[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 63 (Monday, April 2, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17499-17506]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-7732]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 98-NM-326-AD; Amendment 39-12163; AD 2001-06-16]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-80 Series
Airplanes and Model MD-88 Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes an existing airworthiness directive
(AD), applicable to all McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-80 series
airplanes and Model MD-88 airplanes, that currently requires revisions
to the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) and installation of inspection aids
on the wing upper surfaces. This amendment requires, among other
actions, installation of an overwing heater blanket system or primary
upper wing ice detection system, and installation of a heater
protection panel or an equipment protection device on certain overwing
heater blanket systems. This amendment is prompted by incidents in
which ice accumulation on the wing upper surfaces shed into the engines
during takeoff. The actions specified by this AD are intended to
prevent ice accumulation on the wing upper surfaces, which could result
in ingestion of ice into one or both engines and consequent loss of
thrust from one or both engines.
DATES: Effective May 7, 2001.
The incorporation by reference of McDonnell Douglas Service
Bulletin 30-59, dated September 18, 1989, and McDonnell Douglas Service
Bulletin 30-59, Revision 1, dated January 5, 1990, as listed in the
regulations, was approved previously by the Director of the Federal
Register as of January 17, 1992 (57 FR 2014, November 12, 1998).
The incorporation by reference of certain other publications, as
listed in the regulations, is approved by the Director of the Federal
Register as of May 7, 2001.
ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD 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 Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue,
SW., Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office, 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: Albert Lam, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California
90712-4137; telephone (562) 627-5346; fax (562) 627-5210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) by superseding AD 92-03-02,
amendment 39-8156 (57 FR 2014, January 17, 1992), which is applicable
to all McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-80 series airplanes and Model MD-88
airplanes, was published as a supplemental notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register on April 28, 2000 (65 FR
24882). The action proposed to continue to require a revision to the
Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) to specify restrictions on operations
during icing conditions, installation of inspection aids on the inboard
side of the wing upper surfaces, and a revision to the AFM to specify
restrictions on operations when such inspection aids are missing. That
action also proposed to add a requirement for installation of an
overwing heater blanket system or a primary upper wing ice detection
system, and a new revision to the AFM to advise the flight crew of the
hazards associated with ice accumulation on wing surfaces.
Comments Received
Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to
the comments received.
Support for Supplemental NPRM
Several commenters support the supplemental NPRM.
Request To Allow a Certain Installation After the Effective Date of
the AD
One commenter requests that installation of an operational overwing
heater blanket system per TDG Aerospace, Inc., Supplemental Type
Certificate (STC) SA6042NM without an equipment protective device (EPD)
be allowed after the effective date of this AD until an EPD becomes
available, provided that the inspection and test requirements of
paragraph (d)(2) of the supplemental NPRM are done. As currently
worded, paragraph (d) of the supplemental NPRM requires inspection and
test requirements for airplanes on which an overwing heater blanket
system was installed without a heater protection panel (HPP) or an EPD
prior to the effective date of this AD. The commenter states that it
interprets this paragraph to mean that any overwing heater blanket
system installed after the effective date of the AD must include an HPP
or EPD as part of the installation. The commenter notes that there are
no EPD's available to date.
The FAA does not agree and finds that clarification is necessary.
The commenter is correct that this AD (paragraph (f)) requires
installation of an overwing heater blanket system with an HPP or EPD.
Since issuance of the supplemental NPRM, we have reviewed and approved
the design of an EPD (reference TDG Master Drawing List (MDL) E93-104,
Revision R, dated October 25, 2000), which provides a circuit
protection function to the overwing heater blanket, for installation on
certain affected airplanes. We have revised paragraph (f)(2)(i) of the
final rule to reference this MDL as an acceptable method of compliance.
We find that the 3-year compliance time specified in paragraph (f) of
this AD for installation of an EPD will accommodate the time necessary
for affected operators to order, obtain, and install an EPD in
conjunction with an
[[Page 17500]]
overwing heater blanket system, without adversely affecting safety.
Request To Revise Repetitive Test Intervals
One commenter requests that the repetitive test interval specified
in paragraph (d)(2)(ii)(A) of the supplemental NPRM be extended from
150 days to 180 days. The commenter states that it currently does the
tests during base maintenance visits every 1,300 flight hours. The
commenters notes that, based on its average airplane utilization rate,
1,300 flight hours can be as much as 180 days.
