day of July 2007. Kevin Shea, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. E7–14162 Filed 7–20–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–34–P ?≤ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2005–21470; Directorate Identifier 2003–NM–45–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; and Model MD–11 and MD– 11F Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of comment period. sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS AGENCY: SUMMARY: The FAA is revising an earlier proposed airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 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; and Model MD–11 and MD–11F airplanes. The original NPRM would have required, for certain airplanes, modifying the thrust reverser command wiring of the number 2 engine. For certain other airplanes, the original NPRM would have required modifying the thrust reverser system wiring from the flight compartment to engines 1, 2, and 3 thrust reversers. The original NPRM also would have required installing thrust reverser locking systems on certain airplanes. The original NPRM resulted from a determination that the thrust reverser systems on these McDonnell Douglas airplanes do not adequately preclude unwanted deployment of a thrust reverser. This action revises the original NPRM by revising, for certain airplanes, the requirements for the modification of the thrust reverser system wiring from the flight compartment to engines 1, 2, and 3 thrust reversers. We are proposing this supplemental NPRM to prevent an unwanted deployment of a thrust reverser during flight, which could VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:41 Jul 20, 2007 Jkt 211001 result in reduced controllability of the airplane. DATES: We must receive comments on this supplemental NPRM by August 17, 2007. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this supplemental NPRM. • 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: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. • Fax: (202) 493–2251. • Hand Delivery: Room W12–140 on the ground floor of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 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 service information identified in this proposed AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Philip C. Kush, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Branch, ANM–140L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712–4137; telephone (562) 627–5263; fax (562) 627–5210. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this supplemental NPRM. Send your comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 2005–21470; Directorate Identifier 2003–NM–45–AD’’ at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this supplemental NPRM. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this supplemental NPRM in light of those comments. We will post all comments submitted, 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 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 this supplemental NPRM. 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 Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Operations office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is located on the ground floor of the West Building at the 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 proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 with a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for an AD (the ‘‘original NPRM’’) for certain 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; and Model MD–11 and MD–11F airplanes. The original NPRM was published in the Federal Register on June 16, 2005 (70 FR 35049). The original NPRM proposed to require, for certain airplanes, modifying the thrust reverser command wiring of the number 2 engine. For certain other airplanes, the original NPRM proposed to require modifying the thrust reverser system wiring from the flight compartment to engines 1, 2, and 3 thrust reversers. The original NPRM also proposed to require installing thrust reverser locking systems on certain airplanes. Relevant Service Information Since we issued the original NPRM, Boeing has issued Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11–78A007, Revision 4, dated February 22, 2007 (Boeing Service Bulletin MD11–78–007, Revision 02, dated August 22, 2001, was referred to as the appropriate source of service information for modifying the thrust reverser system wiring from the flight compartment to engines 1, 2, and 3 thrust reversers in the original NPRM for Model MD–11 and –11F airplanes). Revision 4 of the alert service bulletin requires additional work (wire changes in the wing root and empennage with metallic lightning overbraid and E:\FR\FM\23JYP1.SGM 23JYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 140 / Monday, July 23, 2007 / Proposed Rules separation of thrust reverser wiring in the empennage) if the modification was done in accordance with an earlier issue of the service bulletin. The modification includes revising and routing the wiring, verifying the proper configuration code, revising the wiring if required, and doing a test of the thrust reverser system. We have revised paragraphs (c)(3) and (g) of this supplemental NPRM to refer to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11–78A007, Revision 4, dated February 22, 2007. We have also reviewed McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC10–78–060, Revision 01, dated June 30, 2003 (McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC10–78–060, dated December 17, 1999, was referred to as a concurrent requirement in the original NPRM as required by AD 2001–17–19). We approved Revision 01 of the service bulletin as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) for the corresponding action in AD 2001–17– 19. We have added Revision 01 of the service bulletin to Table 2 of this supplemental NPRM. Comments We have considered the following comments on the original NPRM. sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Support for the Original NPRM The Air Line Pilots Association supports the original NPRM. Request To Remove Requirement Lufthansa Technik suggests that we avoid the installation of thrust reverser locking systems with low reliability rates like those of the Model 747–400 airplanes, which require inspection every 1,000 flight hours. Lufthansa states that installed systems should not increase the maintenance burden with short interval inspections. We infer that the commenter requests that we remove the requirement to install thrust reverser locking systems on certain airplanes. We disagree with the request to remove the requirement to install thrust reverser locking systems on certain airplanes specified in this supplemental NPRM. The commenter refers to repetitive inspections for Model 747– 400 series airplanes, and those airplanes are not part of the applicability of this supplemental NPRM. However, operators should note that repetitive inspections are sometimes required if a terminating action is not available. Even though there are some reliability issues with certain locking systems, the locks still function to prevent an in-flight reverse event. We are not aware of any reliability issues with the locking systems on airplanes affected by this supplemental NPRM. We have not VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:41 Jul 20, 2007 Jkt 211001 changed this supplemental NPRM in this regard. Request To Withdraw Original NPRM Northwest Airlines (NWA) states that it is not convinced the accomplishment of the modification specified in the original NPRM should be mandated. We infer that NWA requests that we withdraw the original NPRM. NWA states that the FAA has not demonstrated that the reduced controllability from the deployment of a number 2 thrust reverser in flight would represent a condition that would prevent continued safe flight and landing. NWA states that ADs 2001–05– 10 and 2001–17–19 require operators to install interlocks on the wing engines and modify control and indication wiring. NWA concludes that these wing thrust reverser modifications have reduced the probability of an unsafe condition of the airplane to an acceptable level. We do not agree to withdraw the original NPRM. A safety flight analysis was conducted by the manufacturer, and it has been determined that, in a certain part of the flight envelope, an uncommanded deployment of the reverser on the number 2 engine could result in reduced controllability of the airplane. In the analysis, the separation of the wiring in the number 2 engine will increase this margin to an acceptable level of safety. We have determined that an unsafe condition exists and that the separation of the wiring must be done to ensure continued safety. We have not revised this supplemental NPRM in this regard. Request To Remove Requirements or Supersede Existing ADs FedEx requests that we either remove the reference to concurrent requirements or supersede the related ADs. FedEx states that concurrent McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin DC10–78A057, Revision 01, dated February 18, 1999, is already mandated by AD 2001–05–10, and McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC10–78–060, dated December 17, 1999, is already mandated by AD 2001– 17–19. FedEx concludes that these two service bulletins are not necessary in the original NPRM and would result in redundant compliance tracking unless the original NPRM supersedes the related ADs. We acknowledge that additional compliance tracking might be necessary for affected operators. However, due to the complexity of the actions specified in both of those ADs and this supplemental NPRM, we do not agree to supersede ADs 2001–05–10 and 2001– PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 40091 17–19. We also do not agree to remove McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin DC10–78A057 and McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC10–78–060 from the concurrent actions specified in this supplemental NPRM. Although operators might have already done these service bulletins in accordance with ADs 2001–05–10 and 2001–17–19, operators that bring an airplane onto the U.S. registry must be aware that these service bulletins are prior or concurrent requirements to the actions specified in this supplemental NPRM. Request To Delay Releasing an AD FedEx requests that we delay releasing an AD that requires the actions specified in the original NPRM until after Rohr SB MD–11 54–201 is available (Rohr Service Bulletin MD–11 54–201, dated November 30, 1999, was referred to as a concurrent service bulletin in Table 3 of the original NPRM). FedEx states that, according to Goodrich, Revision 1 of the service bulletin is in draft form and that neither Revision 1 nor the original issue has been issued or released to operators. FedEx states that all pertinent service bulletins should be available to operators for review. We acknowledge that the original issue of the service bulletin was not readily available to operators. Since the original NPRM was issued, we have reviewed Rohr Service Bulletin MD–11 54–201, Revision 2, dated December 12, 2005. The service bulletin specifies the same procedures as the original to modify pylon thrust reverser harnesses and the J-box. We have revised Table 3 of the supplemental NPRM to refer to Revision 2. We have also added Rohr Service Bulletin MD–11 54–201, dated November 30, 1999, and Rohr Service Bulletin MD–11 54–201, Revision 1, dated November 23, 2005, to paragraph (k) of the supplemental NPRM in order to give credit for actions done in accordance with these service bulletins for the corresponding requirements of Table 3 of this supplemental NPRM. Request To Revise Cost Estimate FedEx requests that we revise the cost estimate for the original NPRM. FedEx states that it will need 244 work hours per MD–11 airplane, with parts costing over $18,750, for a total cost per airplane of over $34,600 for the wiring modification. The commenter notes that this estimate reflects concurrent requirements and material costs not adjusted for inflation and that this estimate does not include taxes, contingency fees, consumable materials or the cost of delays and lost airlift that will be incurred by operators. The E:\FR\FM\23JYP1.SGM 23JYP1 40092 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 140 / Monday, July 23, 2007 / Proposed Rules commenter notes that increased revenue is lost if an airplane must be removed from revenue service on an off-schedule basis and that the additional 250 to 300 work hours must be scheduled into scheduled maintenance. The commenter concludes that the cost of compliance will be higher than the figures published. We agree that a cost per MD–11 airplane of $34,600 is a good estimate and it corresponds with our estimate in the cost of compliance section of this supplemental NPRM for MD–11 airplanes of up to $17,672 for the main modification and $19,675 for applicable concurrent actions for a total of up to $37,374 per airplane. We do not agree to revise the cost estimate to include other incidental costs, such as delays due to scheduling. Where safety considerations allow, we attempt to set compliance times that generally coincide with operators’ maintenance schedules. However, because operators’ schedules vary substantially, we cannot accommodate every operator’s optimal scheduling in each AD. Each AD does allow individual operators to request approval for extensions of compliance times, based on a showing that the extension will not affect safety adversely as specified in the provisions of paragraph (l) of this AD. Therefore, we do not consider it appropriate to attribute to the AD the costs associated with the type of special scheduling that might otherwise be required. We have not changed this supplemental NPRM in this regard. Request That We Ensure Adequate Parts FedEx requests that we ensure that relevant equipment manufacturers have an initial stock of materials available that will support U.S. operators and prevent any undue delays in completing all fleet modifications. FedEx states that the initial supply and replenishment of parts and materials affect scheduling and ground time needed to complete the modifications. We acknowledge that parts availability affects scheduling and ground time needed to complete the modifications. We contacted Boeing about parts availability in regard to this supplemental NPRM, and have confirmed that a sufficient quantity of parts is available. We have not changed this supplemental NPRM in this regard. Clarification of AMOC Paragraph We have