Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 19, 1996 / Proposed Rules 31061

actions specified in paragraphs (f)(1)through

(f)(9) of this AD.

(1) Perform a visual inspection to detect

cracking of the pylon aft bulkhead, in

accordance with paragraphs 2.E. and 2.F. of

McDonnell Douglas DC–10 Service Bulletin

54–74, dated December 21, 1979; and an

eddy current inspection to detect cracking of

the pylon aft bulkhead, in accordance with

page 634, dated December 1, 1979, and page

634A, dated August 1, 1990, of Chapter 54–

10–11 of the McDonnell Douglas DC–10

Nondestructive Testing Manual.

(2) Perform a visual inspection to detect

discrepancies of the front spar bulkhead, in

accordance with paragraph 2.H. of

McDonnell Douglas DC–10 Service Bulletin

54–74, dated December 21, 1979.

(3) Perform a visual inspection to detect

cracking of the attachment fitting-to-pylon

forward bulkhead (footstool) of the wing

front spar; perform a detailed visual

inspection to detect cracking, and loose or

missing fasteners, of the wing pylon

attachment; and verify that the pre-load

indicating (PLI) washers cannot be rotated; in

accordance with paragraph 2.L. of McDonnell

Douglas DC–10 Service Bulletin 54–74, dated

December 21, 1979.

(4) Perform an inspection to verify that the

attach bolt PLI washers on the lower

spherical bearing plug cannot be rotated;

verify that no interference exists between the

plug forward flange aft face, and the forward

face of the spherical bearing; and perform a

detailed visual inspection of the plug in situ;

in accordance with paragraph 2.I. of

McDonnell Douglas DC–10 Service Bulletin

54–74, dated December 21, 1979.

(5) Perform a visual inspection to verify the

condition, security, and torque stripe

alignment of the plug assembly of the

forward upper spherical bearing installation,

in accordance with paragraph 2.J. of

McDonnell Douglas DC–10 Service Bulletin

54–74, dated December 21, 1979.

(6) Perform a visual inspection to verify

proper installation of the thrust link bolts,

nuts, and retaining washers of the thrust link

installation, in accordance with paragraph

2.C.(2) of McDonnell Douglas DC–10 Service

Bulletin 54–74, dated December 21, 1979.

(7) Perform an inspection of the aft

spherical bearing, as specified in paragraphs

(f)(7)(i) through (f)(7)(iv) of this AD.

(i) Remove the aft spherical bearing

through bolt. Inspect the inner bore of the

bushing in situ using Magnaflux bolt and

visual inspection techniques. Perform a

visual inspection using a 10x (power) glass

(or equivalent) to detect cracks of the forward

and aft surfaces of the spherical bearing.

Reinstall the through bolt.

(ii) Verify that the torque of the through

bolt is 1,200 to 1,300 inch-pounds.

(iii) Inspect the clearance of the aft

spherical bearing forward face/clevis.

(iv) Torque stripe the nut to bolt.

(8) Perform an ultrasonic inspection to

detect cracking of the bulkhead lug and wing

clevis-to-wing attachment, including the

bolts, in accordance with pages 635, 636,

638, 638A, and 638B, dated December 1,

1979; page 637, dated September 1, 1993;

page 651, dated February 1, 1982; and page

652, dated August 1, 1992; of Chapter 54–10–

11 of the McDonnell Douglas DC–10

Nondestructive Testing Manual.

(9) Accomplish either paragraph (f)(9)(i) or

(f)(9)(ii) of this AD.

(i) Perform an X-ray inspection in situ to

ensure the integrity of the steel thrust links,

in accordance with page 632A, dated August

1, 1984, and page 632B, dated February 1,

1981, of the McDonnell Douglas DC–10

Nondestructive Testing Manual. Or

(ii) Perform an ultrasonic inspection in situ

to ensure the integrity of the steel thrust

links, in accordance with page 632C, dated

August 1, 1985, and page 632D, dated August

1, 1984, of the McDonnell Douglas DC–10

Nondestructive Testing Manual.

(g) Prior to further flight after a pylon has

been subjected to vertical or horizontal

misalignment, or both (e.g., during

maintenance), perform an inspection to

detect cracking of the aft pylon bulkhead, in

accordance with page 634, dated December 1,

1979, and page 634A, dated August 1, 1990,

of Chapter 54–10–11 of the McDonnell

Douglas DC–10 Nondestructive Testing

Manual.

(h) Prior to further flight following any

event that produces high pylon loads:

Perform an inspection of the pylon for

structural integrity, in accordance with pages

601, 602, 602A, 604, 605, 606, and 608, dated

November 1, 1986; page 603, dated May 1,

1986; and pages 604A and 607, dated May 1,

1987; of Chapter 05–51–08 of the McDonnell

Douglas DC–10 Maintenance Manual.

