AD 2003-04-10
Applicability
| Type | Manufacturer | Model | Details |
|---|---|---|---|
| aircraft | McDonnell Douglas | MD-90-30 | Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model MD-90-30 Airplanes |
Unsafe Condition
Contact between certain wires and the adjacent structure could result in electrical arcing and consequent smoke and fire in the cabin.
AI-generated summary from the source AD text. Verify against the official source before acting.
Required Actions
Perform a one-time general visual inspection to find wire chafing damage and determine adequate clearance between the disconnect panel structure and the wires above the aft left lavatory. Take corrective actions if necessary.
AI-generated summary from the source AD text. Verify against the official source before acting.
Compliance Time
Before further flight.
AI-generated summary from the source AD text. Verify against the official source before acting.
Affected Aircraft
McDonnell Douglas Model MD-90-30 airplanes.
AI-generated summary from the source AD text. Verify against the official source before acting.
Federal Register Abstract
This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model MD-90-30 airplanes, that requires a one-time general visual inspection to find wire chafing damage and to determine adequate clearance between the disconnect panel structure and the wires above the aft left lavatory; and corrective actions, if necessary. This action is necessary to prevent damage to certain wires due to contact between the wires and the adjacent structure, which could result in electrical arcing and consequent smoke and fire in the cabin. This action is intended to address the identified unsafe condition.
Document Text
Show stored source text (verify against official source)
[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 40 (Friday, February 28, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9513-9515]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 03-4241]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 2001-NM-389-AD; Amendment 39-13058; AD 2003-04-10]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model MD-90-30
Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD),
applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model MD-90-30 airplanes, that
requires a one-time general visual inspection to find wire chafing
damage
[[Page 9514]]
and to determine adequate clearance between the disconnect panel
structure and the wires above the aft left lavatory; and corrective
actions, if necessary. This action is necessary to prevent damage to
certain wires due to contact between the wires and the adjacent
structure, which could result in electrical arcing and consequent smoke
and fire in the cabin. This action is intended to address the
identified unsafe condition.
DATES: Effective April 4, 2003.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of April 4, 2003.
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: Data
and Service Management, Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024). This information may
be examined at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport
Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington; at the FAA, 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: George Mabuni, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California
90712-4137; telephone (562) 627-5341; 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
MD-90-30 airplanes was published in the Federal Register on August 30,
2002 (67 FR 55735). That action proposed to require a one-time general
visual inspection to find wire chafing damage and to determine adequate
clearance between the disconnect panel structure and the wires above
the aft left lavatory; 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.
Request for Withdrawal of Proposed AD
One commenter disagrees with the need for an AD to require
accomplishment of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-24A074, Revision
01, dated August 8, 2001. The commenter notes that the incident that
prompted the proposed AD occurred on a McDonnell Douglas Model MD-88
airplane, not an MD-90-30 airplane. The commenter notes that the
affected wire bundle on the incident airplane chafed on a disconnect
bracket on an extruded angle. The commenter states that, after
considering the design of the disconnect panel on Model MD-90-30
airplanes, it is confident that no wire chafing will be found on Model
MD-90-30 airplanes. The commenter points out that the design of the
subject disconnect bracket on the Model MD-90-30 airplane is
significantly different, especially in length, from that on the Model
MD-88 airplane. The bracket on the Model MD-90-30 airplane does not
extend to the area where the wire bundle chafing occurred on the Model
MD-88 airplane. The commenter requests that the proposed AD, if issued,
include information about inspection findings on Model MD-90-30
airplanes.
The FAA infers that the commenter is requesting that we withdraw
the proposed AD. We do not agree. The airplane manufacturer has
reviewed the installation drawings and has confirmed that the same
disconnect bracket (i.e., same part number) is installed in the same
location on both Model MD-88 and Model MD-90-30 airplanes. Therefore,
Model MD-90-30 airplanes may be subject to the same unsafe condition
revealed on the Model MD-88 airplanes, even though no wire chafing
damage has been found to date on Model MD-90-30 airplanes. No change to
the final rule is necessary in this regard.
Request To Extend Compliance Time
The same commenter requests that, if we deem it necessary to issue
an AD, we extend the compliance time from 4 months after the effective
date of the AD, as proposed, to 12 months after the effective date of
the AD. Aside from its comments regarding the appropriateness of the
AD, discussed previously, the commenter provides no further
justification for its request.