revised this action to clarify the appropriate procedure for notifying the principal inspector before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies. Explanation of Change to Costs of Compliance After the original NPRM was issued, we reviewed the figures we have used over the past several years to calculate AD costs to operators. To account for various inflationary costs in the airline industry, we find it necessary to increase the labor rate used in these calculations from $65 per work hour to $80 per work hour. The cost impact information, below, reflects this increase in the specified hourly labor rate. FAA’s Determination and Proposed Requirements of the Supplemental NPRM Certain changes discussed above expand the scope of the original NPRM; therefore, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment period to provide additional opportunity for public comment on this supplemental NPRM. Costs of Compliance There are about 612 airplanes of the affected designs in the worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 245 airplanes of U.S. registry. The following tables provide the estimated costs for U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD, for the applicable actions, at an average hourly labor rate of $80. COST FOR WIRING MODIFICATION/THRUST REVERSER LOCKING SYSTEM INSTALLATION Number of U.S.registered airplanes Action Work hours Parts Cost per airplane Modify wiring (Model DC–10–10, DC–10–10F, DC–10–15, DC– 10–30 and DC–10–30F (KC– 10A and KDC–10) airplanes). Modify wiring (Model DC–10–40 and DC–10–40F airplanes). Modify wiring (Model MD–11 and –11F airplanes). Install thrust reverser locking system (Model DC–10–40 and DC–10–40F airplanes). 34 .............................. $1,562 ....................... $4,282 ....................... 40 $171,280. 34 .............................. $5,238 ....................... $7,958 ....................... 45 $358,110. Between 124 and 192. 218 ............................ Between $11,912 and $17,672. Between $165,535 and $207,792. Between $21,832 and $33,032. Between $182,975 and $225,232. 160 45 Fleet cost Between $3,493,120 and $5,285,120. Between $8,233,875 and $10,135,440. COST OF CONCURRENT ACTIONS FOR MODEL MD–11 AND MD–11F AIRPLANES sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Action Work hours Parts Cost per airplane Number of U.S. registered airplanes Fleet cost Update program software, as applicable. Modify wing pylon harnesses, as applicable. Modify pylon thrust reverser harnesses and J-box, as applicable. 2 ............................... None ......................... $160 ......................... Up to 160 ................. 100 ........................... $5,268 ...................... $13,268 .................... Up to 160 ................. Between 82 and 192 Between $10,472 and $15,999. Between $17,032 and $31,359. Up to 160 ................. Up to $25,600. Up to $2,122,880. Up to $5,017,440. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:41 Jul 20, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23JYP1.SGM 23JYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 140 / Monday, July 23, 2007 / Proposed Rules 40093 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. 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 supplemental NPRM and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Affected ADs 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 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, 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–2005– 21470; Directorate Identifier 2003–NM– 45–AD. Comments Due Date (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by August 17, 2007. (b) None. Applicability (c) This AD applies to airplanes, certificated in any category, as listed in Table 1 of this AD. TABLE 1.—APPLICABILITY McDonnell Douglas airplane— As identified in— (1) 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 .................................... (3) Model MD–11 and MD–11F airplanes ................................................ Boeing Service Bulletin DC10–78–066, Revision 01, dated November 30, 2001. Boeing Service Bulletin DC10–78–067, dated October 30, 2002. Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11–78A007, Revision 4, dated February 22, 2007. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD was prompted by a determination that the thrust reverser systems on these McDonnell Douglas airplanes do not adequately preclude unwanted deployment of a thrust reverser. We are issuing this AD to prevent an unwanted deployment of a thrust reverser during flight, which could result in reduced controllability of the airplane. Wiring Modification (f) For Model DC–10–10, DC–10–10F, DC– 10–15, DC–10–30, and DC–10–30F (KC–10A and KDC–10) airplanes: Within 60 months sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS 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. after the effective date of this AD, modify the thrust reverser command wiring of the number 2 engine by doing all the actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin DC10–78–066, Revision 01, dated November 30, 2001. (g) For Model MD–11 and MD–11F airplanes: Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, modify the thrust reverser system wiring from the flight compartment to engines 1, 2, and 3 thrust reversers by doing all the actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11–78A007, Revision 4, dated February 22, 2007. Wiring Modification/Installation of Thrust Reverser Locking System (h) For Model DC–10–40 and DC–10–40F airplanes: Within 60 months after the VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:41 Jul 20, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 effective date of this AD, modify the thrust reverser command wiring of the number 2 engine by doing all the actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin DC10–78–067, dated October 30, 2002, and install thrust reverser locking systems by doing all the applicable actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC10–78–064, dated June 24, 2003. Prior or Concurrent Actions (i) For Model DC–10–10, DC–10–10F, DC– 10–15, DC–10–30, and DC–10–30F (KC–10A and KDC–10) airplanes: Prior to or concurrently with the actions required by paragraph (f) of this AD, do the actions specified in Table 2 of this AD. E:\FR\FM\23JYP1.SGM 23JYP1 40094 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 140 / Monday, July 23, 2007 / Proposed Rules TABLE 2.—PRIOR OR CONCURRENT ACTIONS FOR MODEL DC–10–10, DC–10–10F, DC–10–15, DC–10–30, AND DC– 10–30F (KC–10A AND KDC–10), AIRPLANES Do— Required by— In accordance with— Repetitive detailed visual inspections, functional checks, and torque checks of the thrust reverser systems, and applicable corrective actions. A modification of the indication light system for the thrust reversers. Paragraphs (c) and (i) of AD 2001–05–10, amendment 39–12147. McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin DC10–78A057, Revision 01, dated February 18, 1999. Paragraph (a) of AD 2001–17–19, amendment 39–12410. McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC10– 78–060, dated December 17, 1999; or McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC10– 78–060, Revision 01, dated June 30, 2003. (j) For Model MD–11 and MD–11F airplanes: Prior to or concurrently with the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, do the actions specified in Table 3 of this AD. TABLE 3.