Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-30, DC-9-40, and DC-9-50 Series Airplanes, Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), and DC-9-87 (MD-87) Airplanes, and Model MD-88 and MD-90-30 Airplanes, 50894-50896 [E8-20082]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
50894
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 169 / Friday, August 29, 2008 / Proposed Rules
Compliance
(e) You are responsible for having the
actions required by this AD performed before
further flight after the effective date of this
AD, unless the actions have already been
done.
(f) Inspect the blade pitch change operating
link and eyebolt fork assembly for:
(1) Seizure (the link and eyebolt are seized
if the torque required to move the link is 300
inch pounds or more); and
(2) Cadmium plating on the mating
surfaces between the operating link and
eyebolt fork and the holes through the
eyebolt fork and the operating link.
(g) If the link and eyebolt fork are not
seized and have not been cadmium plated,
they may remain in service.
(h) If the link and eyebolt fork are not
seized but cadmium plating is found in the
prohibited areas, remove the plating by
means of wet or dry silicon carbide paper,
fine or medium grade, and conduct a
magnetic crack test. If no cracks are found,
the assembly may remain in service until the
next propeller overhaul for air carrier
airplanes and airplanes under a continuous
maintenance program or for 3,300 hours
time-in-service after the effective date of this
AD for all other airplanes. At the next
propeller overhaul for air carrier airplanes
and airplanes under a continuous
maintenance program, or within 3,300 hours
time-in-service after the effective date of this
AD for all other airplanes, heat treat the links
and eyebolt forks found to have been
cadmium plated, to remove embrittlement.
Use Dowty Rotol Service Bulletin No. 61–
754, dated June 12, 1970, to perform the heat
treatment.
(i) If the link and eyebolt fork are seized,
remove the link and eyebolt fork from service
and replace them with an assembly having a
part number approved for that model
propeller that has not been cadmium plated
in the prohibited areas.
(j) If the link or eyebolt fork are found to
be cracked during the inspection in
paragraph (h) of this AD, remove the cracked
part from service and replace it with a part
having a part number approved for that
model propeller that has not been cadmium
plated.
(k) The inspection required by paragraph
(f) of this AD need not be performed and the
propeller may remain in service if:
(1) The operator can show that no
cadmium plating exists in the prohibited
areas of that propeller; or
(2) It is a new propeller that has never been
overhauled.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(l) The Manager, Boston Aircraft
Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to
approve alternative methods of compliance
for this AD if requested using the procedures
found in 14 CFR 39.19.
Related Information
(m) Contact Terry Fahr, Aerospace
Engineer, Boston Aircraft Certification Office,
FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12
New England Executive Park, Burlington,
MA 01803; e-mail: terry.fahr@faa.gov;
telephone (781) 238–7155; fax (781) 238–
7170, for more information about this AD.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:27 Aug 28, 2008
Jkt 214001
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on
August 22, 2008.
Carlos Pestana,
Acting Assistant Manager, Engine and
Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E8–20081 Filed 8–28–08; 8:45 am]
For service information identified in
this AD, contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855
Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach,
California 90846, Attention: Data and
Service Management, Dept. C1–L5A
(D800–0024).
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this proposed AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Office
(telephone 800–647–5527) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Serj
Harutunian, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Branch, ANM–140L, FAA,
Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard,
Lakewood, California 90712–4137;
telephone (562) 627–5254; fax (562)
627–5210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2008–0934; Directorate
Identifier 2008–NM–113–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell
Douglas Model DC–9–30, DC–9–40,
and DC–9–50 Series Airplanes, Model
DC–9–81 (MD–81), DC–9–82 (MD–82),
DC–9–83 (MD–83), and DC–9–87 (MD–
87) Airplanes, and Model MD–88 and
MD–90–30 Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for the
McDonnell Douglas airplanes listed
above. This proposed AD would require
modifying the fuel boost pumps for the
center wing, and forward or aft auxiliary
fuel tanks. This proposed AD results
from fuel system reviews conducted by
the manufacturer. We are proposing this
AD to prevent possible sources of
ignition in a fuel tank caused by an
electrical fault or uncommanded dry
operation of the fuel boost pumps. An
ignition source in the fuel tank could
result in a fire or an explosion and
consequent loss of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by October 14, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments by
any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• 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.
• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments about
this proposed AD. Send your comments
to an address listed under the
ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No.
FAA–2008–0934; Directorate Identifier
2008–NM–113–AD’’ at the beginning of
your comments. We specifically invite
comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy
aspects of this proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the
closing date and may amend this
proposed AD because of those
comments.
We will post all comments we
receive, without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact we receive
about this proposed AD.
Discussion
The FAA has examined the
underlying safety issues involved in fuel
tank explosions on several large
transport airplanes, including the
adequacy of existing regulations, the
service history of airplanes subject to
those regulations, and existing
maintenance practices for fuel tank
systems. As a result of those findings,
we issued a regulation titled ‘‘Transport
Airplane Fuel Tank System Design
E:\FR\FM\29AUP1.SGM
29AUP1
50895
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 169 / Friday, August 29, 2008 / Proposed Rules
Single failures, single failures in
combination with a latent condition(s),
and in-service failure experience. For all
four criteria, the evaluations included
consideration of previous actions taken
that may mitigate the need for further
action.
We have determined that the actions
identified in this AD are necessary to
reduce the potential of ignition sources
inside fuel tanks, which, in combination
with flammable fuel vapors, could result
in fuel tank explosions and consequent
loss of the airplane.
Boeing has determined a need to
protect the fuel boost pump stator lead
wires from contacting the pump rotor/
shaft assembly. Lead wire contact and
the resulting chafing may result in an
ignition source (energized rotor
assembly) being produced in the fuel
boost pump inlet that could propagate
into the fuel tank when the fuel boost
pump inlet is not fully covered by fuel.
Replacement of the fuel boost pumps
will minimize the risk of potential
ignition sources that may occur within
the fuel tanks at critical fuel boost pump
locations in the center wing, and
forward or aft auxiliary fuel tanks. An
ignition source in the fuel tank could
result in a fire or an explosion and
consequent loss of the airplane.
Review, Flammability Reduction and
Maintenance and Inspection
Requirements’’ (66 FR 23086, May 7,
2001). In addition to new airworthiness
standards for transport airplanes and
new maintenance requirements, this
rule included Special Federal Aviation
Regulation No. 88 (‘‘SFAR 88,’’
Amendment 21–78, and subsequent
Amendments 21–82 and 21–83).
Among other actions, SFAR 88
requires certain type design (i.e., type
certificate (TC) and supplemental type
certificate (STC)) holders to substantiate
that their fuel tank systems can prevent
ignition sources in the fuel tanks. This
requirement applies to type design
holders for large turbine-powered
transport airplanes and for subsequent
modifications to those airplanes. It
requires them to perform design reviews
and to develop design changes and
maintenance procedures if their designs
do not meet the new fuel tank safety
standards. As explained in the preamble
to the rule, we intended to adopt
airworthiness directives to mandate any
changes found necessary to address
unsafe conditions identified as a result
of these reviews.
In evaluating these design reviews, we
have established four criteria intended
to define the unsafe conditions
associated with fuel tank systems that
require corrective actions. The
percentage of operating time during
which fuel tanks are exposed to
flammable conditions is one of these
criteria. The other three criteria address
the failure types under evaluation:
Work
hours
Airplane group
Group 1, Configurations 1 and 2 .......
Group 2, Configurations 1 and 2;
Group 7, Configuration 2.
Group 3, Configurations 1 and 2 .......
Group 4, Configurations 1 and 2 .......
Group 5, Configurations 1 and 2 .......
Group 6, Configurations 1 and 2;
Group 8, Configurations 1 and 2.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Jkt 214001
$80
80
3
1
2
1
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
16:27 Aug 28, 2008
Average labor
rate per hour
1
2
Authority for This Rulemaking
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Boeing Service
Bulletins DC9–28–212 (for Model DC–
9–30, DC–9–40, and DC–9–50 series
airplanes, and Model DC–9–81 (MD–
81), DC–9–82 (MD–82), DC–9–83 (MD–
83), DC–9–87 (MD–87), and MD–88
80
80
80
80
We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all relevant information and
determined the unsafe condition
described previously is likely to exist or
develop in other products of these same
type designs. This proposed AD would
require accomplishing the actions
specified in the Boeing service
information described previously.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD
would affect 804 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The following table provides
the estimated costs for U.S. operators to
comply with the modification specified
in this proposed AD. The fleet cost is
estimated to be between $1,246,200 and
$13,087,512.
