Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 105 / Thursday, June 1, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 28525

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. App. 1354(a), 1421

and 1423; 49 U.S.C. 106(g); and 14 CFR

11.89.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

95–11–11 McDonnell Douglas: Amendment

39–9244. Docket 94–NM–176–AD.

Applicability: Model DC–10–10, –15, –30,

–40, and KC–10 (military) series airplanes; as

listed in McDonnell Douglas Alert Service

Bulletin A54–106, Revision 2, dated

November 3, 1994; 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 use the authority

provided in paragraph (d) to request approval

from the FAA. This approval may address

either no action, if the current configuration

eliminates the unsafe condition; or different

actions necessary to address the unsafe

condition described in this AD. Such a

request should include an assessment of the

effect of the changed configuration on the

unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no

case does the presence of any modification,

alteration, or repair remove any airplane from

the applicability of this AD.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent failure of the wing pylon aft

bulkhead due to fatigue cracking, which

could lead to separation of the engine and

pylon from the airplane, accomplish the

following:

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 1,800

landings after the effective date of this AD,

conduct an eddy current inspection to detect

fatigue cracks in the pylon aft bulkhead

flange, upper pylon box web, fitting radius,

and adjacent tangent areas, in accordance

with McDonnell Douglas Alert Service

Bulletin A54–106, Revision 2, dated

November 3, 1994. Repeat this inspection

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,800

landings.

(b) If any crack(s) is found during any

inspection required by paragraph (a) of this

AD, prior to further flight, repair in

accordance with a method approved by the

Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification

Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate.

(c) Accomplishment of the gap inspection

and necessary shimming in accordance with

‘‘Phase III,’’ as specified in McDonnell

Douglas Alert Service Bulletin A54–106,

Revision 2, dated November 3, 1994,

constitutes terminating action for the

inspections required by paragraph (a) of this

AD.

(d) 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 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.

(e) 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.

(f) The inspection shall be done in

accordance with McDonnell Douglas Alert

Service Bulletin A54–106, Revision 2, dated

November 3, 1994. 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 McDonnell Douglas

Corporation, 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, Los

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 3960

Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California;

or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800

North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC.

(g) This amendment becomes effective on

July 3, 1995.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 19,

1995.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–12826 Filed 5–31–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–NM–194–AD; Amendment

39–9245; AD 95–11–12]

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–9, DC–9–80, and C–

9 (Military) Series Airplanes, and Model

MD–88 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–9, DC–9–80, and C–

9 (military) series airplanes, and Model

MD–88 airplanes, that requires

repetitive replacement of the emergency

power switch in the overhead switch

panel with a new switch. This

amendment is prompted by a report of

heavy smoke in the cockpit coming from

the overhead switch panel on a Model

DC–9–81 series airplane. The actions

specified by this AD are intended to

ensure replacement of the emergency

power switch when it has reached its

maximum life limit; an emergency

power switch that is not replaced could

fail and lead to a short in the electrical

circuit, which could result in a fire in

the overhead switch panel and smoke in

the cockpit.

DATES: Effective July 3, 1995.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of July 3, 1995.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from McDonnell Douglas Corporation,

3855 Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach,

California 90846, Attention: Technical

Publications Business Administration,

Department C1–L51 (2–60). This

information may be examined at the

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA),

Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules

Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, Los

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 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:

Elvin Wheeler, Aerospace Engineer,
28526 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 105 / Thursday, June 1, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–

130L, FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712;

telephone (310) 627–5344; fax (310)

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–9, DC–9–80, and C–

9 (military) series airplanes, and Model

MD–88 airplanes was published in the

Federal Register on December 20, 1994

(59 FR 65518). That action proposed to

require repetitively replacing the

emergency power switch in the

overhead switch panel with a new

switch at regular intervals.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received.

One commenter supports the

proposed rule.

Two commenters request that the

compliance time for accomplishment of

the replacement be extended from the

proposed 12 months to 18 months. One

of these commenters states that such an

extension will allow the replacement to

be accomplished during a regularly

scheduled maintenance check. The FAA

does not concur. In developing an

appropriate compliance time for this

action, the FAA considered not only the

degree of urgency associated with

addressing the subject unsafe condition,

but the availability of required parts and

the practical aspect of installing the

required replacement with a maximum

interval of time allowable for all affected

airplanes to continue to operate without

compromising safety. Since

maintenance schedules vary from

operator to operator, there would be no

assurance that the replacement will be

accomplished during that time. The

manufacturer has advised that an ample

number of required parts will be

available for replacement of the

emergency power switch on the U.S.

fleet within the proposed compliance

period. However, under the provisions

of paragraph (b) of the final rule, the

FAA may approve requests for

adjustments to the compliance time if

data are presented to justify such an

adjustment.

Several commenters request that the

compliance time for accomplishing the

proposed replacement be based on

switch cycle usage, rather than calendar

time. Two commenters note that a

compliance time based on a calendar

time would impose a severe penalty on

operators that cycle the switch only

once a day and would also impose a

somewhat lesser penalty on operators

who cycle the switch on the first flight

of the day and at crew changes. One

commenter states that, due to the fact

that the switches do not have counters

to record actual switch cycles, it is

critical that operators have the

flexibility to establish an equivalent

calendar time or airplane cycle limit

based on their individual procedures for

exercising these switches.

The FAA does not concur with the

commenters’ request to base the

compliance time on switch cycles.