—PRIOR OR CONCURRENT ACTIONS FOR MODEL MD–11 AND MD–11F AIRPLANES Do— In accordance with— An update of the program software of display electronic units ............... McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin MD11–31–091, dated November 5, 1998. Rohr Service Bulletin MD–11 54–200, Revision 1, dated May 14, 2001. Rohr Service Bulletin MD–11 54–201, Revision 2, dated December 12, 2005. A modification of the wing pylon harnesses ............................................ A modification of the pylon thrust reverser harnesses and J-box ........... Actions Accomplished According to Previous Issues of Service Bulletins DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (k) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD according to Boeing Service Bulletin DC10–78–066, dated March 6, 2001; Rohr Service Bulletin MD–11 54– 201, dated November 30, 1999; or Rohr Service Bulletin MD–11 54–201, Revision 1, dated November 23, 2005; are considered acceptable for compliance with the applicable corresponding actions specified in this AD. Federal Aviation Administration Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS (l)(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) To request a different method of compliance or a different compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 11, 2007. Stephen P. Boyd, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7–14042 Filed 7–20–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:41 Jul 20, 2007 Jkt 211001 [Docket No. FAA–2007–28748; Directorate Identifier 2007–NM–115–AD] could break off and can cause injury to people or damage to property on the ground, can affect landing gear controls and rear spar flight control systems, can cause damage to other control systems, and might cause loss of control of the airplane. RIN 2120–AA64 DATES: 14 CFR Part 39 Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC–10–10, DC–10–10F, DC–10–30F (KC–10A and KDC–10), DC–10–40F, MD–10–10F, and MD–10– 30F Airplanes; and Model MD–11 and MD–11F Airplanes 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 certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC– 10–10, DC–10–10F, DC–10–30F (KC– 10A and KDC–10), DC–10–40F, MD–10– 10F, and MD–10–30F airplanes; and Model MD–11 and MD–11F airplanes. This proposed AD would require installation of control cable freeze protection by making certain changes. This proposed AD results from reports of standing water on the horizontal pressure panel above the main and center landing gear wheel wells. We are proposing this AD to prevent the accumulation of ice on the flight control cables in the wheel wells. When the landing gear doors open or vibration in this area occurs, such ice accumulation PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 6, 2007. 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: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • Fax: (202) 493–2251. • Hand Delivery: Room W12–140 on the ground floor of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 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. E:\FR\FM\23JYP1.SGM 23JYP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 140 (Monday, July 23, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40090-40094]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-14042]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2005-21470; Directorate Identifier 2003-NM-45-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; and Model MD-11 and MD-11F
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of
comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is revising an earlier proposed airworthiness
directive (AD) for certain 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; and Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes.
The original NPRM would have required, for certain airplanes, modifying
the thrust reverser command wiring of the number 2 engine. For certain
other airplanes, the original NPRM would have required modifying the
thrust reverser system wiring from the flight compartment to engines 1,
2, and 3 thrust reversers. The original NPRM also would have required
installing thrust reverser locking systems on certain airplanes. The
original NPRM resulted from a determination that the thrust reverser
systems on these McDonnell Douglas airplanes do not adequately preclude
unwanted deployment of a thrust reverser. This action revises the
original NPRM by revising, for certain airplanes, the requirements for
the modification of the thrust reverser system wiring from the flight
compartment to engines 1, 2, and 3 thrust reversers. We are proposing
this supplemental NPRM to prevent an unwanted deployment of a thrust
reverser during flight, which could result in reduced controllability
of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this supplemental NPRM by August 17,
2007.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on
this supplemental NPRM.
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: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Hand Delivery: Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 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 service information
identified in this proposed AD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Philip C. Kush, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Branch, ANM-140L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137;
telephone (562) 627-5263; fax (562) 627-5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or
arguments regarding this supplemental NPRM. Send your comments to an
address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number
``Docket No. FAA-2005-21470; Directorate Identifier 2003-NM-45-AD'' at
the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the
overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this
supplemental NPRM. We will consider all comments received by the
closing date and may amend this supplemental NPRM in light of those
comments.
We will post all comments submitted, 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 supplemental NPRM. 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 Operations office between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
Docket Operations office (telephone (800) 647-5527) is located on the
ground floor of the West Building at the 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 proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 with a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) for an AD (the ``original NPRM'') for certain
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; and Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes. The original NPRM was
published in the Federal Register on June 16, 2005 (70 FR 35049). The
original NPRM proposed to require, for certain airplanes, modifying the
thrust reverser command wiring of the number 2 engine. For certain
other airplanes, the original NPRM proposed to require modifying the
thrust reverser system wiring from the flight compartment to engines 1,
2, and 3 thrust reversers. The original NPRM also proposed to require
installing thrust reverser locking systems on certain airplanes.