Cost per product
Between $1,470 and $16,038 ............
Between $1,470 and $16,038 ............
Between $1,550 and $16,118.
Between $1,630 and $16,198.
Between
Between
Between
Between
Between
Between
Between
Between
$1,470
$1,470
$1,470
$1,470
and
and
and
and
$16,038
$16,038
$16,038
$16,038
Regulatory Findings
We determined that this proposed AD
would not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This
Frm 00007
FAA’s Determination and Requirements
of This Proposed AD
Parts
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.
PO 00000
airplanes) and MD90–28–010, (for MD–
90–30 airplanes), both dated February
22, 2008. The service bulletins describe
procedures for modifying the fuel boost
pumps for the center wing, and forward
or aft auxiliary fuel tanks. The
modification includes changing or
replacing the boost pumps, as
applicable. The change includes
incorporating a stator lead wire position
retention feature.
The Boeing service bulletins
recommend concurrent accomplishment
of the modification in Argo-Tech
Service Bulletin 398000–28–2, dated
November 8, 2007. The Argo-Tech
Service Bulletin describes procedures
for modifying the fuel boost pumps.
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
............
............
............
............
$1,710
$1,550
$1,630
$1,550
and
and
and
and
$16,278.
$16,118.
$16,198.
$16,118.
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 this proposed regulation:
1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866,
2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), and
E:\FR\FM\29AUP1.SGM
29AUP1
50896
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 169 / Friday, August 29, 2008 / Proposed Rules
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.
You can find our regulatory
evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.
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.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new AD:
McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA–2008–
0934; Directorate Identifier 2008–NM–
113–AD.
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Service Bulletin DC9–28–212 or MD90–28–
010, both dated February 22, 2008, as
applicable.
Prior or Concurrent Action
(g) Prior to or concurrently with
accomplishing the modification required by
paragraph (f) of this AD: Do the modification
specified in Argo-Tech Service Bulletin
398000–28–2, dated November 8, 2007.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(h)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, ATTN: Serj
Harutunian, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion
Branch, ANM–140L, FAA, Los Angeles
Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount
Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712–
4137; telephone (562) 627–5254; fax (562)
627–5210; has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using 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.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments by October
14, 2008.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on August
21, 2008.
Kevin Hull,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E8–20082 Filed 8–28–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas
Model DC–9–31, DC–9–32, DC–9–32 (VC–
9C), DC–9–32F, DC–9–32F (C–9A, C–9B),
DC–9–33F, DC–9–34, DC–9–34F, DC–9–41,
DC–9–51, DC–9–81 (MD–81), DC–9–82 (MD–
82), DC–9–83 (MD–83), and DC–9–87 (MD–
87), MD–88, and MD–90–30 airplanes;
certificated in any category; as identified in
Boeing Service Bulletins DC9–28–212 and
MD90–28–010, both dated February 22, 2008.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from fuel system
reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We
are issuing this AD to prevent possible
sources of ignition in a fuel tank caused by
electrical fault or uncommanded dry
operation of the fuel boost pumps. An
ignition source in the fuel tank could result
in a fire or an explosion and consequent loss
of the airplane.
Compliance
(e) Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
Modification
(f) Within 60 months after the effective
date of this AD: Modify the fuel boost pumps
for the center wing, and forward or aft
auxiliary fuel tanks, as applicable, by doing
all the applicable actions specified in the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:27 Aug 28, 2008
Jkt 214001
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
compliance times of the existing AD.
This proposed AD results from a report
of extensive corrosion of a ballscrew in
the drive mechanism of the horizontal
stabilizer on a Boeing Model 757
airplane, which is similar in design to
the ballscrew on Model 777 airplanes.