The FAA does not agree. In developing an appropriate compliance
time, the FAA considered the safety implications of potential arcing of
an overwing heater blanket, and normal maintenance schedules for timely
accomplishment of the tests. In light of these items, we have
determined that 150 days for compliance is appropriate. However,
paragraph (i)(1) of the final rule does provide affected operators the
opportunity to apply for an adjustment of the compliance time if data
are presented to justify such an adjustment.
Request To Allow Deactivation of the Heater Blanket System
One commenter requests that a statement be added to paragraph (e)
of the supplemental NPRM to allow the heater blanket system to be
deactivated per the Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL) until the
repair or replacement can be done.
The FAA agrees. As discussed below under the heading ``Request to
Allow An Inoperative Overwing Heater Blanket System,'' we find that an
overwing heater blanket or ice detection system may be inoperative for
10 days per the MMEL, so that the affected airplane may be rerouted to
a suitable repair station. We have included a new paragraph (h) in the
final rule that provides for such an option. We have also revised
paragraph (e) of the final rule to reference that option in paragraph
(h) of the final rule.
Requests To Revise 3-Year Compliance Time
Several commenters request that the 3-year compliance time
specified in paragraph (f) of the supplemental NPRM be revised. Some of
the commenters suggest 2 years, and another suggests 18 months. One
commenter suggests that the FAA determine and define a compliance time
that is consistent with the flight safety risk implications, parts
availability, and ability of operators to incorporate the modification.
Three commenters, one acting as a consultant to the others, state
that a shorter compliance time would enhance public safety and reduce
exposure to current manual tactile inspection procedures as the primary
means of determining whether wings are free of ice. The commenters also
state that an 18-month or 24-month compliance time should not cost
operators any more to comply with than a 3-year compliance time. The
commenters further state that one of the heater blanket manufacturers
can provide sufficient quantities of heater blanket kits within an 18-
month or 24-month compliance time. One of the commenters states that a
3-year compliance time seems unduly long given the potential severity
of the problem and that the solution is already well established.
The FAA does not agree. As discussed under the heading
``Explanation of Differences Between Service Bulletins and Supplemental
NPRM'' in the preamble of the supplemental NPRM, we find installation
of both an overwing heater blanket system and HPP or EPD within 3 years
after the effective date of this AD to be appropriate. In developing an
appropriate compliance time, the FAA considered the interim
requirements (i.e., repetitive inspections of the overwing heater
blanket); development, approval, and manufacturing schedule of EPD's;
scope of an EPD installation; and safety impact of the existing TDG
overwing heater blanket without an EPD. Because the installation of an
EPD or HPP is relatively simple and may be done during a light
maintenance check, we find that a 3-year compliance time for fielding
an EPD to affected operators will not impose an unreasonable burden on
operators. Also, we find that an overwing heater blanket system should
be installed during a heavy maintenance check (i.e., 3 years). An 18-
month compliance time would require operators to schedule special times
for installation of an overwing heater blanket system or primary upper
wing ice detection system, at additional expense and downtime.
Operators are always permitted to accomplish the requirements of an
AD at a time earlier than that specified as the compliance time;
therefore, if an operator elects to accomplish the installation
required by paragraph (f) of this AD before 3 years after the effective
date of this AD, it is that operator's prerogative to do so. If
additional data are presented that would justify a shorter compliance
time, the FAA may consider further rulemaking on this issue. Therefore,
no change to the compliance time of paragraph (f) of the final rule is
necessary.
One commenter requests that the 3-year compliance time specified in
paragraph (f) of the supplemental NPRM begin from the date when an
approved EPD becomes available. The commenter states that, to date,
there are no EPD's available. The FAA does not agree. As discussed
above under the heading ``Request to Allow a Certain Installation After
the Effective Date of the AD,'' we have approved the design for an EPD
and find that the 3-year compliance time for installation of an EPD
will accommodate the time necessary for affected operators to order,
obtain, and install an EPD in conjunction with an overwing heater
blanket system, without adversely affecting safety.
Request To Only Require Installation of an Overwing Heater Blanket
System
One commenter requests that paragraph (f) of the proposed AD only
require installation of an overwing heater blanket. The commenter
states that installation of a primary upper wing ice detection system
(the proposed alternative to installation of an overwing heater
blanket) may detect the occurrence of ice, but will not remove ice. The
commenter provides the following safety/operational issues concerning
ice detectors:
1. Ice can form on the ``cold corner'' of Model DC-9-80 series
airplanes at an outside air temperature as high as 50 deg. Fahrenheit
(10 deg. Celsius). Under these non-winter conditions, de-icing
equipment may not be available.