Relevant Service Information

Since we issued the original NPRM, Boeing has issued Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin MD11-78A007, Revision 4, dated February 22, 2007
(Boeing Service Bulletin MD11-78-007, Revision 02, dated August 22,
2001, was referred to as the appropriate source of service information
for modifying the thrust reverser system wiring from the flight
compartment to engines 1, 2, and 3 thrust reversers in the original
NPRM for Model MD-11 and -11F airplanes). Revision 4 of the alert
service bulletin requires additional work (wire changes in the wing
root and empennage with metallic lightning overbraid and

[[Page 40091]]

separation of thrust reverser wiring in the empennage) if the
modification was done in accordance with an earlier issue of the
service bulletin. The modification includes revising and routing the
wiring, verifying the proper configuration code, revising the wiring if
required, and doing a test of the thrust reverser system. We have
revised paragraphs (c)(3) and (g) of this supplemental NPRM to refer to
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11-78A007, Revision 4, dated February
22, 2007.
We have also reviewed McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC10-78-
060, Revision 01, dated June 30, 2003 (McDonnell Douglas Service
Bulletin DC10-78-060, dated December 17, 1999, was referred to as a
concurrent requirement in the original NPRM as required by AD 2001-17-
19). We approved Revision 01 of the service bulletin as an alternative
method of compliance (AMOC) for the corresponding action in AD 2001-17-
19. We have added Revision 01 of the service bulletin to Table 2 of
this supplemental NPRM.

