[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 235 (Wednesday, December 6, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 76185-76187]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-31067]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000-NM-260-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-81, -9-82, 
-9-83, and -9-87 Series Airplanes; Model MD-88 Airplanes; and Model MD-
90-30 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This document proposes the adoption of a new airworthiness 
directive (AD) that is applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model 
DC-9-81, -9-82, -9-83, and -9-87 series airplanes; Model MD-88 
airplanes; and Model MD-90-30 series airplanes.
    This proposal would require repetitive inspections of the number 1 
and 2 electric motors of the auxiliary hydraulic pump for electrical 
resistance, continuity, mechanical rotation, and associated wiring 
resistance/voltage; and corrective actions, if necessary. This action 
is necessary to prevent various failures of electric motors of the 
auxiliary hydraulic pump and associated wiring, which could result in 
fire at the auxiliary hydraulic pump and consequent damage to the 
adjacent electrical equipment and/or structure. This action is intended 
to address the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by January 22, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, 
Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000-NM-260-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 
Renton, Washington 98055-4056. Comments may be inspected at this 
location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 
Federal holidays. Comments may be submitted via fax to (425) 227-1232. 
Comments may also be sent via the Internet using the following address: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ebd2c68a8586c6859b9986888486868e859fab8d8a8ac58c849d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="90a9bdf1fefdbdfee0e2fdf3fffdfdf5fee4d0f6f1f1bef7ffe6">[email protected]</span></a>. Comments sent via fax or the Internet must 
contain ``Docket No. 2000-NM-260-AD'' in the subject line and need not 
be submitted in triplicate. Comments sent via the Internet as attached 
electronic files must be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for Windows or 
ASCII text.
    The service information referenced in the proposed rule 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 FAA, Transport Airplane 
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, 
Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 
Lakewood, California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Albert Lam, Aerospace Engineer, 
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130L, the FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft 
Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 
90712; telephone (526) 627-5346; fax (562) 627-5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the 
proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as 
they may desire. Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number 
and be submitted in triplicate to the address specified above. All 
communications received on or before the closing date for comments, 
specified above, will be considered before taking action on the 
proposed rule. The proposals contained in this action may be changed in 
light of the comments received.
    Submit comments using the following format:

[[Page 76186]]

    <bullet> Organize comments issue-by-issue. For example, discuss a 
request to change the compliance time and a request to change the 
service bulletin reference as two separate issues.
    <bullet> For each issue, state what specific change to the proposed 
AD is being requested.
    <bullet> Include justification (e.g., reasons or data) for each 
request.
    Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All 
comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing 
date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested 
persons. A report summarizing each FAA-public contact concerned with 
the substance of this proposal will be filed in the Rules Docket.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments 
submitted in response to this action must submit a self-addressed, 
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments 
to Docket Number 2000-NM-260-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped 
and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request 
to the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, Attention: Rules 
Docket No. 2000-NM-260-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 
98055-4056.

Discussion

    The FAA has received reports that, during ground operations or when 
powered in flight by the air driven generator, the electric motors of 
the auxiliary hydraulic pump and associated motor feeder cables failed 
on certain McDonnell Douglas Model MD-80, DC-10, MD-10, MD-11, and MD-
90-30 series airplanes. These failures consisted of seized or difficult 
to turn rotor on the pump assembly, burnt and shorted motor feeder 
cables, and/or uncontained internal electric arcing failures with the 
electric motor. Investigation revealed that these failures may be 
caused by hydraulic fluid contamination to the electric motor portion 
of the pump, failed rotor bearing, and/or degradation of the stator's 
encapsulate material. These conditions, if not corrected, could result 
in a fire at the auxiliary hydraulic pump and consequent damage to the 
adjacent electrical equipment and/or structure.

Other Relevant Rulemaking

    This proposed AD affects McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-81, -9-82, -
9-83, and -9-87 series airplanes (i.e., MD-80 series airplanes); Model 
MD-88 airplanes; and Model MD-90-30 series airplanes. The FAA is 
planning to issue a separate rulemaking action for McDonnell Douglas 
Model DC-10 series airplanes, Model MD-10 series airplanes, and Model 
MD-11 series airplanes to address the identified unsafe condition.

Explanation of Relevant Service Information

    The FAA has reviewed and approved McDonnell Douglas Alert Service 
Bulletin MD80-29A067, dated October 21, 1999 (for Model DC-9-81, -9-82, 
-9-83, and -9-87 series airplanes, and Model MD-88 airplanes); and 
McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD90-29A018, dated October 21, 
1999 (for Model MD-90-30 series airplanes). These service bulletins 
describe procedures for repetitive inspections of the number 1 and 2 
electric motors of the auxiliary hydraulic pump for electrical 
resistance, continuity, mechanical rotation, and associated wiring 
resistance/voltage; and corrective actions, if necessary. The 
corrective actions involve replacing the auxiliary hydraulic pump with 
a serviceable pump, troubleshooting, and repairing the wiring.