2. Most types of ice detectors are ``point detectors,'' so ice may
form undetected away from the sensor head. The commenter concludes that
installation of an overwing heater blanket provides both the required
level of safety and airline operational benefit (no de-icing from
``cold corner'' ice).
Another commenter states that it is concerned about the
availability of technology related to primary upper wing ice detection
systems, which may not be adequate to provide a reliable ice detection
system. However, in contradiction to this statement, the commenter also
states the remote system ice detection technology may prove to be more
adequate; however, current airport environments may preclude their use.
The FAA does not agree with the commenter's request to only require
installation of an overwing heater blanket system. The requirements of
this AD are intended to prevent ``ice accumulation on the wing upper
surfaces, which could result in ingestion of ice into one or both
engines and
[[Page 17501]]
consequent loss of thrust from one or both engines.'' We have
determined that installation of an FAA-approved primary upper wing ice
detection system will detect ice on the ``cold corner'' of Model DC-9-
80 series airplanes and is a reliable ice detection system. In
addition, all Model MD-90-30 and 717 series airplanes are equipped with
primary upper wing ice detection systems. We have not received any
report of failures or malfunctions of the primary upper wing ice
detection systems that resulted in an unsafe condition on those
airplanes. Furthermore, airplane-mounted ice detection systems have
been fully developed and are being widely used on different areas and
on different types of airplane models. We find that both the overwing
heater blanket and primary upper wing ice detection systems perform
their intended functions and provide an acceptable level of safety. As
a result, the AD allows operators the flexibility to choose an
appropriate system that suits their operational requirements.
Request To Revise Applicability of Certain Paragraphs
One commenter requests clarification of the applicability of
paragraph (f)(1)(iii) of the supplemental NPRM. The commenter states
that the wording is vague and should clearly state that airplanes
identified, but not modified, per paragraph (f)(1)(i) or (f)(1)(ii) of
the supplemental NPRM must do the requirements of paragraph
(f)(1)(iii)(B) or (f)(1)(iii)(C) of the supplemental NPRM. The
commenter states that its airplanes are identified in the effectivity
of McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin MD80-30-090, but opted to install
the AlliedSignal system.
The FAA agrees that clarification is necessary. Paragraph (f) of
the supplemental NPRM states ``accomplish the requirements of either
paragraph (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this AD.'' Our intent was that operators
could do any of the actions specified in those paragraphs (including
the sub-paragraphs), regardless of whether an airplane was identified
in paragraph (f)(1)(i) or (f)(1)(ii) of the supplemental NPRM (Group 1
and Group 2 airplanes listed in McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin
MD80-30-090, dated October 19, 1999). For airplanes not identified in
paragraph (f)(1)(i) or (f)(1)(ii) of the supplemental NPRM, it was also
our intent that operators be able to do the requirements of paragraph
(f)(1)(i) or (f)(1)(ii) of this AD if approved per paragraph (i)(1) of
this AD. Because some operators may misinterpret paragraph (f) of the
supplemental NPRM as it is currently worded, we have revised paragraph
(f) of the final rule to clarify these points by deleting paragraph
(f)(1)(iii) of the supplemental NPRM, adding a new note, and
redesignating other sub-paragraphs of paragraph (f) of the supplemental
NPRM.
Request To Revise AFM
One commenter requests that the AFM be revised to include
additional foreign object damage (FOD) information for the flight crew.
The commenter suggests the following:
1. Airplanes operated with an overwing heater blanket system can
still encounter possible FOD danger in certain weather conditions, and
in this case, a hands-on inspection to detect ice in the flap and
spoiler areas must be performed. The heaters should remain OFF until
completion of that inspection and de-icing.
2. In the case of an inoperative overwing heater blanket system, a
hands-on inspection, as required by AD 92-03-02, must be performed
until the system is repaired.
The commenter notes that there were incidents of FOD to an engine
on airplanes equipped with an overwing heater blanket system, which
apparently originated from ice being ingested into the engine during
takeoff. Investigation revealed that, if an overwing heater blanket
system is left ON for several hours when an airplane is on the ground
during a snow or ice storm, frozen precipitation over the heated area
of the wing melts and runs off into the flap trailing edge or spoiler
cavity areas. De-icing crews cleared the remainder of the airframe, but
failed to detect the ice remaining in the flap or spoiler areas. If the
airplane is dispatched in that condition, the ice may be ingested into
the engine during takeoff.