Comments

We have considered the following comments on the original NPRM.

Support for the Original NPRM

The Air Line Pilots Association supports the original NPRM.

Request To Remove Requirement

Lufthansa Technik suggests that we avoid the installation of thrust
reverser locking systems with low reliability rates like those of the
Model 747-400 airplanes, which require inspection every 1,000 flight
hours. Lufthansa states that installed systems should not increase the
maintenance burden with short interval inspections. We infer that the
commenter requests that we remove the requirement to install thrust
reverser locking systems on certain airplanes.
We disagree with the request to remove the requirement to install
thrust reverser locking systems on certain airplanes specified in this
supplemental NPRM. The commenter refers to repetitive inspections for
Model 747-400 series airplanes, and those airplanes are not part of the
applicability of this supplemental NPRM. However, operators should note
that repetitive inspections are sometimes required if a terminating
action is not available. Even though there are some reliability issues
with certain locking systems, the locks still function to prevent an
in-flight reverse event. We are not aware of any reliability issues
with the locking systems on airplanes affected by this supplemental
NPRM. We have not changed this supplemental NPRM in this regard.

Request To Withdraw Original NPRM

Northwest Airlines (NWA) states that it is not convinced the
accomplishment of the modification specified in the original NPRM
should be mandated. We infer that NWA requests that we withdraw the
original NPRM. NWA states that the FAA has not demonstrated that the
reduced controllability from the deployment of a number 2 thrust
reverser in flight would represent a condition that would prevent
continued safe flight and landing. NWA states that ADs 2001-05-10 and
2001-17-19 require operators to install interlocks on the wing engines
and modify control and indication wiring. NWA concludes that these wing
thrust reverser modifications have reduced the probability of an unsafe
condition of the airplane to an acceptable level.
We do not agree to withdraw the original NPRM. A safety flight
analysis was conducted by the manufacturer, and it has been determined
that, in a certain part of the flight envelope, an uncommanded
deployment of the reverser on the number 2 engine could result in
reduced controllability of the airplane. In the analysis, the
separation of the wiring in the number 2 engine will increase this
margin to an acceptable level of safety. We have determined that an
unsafe condition exists and that the separation of the wiring must be
done to ensure continued safety. We have not revised this supplemental
NPRM in this regard.

Request To Remove Requirements or Supersede Existing ADs

FedEx requests that we either remove the reference to concurrent
requirements or supersede the related ADs. FedEx states that concurrent
McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin DC10-78A057, Revision 01,
dated February 18, 1999, is already mandated by AD 2001-05-10, and
McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC10-78-060, dated December 17,
1999, is already mandated by AD 2001-17-19. FedEx concludes that these
two service bulletins are not necessary in the original NPRM and would
result in redundant compliance tracking unless the original NPRM
supersedes the related ADs.
We acknowledge that additional compliance tracking might be
necessary for affected operators. However, due to the complexity of the
actions specified in both of those ADs and this supplemental NPRM, we
do not agree to supersede ADs 2001-05-10 and 2001-17-19. We also do not
agree to remove McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin DC10-78A057
and McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin DC10-78-060 from the concurrent
actions specified in this supplemental NPRM. Although operators might
have already done these service bulletins in accordance with ADs 2001-
05-10 and 2001-17-19, operators that bring an airplane onto the U.S.
registry must be aware that these service bulletins are prior or
concurrent requirements to the actions specified in this supplemental
NPRM.

Request To Delay Releasing an AD

FedEx requests that we delay releasing an AD that requires the
actions specified in the original NPRM until after Rohr SB MD-11 54-201
is available (Rohr Service Bulletin MD-11 54-201, dated November 30,
1999, was referred to as a concurrent service bulletin in Table 3 of
the original NPRM). FedEx states that, according to Goodrich, Revision
1 of the service bulletin is in draft form and that neither Revision 1
nor the original issue has been issued or released to operators. FedEx
states that all pertinent service bulletins should be available to
operators for review.
We acknowledge that the original issue of the service bulletin was
not readily available to operators. Since the original NPRM was issued,
we have reviewed Rohr Service Bulletin MD-11 54-201, Revision 2, dated
December 12, 2005. The service bulletin specifies the same procedures
as the original to modify pylon thrust reverser harnesses and the J-
box. We have revised Table 3 of the supplemental NPRM to refer to
Revision 2. We have also added Rohr Service Bulletin MD-11 54-201,
dated November 30, 1999, and Rohr Service Bulletin MD-11 54-201,
Revision 1, dated November 23, 2005, to paragraph (k) of the
supplemental NPRM in order to give credit for actions done in
accordance with these service bulletins for the corresponding
requirements of Table 3 of this supplemental NPRM.