Note 2: Examples of events that produce

high pylon loads, include, but are not limited

to, the following:

• Hard or overweight landings (for the

purpose of this AD, overweight landings are

made at aircraft weights in excess of 369,000

pounds);

• Severe turbulence encounters;

• Engine vibration that requires engine

removal or critical engine failure, or both;

• Ground damage (work stands, etc.);

• Compressor stalls requiring engine

removal; and

• Excursions from the runway of a nature

that might have imposed loads more severe

than those encountered normally on the

runway.

(i) Prior to further flight, correct any

discrepancy found during any inspection

required by this AD, in accordance with a

method approved by the Manager, Los

Angeles ACO; the Structural Repair Manual;

or McDonnell Douglas DC–10 Service

Bulletin 54–74, dated December 21, 1979; as

appropriate.

(j) Within 10 days after accomplishing the

inspections required by this AD, report

inspection results, positive or negative, to the

FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector. The

report shall include the information specified

in paragraphs (j)(1) through (j)(5) of this AD.

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.

(1) The ‘‘N’’ number of the airplane.

(2) The total number of hours time-inservice accumulated on the airplane.

(3) The pylon number of the airplane.

(4) The specific paragraph (and

subparagraph) of this AD that corresponds

with the inspection results being reported.

(5) Specific inspection results: For

example, the location and size of cracking,

specific location of discrepant fasteners, and

part numbers.

(k) 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. 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.

(l) 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 June 13,

1996.

James V. Devany,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–15601 Filed 6–18–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–106–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 727 and 737 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 Boeing Model 727 and 737 series

airplanes. This proposal would require

replacing the fuel cap assembly with a

new assembly on the inlet fitting at the

inside top of the auxiliary fuel tank. The

proposal would also require replacing

the INOP placards with new placards.

This proposal is prompted by reports

that the fuel cap assembly, due to its

design, became loose and allowed fuel

to enter the deactivated auxiliary fuel

tanks on in-service airplanes. The

actions specified by the proposed AD

are intended to prevent unwanted fuel

transferring to the deactivated auxiliary

fuel tanks, due to the problems

associated with a loose fuel cap

assembly.

DATES: Comments must be received by

July 29, 1996.
31062 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 19, 1996 / Proposed Rules

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM–

106–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Boeing Commercial Airplane Group,

P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington

98124–2207. This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sulmo Mariano, Aerospace Engineer,

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, FAA,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; telephone (206) 227–2686;

fax (206) 227–1181.

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 notice may be changed in light

of the comments received.

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 notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 95–NM–106–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–103, Attention: Rules Docket No.

95–NM–106–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

On October 31, 1980, the FAA issued

AD 80–02–01 R2, amendment 39–3969

(45 FR 74467, November 10, 1980),

applicable to Boeing Model 727 series

airplanes on which an operative Boeingdesigned auxiliary body fuel system is

installed. In addition, the FAA issued a

similar AD 80–02–02 R2, amendment

39–3970 (45 FR 74467, November 10,

1980), which is applicable to Boeing

Model 737 series airplanes on which an

operative Boeing-designed auxiliary

body fuel system is installed. Those ADs

were prompted by reports of loss of fuel

from the auxiliary body fuel tank due to

defective and damaged shrouds. The

actions required by those AD’s are

intended to prevent failure of the fuel

system and unwanted fuel transfer to

the auxiliary body fuel tanks.

Events Since Issuance of Previous AD’s

Since issuance of those AD’s, the FAA

has received reports indicating that, on

certain Boeing Model 727 series

airplanes, the fuel cap assembly (which

was installed to deactivate the auxiliary

fuel tanks, in accordance with AD 80–

02–01 R2) became loose and allowed

fuel to enter the tanks. Investigation

revealed that, due to incorrect

procedures that were provided in the

relevant service bulletin, the safety

lockwire of the fuel cap assembly was

attached to the cap, rather than to the

nut. This condition, if not corrected,

could allow the nut of the fuel cap

assembly to back off and the cap to

loosen; consequently, unwanted fuel

could then transfer to the auxiliary fuel

tanks.

The fuel cap assembly on certain

Model 737 series airplanes is identical

to that on the affected Model 727 series

airplanes. Therefore, those Model 737

series airplanes may be subject to this

same unsafe condition revealed on the

Model 727 series airplanes.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

The FAA has reviewed and approved

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 727–

28A0062, Revision 5, dated May 4, 1995

(for Model 727 series airplanes) and

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–

28A1032, Revision 2, dated May 4, 1995

(for Model 737 series airplanes). For

airplanes equipped with forward and/or

aft auxiliary fuel tanks that have been

deactivated, these service bulletins

contain:

1. Procedures for replacing the fuel

cap assembly having part number (P/N)

AN929A24 with a new fuel cap

assembly having P/N AN929L24 on the

inlet fitting at the inside top of the

auxiliary fuel tank; and

2. procedures for replacing the INOP

placards with new placards, which state

that the fuel indicators for the auxiliary

fuel tanks are still operational.