The FAA does not agree. Overwing heater blanket systems are only
designed and certified as anti-icing systems and should not be used as
a de-icing device. We have determined that the runoff flows into the
flap or spoiler cavity areas are no different for airplanes equipped
with or without an overwing heater blanket system. Therefore, ice could
form on any airplane area where runoff flows are not cleared by a de-
icing crew. As discussed previously, the requirements of this AD are
intended to prevent ice accumulation on the wing upper surfaces, which
does not relieve operators and flight crews from complying with 14 CFR
parts 91.527 and 121.629 requirements to properly operate an airplane
in icing conditions. Subsequent to the incidents cited by the
commenter, Boeing issued All Operators Letter, FO-AOL-9-061, dated
September 25, 1996, which informs operators and flightcrews of proper
de-icing and inspection procedures.
Request To Revise Description of Tufts and Triangular Decals
One commenter requests that the FAA revise the term ``tufts and
triangular decals'' throughout the supplemental NPRM to ``inspection
aids.'' The commenter states that this revision would provide one term
to describe the various inspection aids (i.e., tufts, decals, mount
pads, painted symbols, and paint stripes.) The FAA agrees and has
revised the final rule accordingly.
Request To Continue To Require Inspection Aids After Certain
Actions
One commenter requests that inspection aids required by paragraph
(c) of the supplemental NPRM remain required after installation of
either an overwing heater blanket system or primary upper wing ice
detector system, and incorporation of the AFM revision required by
paragraphs (f) and (g) of the supplemental NPRM, respectively. The
commenter states that this is required for MMEL relief. The commenter
also states that the inspection aids are part of the MD-90 production
configuration, even though the wing clear ice issue was eliminated by a
return-to-tank heating system. The commenter further states that a
certain operator incorporated the grid strips inspection aids, along
with the heater blanket installation, on its fleet.
The FAA partially agrees. We do not agree that the inspection aids
required by paragraph (c) of the AD are necessary after installation of
either an overwing heater or primary upper ice detector system, and
incorporation of the AFM revision, required by paragraphs (f) and (g)
of the AD, respectively. However, as discussed below under the heading
``Request to Allow An Inoperative Overwing Heater Blanket System,'' we
do agree that an airplane may be operated with an inoperative overwing
heater blanket or primary upper ice detection system for 10 days per
the MMEL, provided that the actions specified in paragraphs (h)(1),
(h)(2), and (h)(3) of this final rule are done before further flight.
As indicated below, we have included a new paragraph (h) to provide
this exception. Therefore, no change to paragraph (c) is necessary.
Request To Allow an Inoperative Overwing Heater Blanket System
One commenter requests that dispatch with an inoperative overwing
heater
[[Page 17502]]
blanket system per the MMEL be permitted in paragraph (g) of the
supplemental NPRM. The commenter notes the AFM revision required by
paragraph (g) of the supplemental NPRM is the same as that required by
AD 92-03-02 (paragraph (a) of the supplemental NPRM), except the
requirement for the visual and physical checks of the wing upper
surfaces for ice has been removed. The commenter also notes that
requirements of paragraph (g) of the supplemental NPRM allow for the
removal of the AFM revisions required by paragraphs (a) and (b) of the
supplemental NPRM, as well as the tuft and triangular decal
installation required by paragraph (c) of the supplemental NPRM (all of
which were requirements of AD 92-03-02 that were retained in the
supplemental NPRM).
The commenter states that its affected airplanes are equipped with
an overwing heater blanket system and operated per the AFM Supplement
for TDG Aerospace, Inc., STC SA6042NM. This STC, which was approved as
an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) for AD 92-03-02, allows an
overwing heater blanket system to be inoperative per the MMEL for 120
days, provided that the visual and physical checks of the wing upper
surfaces for ice are performed as indicated in the AFM revision
required by paragraph (a) of the supplemental NPRM. As paragraph (g) of
the supplemental NPRM is currently worded, the commenter states that it
will no longer be able to operate with an inoperative overwing heater
blanket system per the MMEL, and that the overwing heater blanket
system must be operational for every flight.
The FAA partially agrees with the commenter's request. The FAA
acknowledges that it issued AMOC's for AD 92-03-02 (i.e., Boeing TDG
overwing heater blankets without an HPP installed, and TDG Aerospace,
Inc., STC SA6042NM without an EPD installed) that reverted to the
physical and visual checks to detect ice required by that AD in the
event that the overwing heater blanket became inoperative. As discussed
in the preamble of the NPRM, we found that the physical and visual
checks to detect ice accumulation, as specified by the AFM revision
required by AD 92-03-02, may not be adequate to ensure the safety of
the affected transport airplane fleet.