Compliance times for AD’s are normally

based on a parameter related to failure

of a particular component. In this case,

the failure of the emergency power

switch is undoubtedly related to the

number of switch cycles. However,

because switch cycles are not recorded,

referencing switch cycles in the

compliance time would make it

impossible to verify compliance at the

required time. Therefore, the FAA has

selected a compliance time that equates

to the approximate number of switch

cycles specified in McDonnell Douglas

DC–9 Service Bulletin 24–150, assuming

that the switch is cycled once for each

flight cycle. Under provisions of

paragraph (b) of the final rule, however,

operators may apply for the approval of

an extension of the compliance time if

sufficient justification is presented to

the FAA. For example, such justification

may consist of data demonstrating that

the operator only cycles the switch once

a day, or at each crew change, rather

than once per flight cycle.

Since issuance of the proposal, the

FAA has reviewed and approved

McDonnell Douglas DC–9 Service

Bulletin 24–150, Revision 1, dated April

7, 1995, which describes the appropriate

procedures for repetitively replacing the

emergency power switch in the

overhead switch panel with a new

switch at regular intervals. Therefore,

the final rule has been revised to

reference this revision of the service

bulletin as an additional source of

service information.

The FAA points out that it

inadvertently used the phrase ‘‘time-inservice’’ after the term ‘‘3 years’’ in

paragraph (a) of the proposal when

referring to the compliance threshold for

installation of the emergency power

switch. Since that phrase is

inappropriate, the FAA has removed it

from the final rule. Likewise, the FAA

has removed that phrase from the

reference to the repetitive replacement

interval.

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.

There are approximately 1,990 Model

DC–9, DC–9–80, and C–9 (military)

series airplanes and Model MD–88

airplanes of the affected design in the

worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that

992 airplanes of U.S. registry will be

affected by this AD, that it will take

approximately 2 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the required

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. Required parts

will cost approximately $1,434 per

airplane. Based on these figures, the

total cost impact of the AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $1,541,568,

or $1,554 per airplane, per replacement

cycle.

The total 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 regulations adopted herein will

not have substantial direct effects 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, in

accordance with Executive Order 12612,

it is determined that this final rule does

not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

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.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 105 / Thursday, June 1, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 28527

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. App. 1354(a), 1421

and 1423; 49 U.S.C. 106(g); and 14 CFR

11.89.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

95–11–12 McDonnell Douglas: Amendment

39–9245. Docket 94–NM–194–AD.

Applicability: Model DC–9–10, –20, –30,

–40, and –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) series

airplanes; Model MD–88 airplanes; and C–9

(military) series airplanes; as listed in

McDonnell Douglas DC–9 Service Bulletin

24–150, dated March 28, 1994; 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 use the authority

provided in paragraph (b) to request approval

from the FAA. This approval may address

either no action, if the current configuration

eliminates the unsafe condition; or different

actions necessary to address the unsafe

condition described in this AD. Such a

request should include an assessment of the

effect of the changed configuration on the

unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no

case does the presence of any modification,

alteration, or repair remove any airplane from

the applicability of this AD.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To ensure replacement of the emergency

power switch that have reached the

maximum life limit, accomplish the

following:

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 3 years

since installation of the emergency power

switch in the overhead switch panel, or

within 12 months after the effective date of

this AD, whichever occurs later, replace the

emergency power switch with a new switch

in accordance with the procedures specified

in McDonnell Douglas DC–9 Service Bulletin

24–150, dated March 28, 1994, or Revision 1,

dated April 7, 1995. Thereafter, replace the

emergency power switch at intervals not to

exceed 3 years.

(b) 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, 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 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.

(c) 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.

(d) The replacement shall be done in

accordance with McDonnell Douglas DC–9

Service Bulletin 24–150, dated March 28,

1994; or McDonnell Douglas DC–9 Service

Bulletin 24–150, Revision 1, dated April 7,

1995. 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 McDonnell Douglas Corporation, 3855

Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California

90846, Attention: Technical Publications

Business Administration, Department C1–

L51 (2–60). Copies may be inspected at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at

the FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification

Office, Transport Airplane Directorate, 3960

Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California;

or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800

North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC.

(e) This amendment becomes effective on

July 3, 1995.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 22,

1995.

S.R. Miller,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–12951 Filed 5–31–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–96–AD; Amendment

39–9246; AD 95–11–13]

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model MD–11 Series

Airplanes Equipped With Pratt &

Whitney Model PW4460 and PW4462

Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that is

applicable to certain McDonnell

Douglas Model MD–11 series airplanes.

This action requires a visual inspection

to detect cracks or discrepancies in the

aft mount beam assembly of the engines;

and replacement of the cracked or

discrepant aft mount beam assembly

with a new assembly, or a previously

inspected and re-identified assembly.

This amendment is prompted by reports

of cracking in a certain aft mount beam

assembly on Airbus Model A310 series

airplanes. The actions specified in this

AD are intended to prevent cracks in the

aft mount beam assembly of the engines,

which could result in loss of the

capability of the aft mount beam

assembly to support engine loads, and

possible separation of the engine from

the airplane.

DATES: Effective June 16, 1995.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of June 16,

1995.

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

July 31, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM–

96–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

The service information referenced in

this AD may be obtained from

McDonnell Douglas Corporation, 3855

Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach,

California 90846, Attention: Technical

Publications Business Administration,

Department 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, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 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:

Wahib Mina, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office,

3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,

California 90712; telephone (310) 627–

5324; fax (310) 627–5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA

has received reports of cracking in an aft

mount beam assembly having part

number (P/N) 221–0261–501 installed

on Airbus Model A310 series airplanes.

Metallurgical analysis and close

examination of the cracked aft mount

beam assembly has indicated this

cracking is the result of physical defects,

which were caused during the forging

process by one supplier. Cracks in the

aft mount beam assembly of the engines,

if not detected and corrected in a timely