Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10 Series Airplanes and KC-10A (Military) 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-10 series airplanes and KC-10A (military) airplanes. This proposal would require a general visual inspection of electrical power feeder cables, airplane structure, and insulation blankets at a certain fuselage station to detect chafing and arcing damage, and corrective actions, if necessary; and installation of a standoff and clamp. This proposal is prompted by an incident in which the power feeder cables in the cabin electrical system were found to be chafed and arced against a fuselage frame due to insufficient clearance between the cables and airplane structure. The actions specified by the proposed AD are intended to prevent such chafing and arcing, which could cause smoke and fire in the overhead of the main cabin.

DATES:

Comments must be received by March 13, 2000.

ADDRESSES:

Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, Attention: Rules Docket No. 99-NM-214-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 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, Transport Airplane Directorate, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Natalie Phan-Tran, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130L, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone (562) 627-5343; 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 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 99-NM-214-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. 99-NM-214-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056.

Discussion

As part of its practice of re-examining all aspects of the service experience of a particular aircraft whenever an accident occurs, the FAA has become aware of an incident in which the power feeder cables in the cabin electrical system had chafed and arced against the fuselage frame at station Y=1099.000 between longerons 9 and 10 (right side). The cable had burned in half, damaging a three-inch section of the fuselage frame and adjacent insulation blankets. This incident occurred on a McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10 series airplane. The cause of the chafing was insufficient clearance between the electrical power cable and the fuselage structure. This condition, if not corrected, could result in smoke and fire in the overhead of the main cabin.

Other Related Rulemaking

The FAA, in conjunction with Boeing and operators of Model DC-10 series airplanes, is continuing to review all aspects of the service history of those airplanes to identify potential unsafe conditions and to take appropriate corrective actions. This proposed AD is one of a series of actions identified during that process. The process is continuing and the FAA may consider additional rulemaking actions as further results of the review become available.

Explanation of Relevant Service Information

The FAA has reviewed and approved McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin DC10-24A163, dated July 28, 1999. The service bulletin describes procedures for a general visual inspection of electrical power feeder cables, airplane structure, and insulation blankets at station Y=1099.000 between longerons 9 and 10 (right side) to detect chafing and arcing damage; installation of a standoff and clamp at station Y=1093.000, longeron 10; and corrective actions, if necessary. The corrective actions involve repair or replacement of damaged power feeder cables, airplane structure, or insulation blankets with new parts. Accomplishment of the actions specified in the service bulletin is intended to adequately address the identified unsafe condition.

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 bulletin described previously.

Typographical Error in Service Information

Operators should note the applicability statement of the proposed AD differs from the effectivity listing of the referenced service bulletin in that it includes McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-15 series airplanes in the applicability statement. The service bulletin contains a typographical error that identifies Model “DC-10-20” series airplanes (which do not exist) as one of the affected models rather than Model DC-10-15 series airplanes. However, the manufacturer's fuselage numbers listed in the service bulletin corresponds to the affected Model DC-10-15 series airplanes. Therefore, the applicability statement of the proposed AD correctly refers to the subject service bulletin for the listing of affected airplanes.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 160 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 80 airplanes of U.S. registry would be affected by this proposed AD.

It would take approximately 1 work hour per airplane to accomplish the proposed inspection, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $4,800, or $60 per airplane.

It would take approximately 1 work hour per airplane to accomplish the proposed installation, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $4,800, or $60 per airplane.

The cost impact figures discussed above are 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 AD were not adopted.

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.