However, we find that, for 10 days (not the 120 days currently
specified in the MMEL), an overwing heater blanket or primary upper
wing ice detection system may be inoperative per the MMEL, provided
that the physical and visual checks to detect ice are performed. This
would allow the affected airplanes with an inoperative overwing heater
blanket system to be rerouted to a suitable repair station and would
still maintain an adequate level of safety. It should be noted that the
10-day MMEL relief does not relieve operators and flight crews from
complying with the requirements of 14 CFR parts 91.527 and 121.69 for
properly operating an airplane in icing conditions.
Therefore, the FAA has added a new paragraph (h) to include
instructions for operating an airplane with an overwing heater blanket
system that is inoperative and revised paragraph (g) to reference that
paragraph as an exception.
Request To Include Previously Approved AMOC's
One commenter notes that paragraph (h)(2) of the supplemental NPRM
states that ``Alternative methods of compliance, approved previously in
accordance with AD 92-03-02, amendment 39-8156, are NOT approved as
alternative methods of compliance with this AD.'' The commenter states
that it has received AMOC's for the requirements of paragraphs (b) and
(c) of the supplemental NPRM and provides an explanation of those
AMOC's. Therefore, the commenter requests that the requirements of
paragraphs (b) and (c) of the supplemental NPRM be revised to address
those AMOC's.
The FAA partially agrees. We acknowledge that we approved an AMOC,
which installed a non-skid, striped triangular symbol per Option 5 of
McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin MD80-30-059, Revision 4 through
Revision 7, for the requirements of paragraph (b) of AD 92-03-02. We
also acknowledge that we approved an AMOC, which revises the
Configuration Deviation List (CDL) Appendix of the AFM by inserting a
copy of CDL Appendix, Section I, Page 2A, dated March 10, 1993, into
the AFM, for the requirements of paragraph (c) of AD 92-03-02.
We find that these AMOC's are still acceptable for compliance with
the requirements of paragraphs (b) and (c) of this AD, respectively. We
have revised paragraph (i)(2) of the final rule accordingly. However,
for the reasons identified in the preamble of the supplemental NPRM,
AMOC's approved previously per AD 92-03-02 for Boeing TDG overwing
heater blankets without an HPP installed, or TDG Aerospace, Inc. STC
SA6042NM without an EPD installed are NOT approved as AMOC's with this
AD.
Explanation of Change to Certain STC References
The FAA has revised paragraphs (f)(2)(i) and (f)(2)(ii) of the
final rule to: (1) Remove the reference to TDG Aerospace, Inc., STC
SA6042NM and AlliedSignal STC SA6061NM and, instead, include a
reference to a method approved by the FAA; and (2) add new notes to
reference those STC's as approved means of compliance with the
requirements of paragraphs (f)(2)(i) and (f)(2)(ii) of this AD,
respectively. We find these STC's should not be incorporated by
reference in the final rule, because they contain proprietary
information.
Conclusion
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.
Cost Impact
There are approximately 1,153 Model DC-9-80 series airplanes and
Model MD-88 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet.
The FAA estimates that 643 airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected
by this AD.
The AFM revision that is currently required by AD 92-03-02 takes
approximately 1 work hour 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 AFM revision on U.S. operators is
estimated to be $38,580, or $60 per airplane.
The revision of the CDL that is currently required by AD 92-03-02
takes approximately 1 work hour per airplane to accomplish, at an
average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the
cost impact of the CDL revision on U.S. operators is estimated to be
$38,580, or $60 per airplane.
The installation of tufts and decals that is currently required by
AD 92-03-02 takes approximately 3 work hours per airplane to
accomplish, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required
parts cost approximately $25 per airplane. Based on these figures, the
cost impact of the currently required installation of tufts and decals
on U.S. operators is estimated to be $131,815, or $205 per airplane.
The installation of the wing heater system that is provided as one
option
[[Page 17503]]
for compliance with this AD action will take approximately 200 to 350
work hours per airplane to accomplish, at an average labor rate of $60
per work hour. Required parts will cost approximately $76,000 to
$130,000 per airplane, depending on suppliers, airplane fleet size, and
configuration. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the
installation required by this AD on U.S. operators is estimated to
range from $88,000 to $151,000 per airplane.
