AD 2000-15-05

[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 147 (Monday, July 31, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46575-46578]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 00-18748]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99-NM-211-AD; Amendment 39-11834; AD 2000-15-05]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, -10F, 
-15, -30, -30F (KC-10A and KDC-10 Military), -40, and -40F Series 
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), 
applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, -10F, -15, -30, 
-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10 military), -40, and -40F series airplanes, that 
requires a one-time inspection of the wiring and wire bundles of the 
aft main avionics rack (MAR) to determine if the wires are damaged, or 
riding or chafing on structure, clamps, braces, standoffs, or clips, 
and to detect damaged or out of alignment rubber cushion inserts of the 
wiring clamps; and corrective actions, if necessary. This amendment is 
prompted by an incident in which the automatic and manual cargo door 
test in the cockpit was inoperative during dispatch of the airplane, 
due to wiring of the MAR chafing against clamps as a result of the wire 
bundles being installed improperly during production of the airplane. 
The actions specified by this AD are intended to ensure that the wires 
that route from the main wire bundles to the MAR and associated 
brackets, clamps, braces, standoffs, and clips are installed properly. 
Improper installation of such wiring and structure could cause chafing 
of the wires/wire bundles, which could result in electrical arcing, 
smoke, and possible fire in the MAR.

DATES: Effective September 4, 2000.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in 
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as 
of September 4, 2000.

ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be 
obtained from Boeing Commercial Aircraft Group, Long Beach Division, 
3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: 
Technical Publications Business Administration, Dept. C1-L51 (2-60). 
This information may be examined at the Federal Aviation Administration 
(FAA),

[[Page 46576]]

Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 
Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Los 
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 
Lakewood, California; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 
North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Natalie Phan-Tran, Aerospace Engineer, 
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130L, FAA, Transport Airplane 
Directorate, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount 
Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone (562) 627-5343; 
fax (562) 627-5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal 
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness 
directive (AD) that is applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model 
DC-10-10, -10F, -15, -30, -30F (KC-10A and KDC-10 military), -40, and -
40F series airplanes was published in the Federal Register on January 
26, 2000 (65 FR 4190). That action proposed to require a one-time 
inspection of the wiring and wire bundles of the aft main avionics rack 
(MAR) to determine if the wires are damaged, or riding or chafing on 
structure, clamps, braces, standoffs, or clips, and to detect damaged 
or out of alignment rubber cushion inserts of the wiring clamps; and 
corrective actions, if necessary.

Comments

    Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate 
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to 
the comments received.

Support for the Proposed AD

    Two commenters support the proposed AD.

Request To Withdraw Proposed AD

    One commenter requests that the proposed AD be withdrawn. The 
commenter states that the original problem, which was noted in the 
proposed AD, that led to the issuance of McDonnell Douglas Alert 
Service Bulletin DC10-24A165 was due to a production problem on 
McDonnell Douglas Model MD-11 series airplanes. The commenter also 
states that it has been performing general visual inspections of the 
subject area on numerous occasions as part of its FAA-approved DC-10 
maintenance program. The commenter contends that performing these 
inspections again is overly redundant and unnecessary.
    The FAA does not concur. The FAA acknowledges that Model DC-10 
series airplanes have an extensive life of service, and that operators 
have performed numerous inspections as a part of the FAA-approved DC-10 
maintenance program. As part of the continued airworthiness 
requirements, all operators are required to periodically maintain their 
airplanes in accordance with an FAA-approved maintenance program. 
However, the FAA finds that the subject inspections of the maintenance 
program may not adequately address certain in-service difficulties and, 
thus, do not adequately address the identified unsafe condition. The 
FAA has determined that the actions required by this AD will address 
the identified unsafe condition. In light of this, the FAA has 
determined that this AD is appropriate and warranted.

Request To Extend Compliance Time

    One commenter requests that the compliance time from accomplishing 
the general visual inspection be extended from the proposed 60 days to 
18 months. The commenter states that the 60-day compliance time is 
illogical given the extensive service life of the affected airplanes. 
The commenter also states that the inspection should be accomplished 
during the FAA-approved maintenance program task that accomplishes the 
same inspection.
    The FAA does not concur. The FAA finds that an 18-month compliance 
time, which coincides with the FAA-approved maintenance program task 
that accomplishes a similar inspection required by this AD, would not 
maintain an adequate level of safety. In developing an appropriate 
compliance time for the inspection required by this AD, the FAA 
considered not only the degree of urgency associated with addressing 
the subject unsafe condition, but the manufacturer's recommendation as 
to an appropriate compliance time, the availability of required parts, 
and the practical aspect of accomplishing the inspection within an 
interval of time that parallels the normal scheduled maintenance for 
the majority of affected operators. In light of these items, the FAA 
has determined that the compliance time, as proposed, represents an 
appropriate interval in which inspection can be accomplished in a 
timely manner within the fleet and still maintain an adequate level of 
safety. However, under the provisions of paragraph (g) of the final 
rule, the FAA may approve requests for adjustments to the compliance 
time if data are submitted to substantiate that such an adjustment 
would provide an acceptable level of safety.