Request To Revise Cost Estimate

FedEx requests that we revise the cost estimate for the original
NPRM. FedEx states that it will need 244 work hours per MD-11 airplane,
with parts costing over $18,750, for a total cost per airplane of over
$34,600 for the wiring modification. The commenter notes that this
estimate reflects concurrent requirements and material costs not
adjusted for inflation and that this estimate does not include taxes,
contingency fees, consumable materials or the cost of delays and lost
airlift that will be incurred by operators. The

[[Page 40092]]

commenter notes that increased revenue is lost if an airplane must be
removed from revenue service on an off-schedule basis and that the
additional 250 to 300 work hours must be scheduled into scheduled
maintenance. The commenter concludes that the cost of compliance will
be higher than the figures published.
We agree that a cost per MD-11 airplane of $34,600 is a good
estimate and it corresponds with our estimate in the cost of compliance
section of this supplemental NPRM for MD-11 airplanes of up to $17,672
for the main modification and $19,675 for applicable concurrent actions
for a total of up to $37,374 per airplane.
We do not agree to revise the cost estimate to include other
incidental costs, such as delays due to scheduling. Where safety
considerations allow, we attempt to set compliance times that generally
coincide with operators' maintenance schedules. However, because
operators' schedules vary substantially, we cannot accommodate every
operator's optimal scheduling in each AD. Each AD does allow individual
operators to request approval for extensions of compliance times, based
on a showing that the extension will not affect safety adversely as
specified in the provisions of paragraph (l) of this AD. Therefore, we
do not consider it appropriate to attribute to the AD the costs
associated with the type of special scheduling that might otherwise be
required. We have not changed this supplemental NPRM in this regard.

Request That We Ensure Adequate Parts

FedEx requests that we ensure that relevant equipment manufacturers
have an initial stock of materials available that will support U.S.
operators and prevent any undue delays in completing all fleet
modifications. FedEx states that the initial supply and replenishment
of parts and materials affect scheduling and ground time needed to
complete the modifications.
We acknowledge that parts availability affects scheduling and
ground time needed to complete the modifications. We contacted Boeing
about parts availability in regard to this supplemental NPRM, and have
confirmed that a sufficient quantity of parts is available. We have not
changed this supplemental NPRM in this regard.

Clarification of AMOC Paragraph

We have revised this action to clarify the appropriate procedure
for notifying the principal inspector before using any approved AMOC on
any airplane to which the AMOC applies.

Explanation of Change to Costs of Compliance

After the original NPRM was issued, we reviewed the figures we have
used over the past several years to calculate AD costs to operators. To
account for various inflationary costs in the airline industry, we find
it necessary to increase the labor rate used in these calculations from
$65 per work hour to $80 per work hour. The cost impact information,
below, reflects this increase in the specified hourly labor rate.

FAA's Determination and Proposed Requirements of the Supplemental NPRM

Certain changes discussed above expand the scope of the original
NPRM; therefore, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the
comment period to provide additional opportunity for public comment on
this supplemental NPRM.

Costs of Compliance

There are about 612 airplanes of the affected designs in the
worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 245 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The following tables provide the estimated costs for
U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD, for the applicable
actions, at an average hourly labor rate of $80.

Cost for Wiring Modification/Thrust Reverser Locking System Installation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
Cost per U.S.-
Action Work hours Parts airplane registered Fleet cost
airplanes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modify wiring (Model DC-10- 34.............. $1,562.......... $4,282......... 40 $171,280.
10, DC-10-10F, DC-10-15, DC-
10-30 and DC-10-30F (KC-10A
and KDC-10) airplanes).
Modify wiring (Model DC-10-40 34.............. $5,238.......... $7,958......... 45 $358,110.
and DC-10-40F airplanes).
Modify wiring (Model MD-11 Between 124 and Between $11,912 Between $21,832 160 Between
and -11F airplanes). 192. and $17,672. and $33,032. $3,493,120 and
$5,285,120.
Install thrust reverser 218............. Between $165,535 Between 45 Between
locking system (Model DC-10- and $207,792. $182,975 and $8,233,875 and
40 and DC-10-40F airplanes). $225,232. $10,135,440.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cost of Concurrent Actions for Model MD-11 and MD-11F Airplanes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of U.S.
Action Work hours Parts Cost per airplane registered airplanes Fleet cost
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Update program software, as 2..................... None................. $160................. Up to 160............ Up to $25,600.
applicable.
Modify wing pylon harnesses, as 100................... $5,268............... $13,268.............. Up to 160............ Up to $2,122,880.
applicable.
Modify pylon thrust reverser Between 82 and 192.... Between $10,472 and Between $17,032 and Up to 160............ Up to $5,017,440.
harnesses and J-box, as applicable. $15,999. $31,359.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 40093]]

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 supplemental NPRM 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-2005-21470; Directorate Identifier
2003-NM-45-AD.

