This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

10970

Vol. 66, No. 35

Wednesday, February 21, 2001

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–396–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–10–10, –15, –30,

–30F (KC–10A Military), and –40 Series

Airplanes; and Model MD–10–10F and

MD–10–30F Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

supersedure of an existing airworthiness

directive (AD), applicable to certain

McDonnell Douglas Model DC–10–10,

–15, –30, –30F (KC–10A military), and

–40 series airplanes, and Model MD–

10–10F and MD–10–30F series

airplanes, that currently requires, among

other actions, performing repetitive

ultrasonic inspections of the attaching

bolts on the inboard and outboard

support on the inboard and outboard

flap assembly to detect failed bolts, or

verifying the torque of the attaching

bolts on the inboard support on the

outboard flap; and follow-on actions.

This action, among other actions, would

add a requirement to verify the torque

of the attaching bolts on the outboard

support on the inboard and outboard

flaps, and allow repetitive torque

verifications. This proposal is prompted

by a review that revealed inadvertent

omission of a requirement. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to prevent in-flight loss of

inboard and outboard flap assemblies

due to failure of H–11 attaching bolts,

which could result in reduced

controllability of the airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by

April 9, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

396–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. Comments may be

submitted via fax to (425) 227–1232.

Comments may also be sent via the

Internet using the following address: 9-

anm-nprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments

sent via fax or the Internet must contain

‘‘Docket No. 2000–NM–396–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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron

Atmur, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe

Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los Angeles

Aircraft Certification Office, 3960

Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,

California 90712–4137; telephone (562)

627–5224; 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:

• 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.

• For each issue, state what specific

change to the proposed AD is being

requested.

• 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–396–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–396–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

On August 10, 2000, the FAA issued

AD 2000–16–10, amendment 39–11866

(65 FR 50621, August 21, 2000),

applicable to certain McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–10–10, –15, –30,

–30F (KC–10A military), and –40 series

airplanes, and Model MD–10–10F and

MD–10–30F series airplanes, to require

performing repetitive ultrasonic

inspections of the attaching bolts on the

inboard and outboard support on the

inboard and outboard flap assembly to

detect failed bolts, or verifying the

torque of the attaching bolts on the

inboard support on the outboard flap;

and follow-on actions. That AD also

requires replacing all bolts with bolts

made from Inconel, which constitutes

terminating action for the repetitive

inspection requirements. That action

was prompted by an in-flight loss of the

inboard flap assembly on an airplane

during approach for landing. The

requirements of that AD are intended to

prevent in-flight loss of inboard and

outboard flap assemblies due to failure

of H–11 attaching bolts, which could

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 21, 2001 / Proposed Rules 10971

result in reduced controllability of the

airplane.

Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rule

Since the issuance of that AD, the

FAA has reviewed the requirements of

AD 2000–16–10 and found that we

inadvertently omitted a requirement to

verify the torque of the attaching bolts

on the outboard support on the inboard

and outboard flaps.

The procedures for this verification

were identified in McDonnell Douglas

Alert Service Bulletin DC10–57A143,

dated December 20, 1999, which was

referenced in AD 2000–16–10 as the

appropriate source of service

information for accomplishing the

requirements of that AD. Also, we

inadvertently included a requirement to

perform an ultrasonic inspection of the

attaching bolts on the inboard support

on the inboard flap assembly; this area

is not subject to the identified unsafe

condition. In addition, under certain

conditions, that AD only requires

repetitive ultrasonic inspections, rather

than repetitive torque verifications or

ultrasonic inspections, as indicated in

the referenced service bulletin. In light

of these findings, we find that AD 2000–

16–10 needs to be superseded to correct

these inaccuracies and adequately

address the identified unsafe condition

(i.e., failure of H–11 attaching bolts

could result in an in-flight loss of

inboard and outboard flap assemblies,

and consequent reduced controllability

of the airplane).

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

supersede AD 2000–16–10 to continue

to require repetitive ultrasonic

inspections of the attaching bolts on the

inboard and outboard support on the

outboard flap assembly and on the

outboard support on the inboard flap

assembly to detect failed bolts, or

verifying the torque of the attaching

bolts on the inboard support on the

outboard flap; and follow-on actions.

The proposed AD also would continue

to require replacing all bolts with bolts

made from Inconel, which would

constitute terminating action for the

repetitive inspection requirements.

Also, the proposed AD would add a

requirement to verify the torque of the

attaching bolts on the outboard support

on the inboard and outboard flaps, and

allow repetitive torque verification in

lieu of the repetitive ultrasonic

inspections. The actions would be

required to be accomplished per

McDonnell Douglas Alert Service

Bulletin DC10–57A143, dated December

20, 1999.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 412 Model

McDonnell Douglas Model DC–10–10,

–15, –30, –30F (KC–10A military), and

–40 series airplanes, and Model MD–

10–10F and MD–10–30F series airplanes

of the affected design in the worldwide

fleet. The FAA estimates that 244

airplanes of U.S. registry would be

affected by this proposed AD.

The inspection/torque verification

that is currently required by AD 2000–

16–10, and retained in this proposed

AD, takes approximately between 2 and

8 work hours per airplane to

accomplish, at an average labor rate of

$60 per work hour. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of the currently

required actions on U.S. operators is

estimated to be between $29,280 and

$117,120, or between $120 and $480 per

airplane, per inspection cycle.