Explanation of Requirements of Proposed Rule

    Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to 
exist or develop on other products of this same type design, the 
proposed AD would require accomplishment of the actions specified in 
the service bulletins described previously.

Interim Action

    This is considered to be interim action until final action is 
identified, at which time the FAA may consider further rulemaking.

Cost Impact

    There are approximately 1,292 Model DC-9-81, -9-82, -9-83, and -9-
87 series airplanes; Model MD-88 airplanes; and Model MD-90-30 series 
airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA 
estimates that 697 airplanes of U.S. registry would be affected by this 
proposed AD, that it would take approximately 1 work hour per airplane 
to accomplish the proposed inspection, and that the average labor rate 
is $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the 
proposed AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $41,820 or $60 per 
airplane, per inspection cycle.
    The cost impact figure discussed above is based on assumptions that 
no operator has yet accomplished any of the proposed requirements of 
this AD action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in 
the future if this proposed AD were not adopted. The cost impact 
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.

Regulatory Impact

    The regulations proposed herein 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. Therefore, it 
is determined that this proposal would not have federalism implications 
under Executive Order 13132.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that 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 (3) if promulgated, 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 copy of the draft 
regulatory evaluation prepared for this action is contained in the 
Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by contacting the Rules 
Docket at the location provided under the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 
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:


[[Page 76187]]


McDonnell Douglas: Docket 2000-NM-260-AD.

    Applicability: Model DC-9-81, -9-82, -9-83, and -9-87 series 
airplanes, and Model MD-88 airplanes, as listed in McDonnell Douglas 
Alert Service Bulletin MD80-29A067, dated October 21, 1999; and 
Model MD-90-30 series airplanes, as listed in McDonnell Douglas 
Alert Service Bulletin MD90-29A018, dated October 21, 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 (e) 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 various failures of electric motors of the auxiliary 
hydraulic pump and associated wiring, which could result in fire at 
the auxiliary hydraulic pump and consequent damage to the adjacent 
electrical equipment and/or structure, accomplish the following:

Inspection

    (a) Do a detailed inspection of the number 1 and 2 electric 
motors of the auxiliary hydraulic pump for electrical resistance, 
continuity, mechanical rotation, and associated wiring resistance/
voltage, per McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD80-29A067, 
dated October 21, 1999 (for Model DC-9-81, -9-82, -9-83, and -9-87 
series airplanes, and Model MD-88 airplanes); or McDonnell Douglas 
Alert Service Bulletin MD90-29A018, dated October 21, 1999 (for 
Model MD-90-30 series airplanes); as applicable; at the applicable 
time specified in paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this AD.
    (1) For airplanes that have accumulated 3,000 total flight hours 
or more as of the effective date of this AD: Inspect within 12 
months after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) For airplanes that have accumulated less than 3,000 total 
flight hours as of the effective date of this AD: Inspect within 12 
months after accumulating 3,000 total flight hours.

Condition 1, No Failures: Repetitive Inspections

    (b) If no failures are detected during the inspection required 
by paragraph (a) of this AD, repeat the inspection required by 
paragraph (a) of this AD every 5,000 flight hours.

Condition 2, Failure of Any Pump Motor: Replacement and Repetitive 
Inspections

    (c) If any pump motor fails during any inspection required by 
paragraph (a) of this AD, before further flight, replace the failed 
auxiliary hydraulic pump with a serviceable pump, per McDonnell 
Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD80-29A067, dated October 21, 1999 
(for Model DC-9-81, -9-82, -9-83, and -9-87 series airplanes, and 
Model MD-88 airplanes); or McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin 
MD90-29A018, dated October 21, 1999 (for Model MD-90-30 series 
airplanes); as applicable. Repeat the inspection required by 
paragraph (a) of this AD every 5,000 flight hours.

Condition 3, Failure of Any Wiring: Repair and Repetitive Inspection

    (d) If any wiring fails during any inspection required by 
paragraph (a) of this AD, before further flight, troubleshoot and 
repair the failed wiring, per McDonnell Douglas Alert Service 
Bulletin MD80-29A067, dated October 21, 1999 (for Model DC-9-81, -9-
82, -9-83, and -9-87 series airplanes, and Model MD-88 airplanes); 
or McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD90-29A018, dated 
October 21, 1999 (for Model MD-90-30 series airplanes); as 
applicable. Repeat the inspection required by paragraph (a) of this 
AD every 5,000 flight hours.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (e) 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 2: 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 Permit

    (f) 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.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 30, 2000.
Donald L. Riggin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 00-31067 Filed 12-5-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>