Request To Revise Reporting Requirement

    One commenter requests that the compliance time of the reporting 
requirement be revised from within 10 days after accomplishing the 
inspection to ``within 10 days after the AD compliance date.'' The 
commenter also requests that the reporting requirement be limited to 
positive findings only. The commenter states that the compliance time 
extension would allow them to submit one report describing findings for 
its entire fleet.
    The FAA partially concurs. The FAA does not concur with the 
commenter that only positive findings should be reported. The FAA finds 
that both negative and positive findings of the inspection are 
necessary to determine if further rulemaking is necessary. The FAA 
concurs with the commenter that the inspection results may be submitted 
to the FAA within 70 days after the effective date of this AD. 
Therefore, the FAA has revised paragraph (f) of the final rule 
accordingly.

Request To Revise Work Hour Estimate

    One commenter requests that the work hour estimate for 
accomplishing the proposed inspection be revised from 3 work hours to 5 
work hours, because of the large numbers of wires in the subject area.
    The FAA does not concur. The FAA used the work hours (rounded up) 
specified in McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin DC10-24A165, 
dated April 14, 1999 (which is referenced in the AD as the appropriate 
source of service information for accomplishment of the required 
inspection). The FAA notes that the economic analysis of the AD is 
limited only to the cost of actions actually required by the rule. It 
does not consider the costs of ``on condition'' actions, such as 
repairing a crack if one is detected during a required inspection 
(``repair, if necessary''). Such ``on-condition'' actions would be 
required to be accomplished--regardless of AD direction--in order to 
correct an unsafe condition identified in an airplane and to ensure 
operation of that airplane in an airworthy condition, as required by 
the Federal Aviation Regulations. Therefore, no change to the final 
rule is necessary.

Explanation of Change to Affected Airplane Models

    Throughout the proposed AD, the affected airplanes are listed as 
``Model DC-10-10, -15, -30, -30F, and -40 series airplanes and KC-10A 
(military) airplanes.'' The FAA finds that operators may misinterpret 
the term

[[Page 46577]]

``series'' when determining which airplane models are subject to the 
requirements of this AD. Therefore, the FAA finds that clarification is 
necessary. The FAA's intent was that applicability of the proposed AD 
include, among other series airplanes, all series of Model DC-10-10 and 
DC-10-40 airplanes (i.e., Model DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-10-40, and DC-
10-40F), as listed in McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin DC10-
24A165, dated April 14, 1999 (which references the specific affected 
manufacturer's fuselage numbers, including those numbers that 
correspond to Model DC-10-10F and DC-10-40F series airplanes). In 
addition, operators should note that Model DC-10-30F series airplanes, 
as listed in the applicability, include two military airplane models 
(i.e., KC-10A and KDC-10). The FAA has revised the affected airplanes 
throughout the final rule to read ``Model DC-10-10, -10F, -15, -30, -
30F (KC-10A and KDC-10 military), -40, and -40F series airplanes.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the available data, including the comments 
noted above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public 
interest require the adoption of the rule with the changes previously 
described. The FAA has determined that these changes will neither 
increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of 
the AD.

Cost Impact

    There are approximately 412 Model DC-10-10, -10F, -15, -30, -30F 
(KC-10A and KDC-10 military), -40, and -40F series airplanes of the 
affected design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 300 
airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected by this AD, that it will 
take approximately 3 work hours per airplane to accomplish the required 
inspection of the wiring and wire bundles, and that the average labor 
rate is $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of 
the required inspection by this AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be 
$54,000, or $180 per airplane.
    The cost impact figure discussed above is based on assumptions that 
no operator has yet accomplished any of the requirements of this AD 
action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in the 
future if this AD were not adopted.

Regulatory Impact

    The regulations adopted herein will not have a substantial direct 
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national 
Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, it 
is determined that this final rule does not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (1) is 
not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; 
(2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and 
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) will not have a 
significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial 
number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has been prepared for this action 
and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained 
from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption 
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by 
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of 
the Federal Aviation Regulations (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. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new 
airworthiness directive:

2000-15-05  McDonnell Douglas:
    Amendment 39-11834. Docket 99-NM-211-AD.