We are proposing this AD to prevent an
undetected failure of the primary load
path for the ballscrew in the drive
mechanism of the horizontal stabilizer
and subsequent wear and failure of the
secondary load path, which could lead
to loss of control of the horizontal
stabilizer and consequent loss of control
of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by October 14, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments by
any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• 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.
• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
For service information identified in
this AD, contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124–2207.
Federal Aviation Administration
Examining the AD Docket
14 CFR Part 39
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this proposed AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Office
(telephone 800–647–5527) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kelly McGuckin, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–
130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057–3356; telephone
(425) 917–6490; fax (425) 917–6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[Docket No. FAA–2008–0933; Directorate
Identifier 2007–NM–261–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing
Model 777 Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to
supersede an existing airworthiness
directive (AD) that applies to all Boeing
Model 777 airplanes. The existing AD
requires, for the drive mechanism of the
horizontal stabilizer, repetitive detailed
inspections for discrepancies, repetitive
lubrication of the ballnut and ballscrew,
repetitive measurements of the freeplay
between the ballnut and the ballscrew,
and corrective action if necessary. This
proposed AD would revise the
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments about
E:\FR\FM\29AUP1.SGM
29AUP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 169 (Friday, August 29, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 50894-50896]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20082]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2008-0934; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-113-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-30, DC-9-
40, and DC-9-50 Series Airplanes, Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-
82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), and DC-9-87 (MD-87) Airplanes, and Model MD-88
and MD-90-30 Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
McDonnell Douglas airplanes listed above. This proposed AD would
require modifying the fuel boost pumps for the center wing, and forward
or aft auxiliary fuel tanks. This proposed AD results from fuel system
reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We are proposing this AD to
prevent possible sources of ignition in a fuel tank caused by an
electrical fault or uncommanded dry operation of the fuel boost pumps.
An ignition source in the fuel tank could result in a fire or an
explosion and consequent loss of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 14,
2008.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Fax: 202-493-2251.
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.
Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard,
Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Data and Service Management,
Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024).
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-647-5527) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Serj Harutunian, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Branch, ANM-140L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137;
telephone (562) 627-5254; fax (562) 627-5210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2008-0934;
Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-113-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.
Discussion
The FAA has examined the underlying safety issues involved in fuel
tank explosions on several large transport airplanes, including the
adequacy of existing regulations, the service history of airplanes
subject to those regulations, and existing maintenance practices for
fuel tank systems. As a result of those findings, we issued a
regulation titled ``Transport Airplane Fuel Tank System Design
[[Page 50895]]
Review, Flammability Reduction and Maintenance and Inspection
Requirements'' (66 FR 23086, May 7, 2001). In addition to new
airworthiness standards for transport airplanes and new maintenance
requirements, this rule included Special Federal Aviation Regulation
No. 88 (``SFAR 88,'' Amendment 21-78, and subsequent Amendments 21-82
and 21-83).
Among other actions, SFAR 88 requires certain type design (i.e.,
type certificate (TC) and supplemental type certificate (STC)) holders
to substantiate that their fuel tank systems can prevent ignition
sources in the fuel tanks. This requirement applies to type design
holders for large turbine-powered transport airplanes and for
subsequent modifications to those airplanes. It requires them to
perform design reviews and to develop design changes and maintenance
procedures if their designs do not meet the new fuel tank safety
standards. As explained in the preamble to the rule, we intended to
adopt airworthiness directives to mandate any changes found necessary
to address unsafe conditions identified as a result of these reviews.
In evaluating these design reviews, we have established four
criteria intended to define the unsafe conditions associated with fuel
tank systems that require corrective actions. The percentage of
operating time during which fuel tanks are exposed to flammable
conditions is one of these criteria. The other three criteria address
the failure types under evaluation: Single failures, single failures in
combination with a latent condition(s), and in-service failure
experience. For all four criteria, the evaluations included
consideration of previous actions taken that may mitigate the need for
further action.
We have determined that the actions identified in this AD are
necessary to reduce the potential of ignition sources inside fuel
tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result
in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane.