We concur that the compliance time of this AD may be extended. We
have determined that a compliance time of 12 months will ensure that
the identified unsafe condition is addressed in a timely manner, while
allowing the majority of affected operators to complete the required
actions during a scheduled maintenance visit. We have revised paragraph
(a) of the final rule accordingly.
Explanation of Editorial Change
In the NPRM, we stated that the proposed actions were to be
accomplished ``per the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin MD90-24A074, Revision 01, including Appendix A, dated
August 8, 2001.'' However, the service bulletin's appendix contains a
form for reporting inspection findings. This AD does not include such a
requirement. Therefore, we have changed the service bulletin citation
throughout this final rule to exclude the appendix of the service
bulletin.
Also, we have changed the service bulletin citation throughout this
final rule to exclude the Evaluation Form. The form is intended to be
completed by operators and submitted to the airplane manufacturer to
provide input on the quality of the service bulletin; however, this AD
does not include such a requirement.
Also, the Cost Impact section of the NPRM did not include
information about warranty remedies that may be available. We have
revised the Cost Impact section of this final rule to refer to warranty
remedies.
Conclusion
After careful review of the available data, including the comments
noted above, we have determined that air safety and the public interest
require the adoption of the rule with the changes previously described.
We have 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 113 Model MD-90-30 airplanes of the
affected design in the worldwide fleet. We estimate that 21 airplanes
of U.S. registry will be affected by this AD, that it will take
approximately 1 work hour per airplane to accomplish the required
inspection, and that the average labor rate is $60 per work hour. Based
on these figures, the cost impact of inspection required by this AD on
U.S. operators is estimated to be $1,260, or $60 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. The cost impact
[[Page 9515]]
figures discussed in AD rulemaking actions represent only the time
necessary to perform the specific actions actually required by the AD.
These figures typically do not include incidental costs, such as the
time required to gain access and close up, planning time, or time
necessitated by other administrative actions. Manufacturer warranty
remedies may be available for labor costs associated with this AD. As a
result, the costs attributable to this AD may be less than stated
above.
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:
2003-04-10 McDonnell Douglas: Amendment 39-13058. Docket 2001-NM-
389-AD.
Applicability: Model MD-90-30 airplanes, as listed in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin MD90-24A074, Revision 01, dated August 8,
2001; 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 (c) 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 prevent damage to certain wires due to contact between the
wires and the adjacent structure, which could result in electrical
arcing and consequent smoke and fire in the cabin, accomplish the
following:
One-Time Inspection/Corrective Actions
(a) Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD: Do a
one-time general visual inspection to find wire chafing damage and
to determine adequate clearance between the disconnect panel
structure and the wires above the aft left lavatory, per the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-
24A074, Revision 01, excluding Appendix and Evaluation Form, dated
August 8, 2001. If no damage is found and the clearance is adequate,
no further action is required by this AD.
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 from within
touching distance unless otherwise specified. A mirror may be
necessary to enhance visual access to all exposed surfaces in the
inspection area. This level of inspection is made under normally
available lighting conditions such as daylight, hangar lighting,
flashlight, or droplight 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.''
(1) If no damage is found, but the clearance is inadequate:
Before further flight, secure the wires using tie-wraps to obtain
0.50-inch minimum clearance per the service bulletin.
(2) If damage and/or inadequate clearance is found: Before
further flight, repair or replace damaged wires with new wires and/
or secure the wires using tie-wraps to obtain 0.50-inch minimum
clearance, as applicable, per the service bulletin.
(b) Accomplishment of the one-time inspection and corrective
actions before the effective date of this AD per Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin MD90-24A074, dated May 14, 2001, is considered
acceptable for compliance with paragraph (a) of this AD.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(c) 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 Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), FAA. 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 3: 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
(d) 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
(e) Unless otherwise specified in this AD, the actions shall be
done in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-24A074,
Revision 01, excluding Appendix and Evaluation Form, dated August 8,
2001. 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: Data and Service Management, Dept. C1-
L5A (D800-0024). Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; at
the FAA, 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
(f) This amendment becomes effective on April 4, 2003.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 14, 2003.
Ali Bahrami,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 03-4241 Filed 2-27-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
Source: Official FAA Source ↗
Retrieved: Apr 6, 2026
Rights: U.S. Government Public Domain
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FAA. Always verify with official sources.