Comments Due Date

(a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by August
17, 2007.

Affected ADs

(b) None.

Applicability

Table 1.--Applicability
------------------------------------------------------------------------
McDonnell Douglas airplane-- As identified in--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Model DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-10- Boeing Service Bulletin DC10-78-
15, DC-10-30 and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and 066, Revision 01, dated
KDC-10) airplanes. November 30, 2001.
(2) Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F Boeing Service Bulletin DC10-78-
airplanes. 067, dated October 30, 2002.
(3) Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes... Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
MD11-78A007, Revision 4, dated
February 22, 2007.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unsafe Condition

(d) This AD was prompted by a determination that the thrust
reverser systems on these McDonnell Douglas airplanes do not
adequately preclude unwanted deployment of a thrust reverser. We are
issuing this AD to prevent an unwanted deployment of a thrust
reverser during flight, which could result in reduced
controllability 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.

Wiring Modification

(f) For Model DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-10-15, DC-10-30, and DC-
10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) airplanes: Within 60 months after the
effective date of this AD, modify the thrust reverser command wiring
of the number 2 engine by doing all the actions specified in the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin DC10-78-066,
Revision 01, dated November 30, 2001.
(g) For Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes: Within 60 months after
the effective date of this AD, modify the thrust reverser system
wiring from the flight compartment to engines 1, 2, and 3 thrust
reversers by doing all the actions specified in the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11-78A007, Revision
4, dated February 22, 2007.

Wiring Modification/Installation of Thrust Reverser Locking System

(h) For Model DC-10-40 and DC-10-40F airplanes: Within 60 months
after the effective date of this AD, modify the thrust reverser
command wiring of the number 2 engine by doing all the actions
specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service
Bulletin DC10-78-067, dated October 30, 2002, and install thrust
reverser locking systems by doing all the applicable actions
specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of McDonnell Douglas
Service Bulletin DC10-78-064, dated June 24, 2003.

Prior or Concurrent Actions

(i) For Model DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-10-15, DC-10-30, and DC-
10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10) airplanes: Prior to or concurrently with
the actions required by paragraph (f) of this AD, do the actions
specified in Table 2 of this AD.

[[Page 40094]]

Table 2.--Prior or Concurrent Actions for Model DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-
10-15, DC-10-30, and DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10), Airplanes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do-- Required by-- In accordance with--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repetitive detailed visual Paragraphs (c) and McDonnell Douglas
inspections, functional (i) of AD 2001-05- Alert Service
checks, and torque checks 10, amendment 39- Bulletin DC10-
of the thrust reverser 12147. 78A057, Revision
systems, and applicable 01, dated February
corrective actions. 18, 1999.
A modification of the Paragraph (a) of AD McDonnell Douglas
indication light system for 2001-17-19, Service Bulletin
the thrust reversers. amendment 39-12410. DC10-78-060, dated
December 17, 1999;
or McDonnell
Douglas Service
Bulletin DC10-78-
060, Revision 01,
dated June 30,
2003.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(j) For Model MD-11 and MD-11F airplanes: Prior to or
concurrently with the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD,
do the actions specified in Table 3 of this AD.

Table 3.--Prior or Concurrent Actions for Model MD-11 and MD-11F
Airplanes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do-- In accordance with--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
An update of the program software of McDonnell Douglas Service
display electronic units. Bulletin MD11-31-091, dated
November 5, 1998.
A modification of the wing pylon Rohr Service Bulletin MD-11 54-
harnesses. 200, Revision 1, dated May 14,
2001.
A modification of the pylon thrust Rohr Service Bulletin MD-11 54-
reverser harnesses and J-box. 201, Revision 2, dated
December 12, 2005.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Actions Accomplished According to Previous Issues of Service Bulletins

(k) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD
according to Boeing Service Bulletin DC10-78-066, dated March 6,
2001; Rohr Service Bulletin MD-11 54-201, dated November 30, 1999;
or Rohr Service Bulletin MD-11 54-201, Revision 1, dated November
23, 2005; are considered acceptable for compliance with the
applicable corresponding actions specified in this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

(l)(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) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 11, 2007.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E7-14042 Filed 7-20-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

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