    Applicability: Model DC-10-10, -10F, -15, -30, -30F (KC-10A and 
KDC-10 military), -40, and -40F series airplanes, as listed in 
McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin DC10-24A165, dated April 
14, 1999; certificated in any category.

    Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the 
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been 
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the 
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified, 
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of 
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an 
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (g) of 
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of 
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition 
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been 
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to 
address it.

    Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished 
previously.
    To ensure that the wires that route from the main wire bundles 
to the main avionics rack (MAR) and associated brackets, clamps, 
braces, standoffs, and clips are installed properly, accomplish the 
following:

One-Time General Visual Inspection

    (a) Within 60 days after the effective date of this AD, perform 
a one-time general visual inspection of the wiring and wire bundles 
of the aft MAR to determine if the wires are damaged, or riding or 
chafing on structure, clamps, braces, standoffs, or clips, and to 
detect damaged or out of alignment rubber cushion inserts of the 
wiring clamps; in accordance with McDonnell Douglas Alert Service 
Bulletin DC10-24A165, dated April 14, 1999.

    Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a general visual inspection 
is defined as ``A visual examination of an interior or exterior 
area, installation, or assembly to detect obvious damage, failure, 
or irregularity. This level of inspection is made under normally 
available lighting conditions such as daylight, hangar lighting, 
flashlight, or drop-light, and may require removal or opening of 
access panels or doors. Stands, ladders, or platforms may be 
required to gain proximity to the area being checked.''


    Note 3: Where there are differences between this AD and the 
referenced alert service bulletin, the AD prevails.


    Note 4: The wording ``main avionics rack'' in this AD and the 
wording ``main radio rack'' in the alert service are used 
interchangeably.

Corrective Actions

    (b) If any damaged wiring is detected during the inspection 
required by paragraph (a) of this AD, prior to further flight, 
repair in accordance with the alert service bulletin.
    (c) If any wire/wire bundle is detected to be riding or chafing 
on the subject areas during the inspection required by paragraph (a) 
of this AD, prior to further flight, accomplish paragraphs (c)(1), 
(c)(2), and (c)(3) of this AD.
    (1) Route and tie all wires/wire bundles so they are not in 
contact with adjacent wire bundles, clamps or structure, and install 
silicon rubber coated glass cloth wrapping on wiring, if necessary, 
in accordance with the alert service bulletin.
    (2) Perform a general visual inspection of all brackets, clamps, 
braces, standoffs, and clips to make sure they are not bent or 
twisted and do not come in contact with wires/wire bundles, in 
accordance with the alert service bulletin. If any of these parts is 
bent or twisted or is in contact with wires/wire bundles, prior to 
further flight, reposition in accordance with the alert service 
bulletin.
    (3) Perform a general visual inspection of the clamps for proper 
alignment or for damage of the rubber cushion, in accordance

[[Page 46578]]

with the alert service bulletin. If any clamp is not aligned 
properly, prior to further flight, realign the clamp in accordance 
with the alert service bulletin. If any rubber cushion is damaged, 
prior to further flight, replace the clamp in accordance with the 
alert service bulletin.
    (d) If any damaged rubber cushion insert is detected during the 
inspection required by paragraph (a) of this AD, prior to further 
flight, replace the clamp with a new or serviceable clamp in 
accordance with McDonnell Douglas Process Engineering Order DPS 
1.834-7, Revision CF, dated June 29, 1999.
    (e) If any rubber cushion insert is out of alignment, prior to 
further flight, visually realign the cushion.

Reporting Requirement

    (f) Within 70 days after the effective date of this AD, submit a 
report of the results (both positive and negative findings) of the 
inspection required by paragraph (a) of this AD to the Manager, Los 
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane 
Directorate, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-
4137; fax (562) 627-5210. Information collection requirements 
contained in this regulation have been approved by the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) under the provisions of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and have been 
assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (g) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the 
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be 
used if approved by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, FAA, Transport 
Airplane Directorate. Operators shall submit their requests through 
an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add 
comments and then send it to the Manager, Los Angeles ACO.

    Note 5: Information concerning the existence of approved 
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be 
obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.

Special Flight Permits

    (h) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with 
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where 
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.

Incorporation by Reference

    (i) The actions shall be done in accordance with McDonnell 
Douglas Alert Service Bulletin DC10-24A165, dated April 14, 1999. 
This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the 
Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 
51. Copies may be obtained from Boeing Commercial Aircraft Group, 
Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 
90846, Attention: Technical Publications Business Administration, 
Dept. C1-L51 (2-60). Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport 
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or 
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Los Angeles Aircraft 
Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, 
California; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North 
Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

Effective Date

    (j) This amendment becomes effective on September 4, 2000.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 19, 2000.
Donald L. Riggin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 00-18748 Filed 7-28-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U