For certain other airplanes listed in

these service bulletins, no additional

work is necessary.

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 replacing the fuel cap assembly

with a new assembly on the inlet fitting

at the inside top of the auxiliary fuel

tank. The proposed AD also would

require replacing the INOP placards

with new placards; these replacement

actions would be required only on

airplanes on which the auxiliary fuel

tank has been deactivated. The actions

would be required to be accomplished

in accordance with the service bulletins

described previously.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 211 Boeing

Model 727 series airplanes and 36

Boeing Model 737 series airplanes of the

affected design in the worldwide fleet.

The FAA estimates that 134 Boeing

Model 727 series airplanes and 25

Boeing Model 737 series airplanes of

U.S. registry may be affected by this

proposed AD, depending on the current

configuration of the airplanes.

For Boeing Model 727 series

airplanes, the proposed modification

would take approximately 53 work

hours per airplane to accomplish, at an

average labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Required parts would be supplied by

the manufacturer at no cost to the

operators. Based on these figures, the

cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $3,180 per

airplane.

For Boeing Model 737 series

airplanes, the proposed modification

would take approximately 18 work

hours per airplane to accomplish, at an

average labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Required parts would be supplied by

the manufacturer at no cost to the

operators. Based on these figures, the

cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $1,080 per

airplane.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 19, 1996 / Proposed Rules 31063

the proposed 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 proposed herein

would 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

proposal would not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

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.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

Boeing: Docket 95–NM–106–AD.

Applicability: Model 727 and 737 airplanes

equipped with forward and/or aft auxiliary

fuel tanks that have been deactivated,

certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

otherwise 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 (b) 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 the nut of the fuel cap assembly

from backing off and the cap from loosening,

and subsequently, unwanted fuel transferring

to the auxiliary fuel tanks, accomplish the

following:

(a) Within 6 months after the effective date

of this AD, accomplish paragraphs (a)(1) and

(a)(2) of this AD, in accordance with Part IV

of the Accomplishment Instructions of

Boeing Service Bulletin 727–28A0062,

Revision 5, dated May 4, 1995 (for Model 727

series airplanes), or Boeing Service Bulletin

737–28A1032, Revision 2, dated May 4, 1995

(for Model 737 series airplanes), as

applicable.

(1) Replace the fuel cap assembly having

part number (P/N) AN929A24 with a new

fuel cap assembly having P/N AN929L24 on

the inlet fitting at the inside top of the

auxiliary fuel tank, in accordance with the

applicable service bulletin. And

(2) Replace the INOP placards with new

placards, in accordance with the applicable

service bulletin.

(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, Seattle

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, Seattle ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle 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.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 13,

1996.

James V. Devany,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–15604 Filed 6–18–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 96–ASW–15]

Proposed Establishment of Class D

Airspace; McKinney, TX

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: This notice proposes to

establish Class D airspace extending

upward from surface to and including

2,900 feet mean sea level (MSL) at

McKinney, TX. An air traffic control

tower has begun providing air traffic

control services for pilots operating at

McKinney Municipal Airport. The

intended effect of this proposal is to

provide adequate controlled airspace at

McKinney Municipal Airport,

McKinney, TX.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before August 19, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on the

proposal in triplicate to Manager,

Operations Branch, Air Traffic Division,

Federal Aviation Administration,

Southwest Region, Docket No. 96–

ASW–15, Fort Worth, TX 76193–0530.

The official docket may be examined

in the Office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel, Federal Aviation

Administration, Southwest Region, 2601

Meacham Boulevard, Fort Worth, TX,

between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, except Federal

holidays. An informal docket may also

be examined during normal business

hours at the Operations Branch, Air

Traffic Division, Federal Aviation

Administration, Southwest Region, 2601

Meacham Boulevard, Fort Worth, TX.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Donald J. Day, Operations Branch, Air

Traffic Division, Federal Aviation

Administration, Southwest Region, Fort

Worth, TX 76193–0530; telephone: (817)

222–5593.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested parties are invited to

participate in this proposed rulemaking

by submitting such written data, views,

or arguments as they may desire.

Comments that provide the factual basis

supporting the views and suggestions

presented are particularly helpful in

developing reasoned regulatory

decisions on the proposal. Comments

are specifically invited on the overall

regulatory, aeronautical, economic,

environmental, and energy-related

aspects of the proposal.

Communications should identify the

airspace docket number and be

submitted in triplicate to the address