The bolt replacement that is currently

required by AD 2000–16–10, and

retained in this proposed AD, takes

approximately 288 work hours per

airplane to accomplish, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Required parts will cost approximately

$2,987 per airplane. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of the currently

required replacement on U.S. operators

is estimated to be $4,945,148, or $20,267

per airplane.

The cost impact of the new torque

verification proposed in this AD is

included in the cost estimate above for

the inspection/torque verification.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the current or proposed 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 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.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

removing amendment 39–11866 (65 FR

50621, August 21, 2000), and by adding

a new airworthiness directive (AD), to

read as follows:

McDonnell Douglas: Docket 2000–NM–396–

AD. Supersedes AD 2000–16–10,

Amendment 39–11866.

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

–30F (KC–10A military), and –40 series

airplanes; and Model MD–10–10F and MD–

10–30F series airplanes; as listed in

McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin

DC10–57A143, dated December 20, 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)(1) 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

10972 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 21, 2001 / Proposed Rules

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent in-flight loss of inboard and

outboard flap assemblies due to failure of H–

11 attaching bolts, which could result in

reduced controllability of the airplane,

accomplish the following:

Inspection or Torque Verification, and

Corrective Actions, if Necessary

(a) Within 2 months after September 25,

2000, (the effective date of AD 2000–16–10,

amendment 39–11866), do an ultrasonic

inspection of the attaching bolts on the

inboard and outboard support on the

outboard flap assembly and on the outboard

support on the inboard flap assembly to

detect failed bolts, or verify the torque of the

attaching bolts on the inboard support on the

outboard flap, per McDonnell Douglas Alert

Service Bulletin DC10–57A143, dated

December 20, 1999.

(1) If no failed bolt is found, repeat the

ultrasonic inspection or torque verification

every 6 months.

(2) If any failed bolt is found, before further

flight, replace the bolt and associated parts

with a new Inconel bolt and new associated

parts per the service bulletin, except as

provided by paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (a)(2)(ii)

of this AD. Accomplishment of the

replacement constitutes terminating action

for the repetitive requirements of paragraph

(a)(1) of this AD for that bolt.

(i) If an Inconel bolt is not available for

accomplishment of the replacement,

replacement with a new H–11 steel bolt is

acceptable provided that operators repeat the

ultrasonic inspection or torque verification

every 6 months until the requirements of

paragraph (c) of this AD are accomplished.

(ii) If a PLI washer is not available for

accomplishment of the Inconel replacement,

a new Inconel bolt can be temporarily

installed without a new PLI washer provided

that the bolt is torqued to the applicable

value specified in the service bulletin.

Within 6,000 flight hours after an Inconel

bolt is torqued, replace the PLI washer with

a new washer per the service bulletin.

Torque Verification

(b) For airplanes on which the verification

of the torque of the attaching bolts on the

inboard support on the outboard flap was

done per paragraph (a) of this AD: Within 2

months after the effective date of this AD,

verify the torque of the attaching bolts on the

outboard support on the inboard and

outboard flaps, per McDonnell Douglas Alert

Service Bulletin DC10–57A143, dated

December 20, 1999; and do the applicable

action(s) specified in paragraph (a)(1) or

(a)(2) of this AD.

Bolt Replacement

(c) Within 2 years after accomplishing the

initial inspection required by paragraph (a) of

this AD or the torque verification required by

paragraphs (a) and (b) of this AD, do the

action specified in paragraph (a)(2) of this AD

for all H–11 bolts.

Accomplishment of the replacement of all

H–11 bolts with Inconcel bolts constitutes

terminating action for the requirements of

this AD.

Spares

(d) As of 2 years after the effective date of

this AD, no person shall install, on any

airplane, an H–11 steel bolt, part number

71658–8–44, 71658–7–44, 71658–7–54,

71658–7–56, 71658–7–29, 71658–9–31,

71658–9–34, 71658–9–38, 71658–9–41,

71658–10–41, 71658–7–26, 71658–7–27, or

71658–8–29, on the inboard or outboard flap

assembly.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(e)(1) 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.

(2) Alternative methods of compliance,

approved previously per AD 2000–16–10,

amendment 39–11866, are considered to be

approved as alternative methods of

compliance with this AD.

Special Flight Permits

(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 February

13, 2001.

Vi L. Lipski,

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–4221 Filed 2–20–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–320–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 747–400 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 747–400 series

airplanes. This proposal would require

an inspection to detect miswiring of

diodes in the heating system of the pitot

static probes, and corrective action, if

necessary. This action is necessary to

prevent reduced power to the heating

system of the pitot static probes, leading

to ice accumulation on the pitot static

probes, which could result in erroneous

airspeed or altitude indications to the

flight crew, and consequent reduced

operational safety in all phases of flight.

This action is intended to address the

identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by

April 9, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

320–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. Comments may be

submitted via fax to (425) 227–1232.

Comments may also be sent via the

Internet using the following address: 9-

anm-nprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments

sent via fax or the Internet must contain

‘‘Docket No. 2000–NM–320–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 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: Don

Eiford, Aerospace Engineer, Systems

and Equipment Branch, ANM–130S,

FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification

Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(425) 227–2788; fax (425) 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