Boeing has determined a need to protect the fuel boost pump stator
lead wires from contacting the pump rotor/shaft assembly. Lead wire
contact and the resulting chafing may result in an ignition source
(energized rotor assembly) being produced in the fuel boost pump inlet
that could propagate into the fuel tank when the fuel boost pump inlet
is not fully covered by fuel. Replacement of the fuel boost pumps will
minimize the risk of potential ignition sources that may occur within
the fuel tanks at critical fuel boost pump locations in the center
wing, and forward or aft auxiliary fuel tanks. An ignition source in
the fuel tank could result in a fire or an explosion and consequent
loss of the airplane.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Boeing Service Bulletins DC9-28-212 (for Model DC-
9-30, DC-9-40, and DC-9-50 series airplanes, and Model DC-9-81 (MD-81),
DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), DC-9-87 (MD-87), and MD-88 airplanes)
and MD90-28-010, (for MD-90-30 airplanes), both dated February 22,
2008. The service bulletins describe procedures for modifying the fuel
boost pumps for the center wing, and forward or aft auxiliary fuel
tanks. The modification includes changing or replacing the boost pumps,
as applicable. The change includes incorporating a stator lead wire
position retention feature.
The Boeing service bulletins recommend concurrent accomplishment of
the modification in Argo-Tech Service Bulletin 398000-28-2, dated
November 8, 2007. The Argo-Tech Service Bulletin describes procedures
for modifying the fuel boost pumps.
FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD
We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of these same type
designs. This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions
specified in the Boeing service information described previously.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 804 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The following table provides the estimated costs for
U.S. operators to comply with the modification specified in this
proposed AD. The fleet cost is estimated to be between $1,246,200 and
$13,087,512.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Work Average labor
Airplane group hours rate per hour Parts Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group 1, Configurations 1 and 2...... 1 $80 Between $1,470 and Between $1,550 and
$16,038. $16,118.
Group 2, Configurations 1 and 2; 2 80 Between $1,470 and Between $1,630 and
Group 7, Configuration 2. $16,038. $16,198.
Group 3, Configurations 1 and 2...... 3 80 Between $1,470 and Between $1,710 and
$16,038. $16,278.
Group 4, Configurations 1 and 2...... 1 80 Between $1,470 and Between $1,550 and
$16,038. $16,118.
Group 5, Configurations 1 and 2...... 2 80 Between $1,470 and Between $1,630 and
$16,038. $16,198.
Group 6, Configurations 1 and 2; 1 80 Between $1,470 and Between $1,550 and
Group 8, Configurations 1 and 2. $16,038. $16,118.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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 this proposed
regulation:
1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866,
2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), and
[[Page 50896]]
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.
You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.
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 FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new AD:
McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA-2008-0934; Directorate Identifier
2008-NM-113-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments by October 14, 2008.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-31, DC-9-32,
DC-9-32 (VC-9C), DC-9-32F, DC-9-32F (C-9A, C-9B), DC-9-33F, DC-9-34,
DC-9-34F, DC-9-41, DC-9-51, DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-
83 (MD-83), and DC-9-87 (MD-87), MD-88, and MD-90-30 airplanes;
certificated in any category; as identified in Boeing Service
Bulletins DC9-28-212 and MD90-28-010, both dated February 22, 2008.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from fuel system reviews conducted by the
manufacturer. We are issuing this AD to prevent possible sources of
ignition in a fuel tank caused by electrical fault or uncommanded
dry operation of the fuel boost pumps. An ignition source in the
fuel tank could result in a fire or an explosion and consequent loss
of the airplane.
Compliance
(e) Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
Modification
(f) Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD: Modify
the fuel boost pumps for the center wing, and forward or aft
auxiliary fuel tanks, as applicable, by doing all the applicable
actions specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Service Bulletin DC9-28-212 or MD90-28-010, both dated February 22,
2008, as applicable.
Prior or Concurrent Action
(g) Prior to or concurrently with accomplishing the modification
required by paragraph (f) of this AD: Do the modification specified
in Argo-Tech Service Bulletin 398000-28-2, dated November 8, 2007.
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(h)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), FAA, ATTN: Serj Harutunian, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion
Branch, ANM-140L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office,
3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone
(562) 627-5254; fax (562) 627-5210; has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using 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 August 21, 2008.
Kevin Hull,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-20082 Filed 8-28-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