In lieu of installation of a wing heater system, this AD provides
for installation of a primary upper wing ice detector system. Because
the manufacturer has not issued service information that describes the
procedures for such an installation, the FAA is unable at this time to
provide specific information as to the number of work hours or cost of
parts that will be required to do that installation. However, based on
estimated costs provided by the manufacturer, we can reasonably
estimate that the required installation will require 290 work hours to
do, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. The cost of required
parts is estimated to range from $30,000 to $70,000 per airplane,
depending on fleet size and airplane configuration. Based on these
figures, the cost impact of the installation of a primary upper wing
ice detector system required by this AD on U.S. operators is estimated
to range from $47,400 to $87,400 per airplane.
The new AFM revision that is required in this AD action will take
approximately 1 work hour per airplane to accomplish, at an average
labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost
impact of the new AFM revision required by this AD on U.S. operators is
estimated to be $38,580, or $60 per airplane.
For affected airplanes, the new repetitive tests required in this
AD action will take approximately 3 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 repetitive tests required by this
AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $180 per airplane, per test
cycle.
For affected airplanes, the one-time detailed visual inspection
required in this AD action will take approximately 3 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 detailed visual
inspection required by this AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be
$180 per airplane.
For airplanes listed in Group 1 of McDonnell Douglas Alert Service
Bulletin MD80-30-090, the modification of the existing HPP will take
approximately 5 work hours per airplane to accomplish, at an average
labor rate of $60 per work hour. The manufacturer has committed
previously to its customers that it will bear the cost of necessary
parts. As a result, the cost of those parts is not attributable to this
AD. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the AD on U.S. operators
is estimated to be $300 per airplane.
For airplanes listed in Group 2 of McDonnell Douglas Alert Service
Bulletin MD80-30-090, the installation of the HPP and associated wiring
will take approximately 3 work hours per airplane to accomplish, at an
average labor rate of $60 per work hour. The manufacturer has committed
previously to its customers that it will bear the cost of necessary
parts. As a result, the cost of those parts is not attributable to this
AD. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the AD on U.S. operators
is estimated to be $180 per airplane.
The installation of an EPD will take approximately 1 work per
airplane to accomplish, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour.
The required EPD will cost approximately $5,475 per airplane. Based on
these figures, the cost impact of this action required by this AD on
U.S. operators is estimated to be $5,535 per airplane.
The cost impact figures discussed above are 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 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 adopted herein will 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 final rule does not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132.
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.
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. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by removing amendment 39-8156 (57 FR
2014, January 17, 1992), and by adding a new airworthiness directive
(AD), amendment 39-, to read as follows:
2001-06-16 McDonnell Douglas: Amendment 39-12163. Docket 98-NM-326-
AD. Supersedes AD 92-03-02, Amendment 39-8156.
Applicability: All Model DC-9-81, -82, -83, and -87 series
airplanes; and Model MD-88 airplanes; 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 (i)(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 been
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to
address it.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent ice accumulation on the wing upper surfaces, which
could result in ingestion of ice into one or both engines and
consequent loss of thrust from one or both engines, accomplish the
following:
[[Page 17504]]
Restatement of Requirements of AD 92-03-02
Airplane Flight Manual Revision
(a) Within 10 days after January 17, 1992 (the effective date of
AD 92-03-02, amendment 39-8156), revise the Limitations Section of
the FAA-approved Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) to include the
following. This may be accomplished by inserting a copy of this AD
in the AFM.
``Ice on Wing Upper Surfaces
CAUTION
Ice shedding from the wing upper surface during takeoff can
cause severe damage to one or both engines, leading to surge,
vibration, and complete thrust loss. The formation of ice can occur
on wing surfaces during exposure of the airplane to normal icing
conditions. Clear ice can also occur on the wing upper surfaces when
cold-soaked fuel is in the main wing fuel tanks, and the airplane is
exposed to conditions of high humidity, rain, drizzle, or fog at
ambient temperatures well above freezing. Often, the ice
accumulation is clear and difficult to detect visually. The ice
forms most frequently on the inboard, aft corner of the main wing
tanks. [END OF CAUTIONARY NOTE]
The wing upper surfaces must be physically checked for ice when
the airplane has been exposed to conditions conducive to ice
formation. Takeoff may not be initiated unless the flight crew
verifies that a visual check and a physical (hands-on) check of the
wing upper surfaces have been accomplished, and that the wing is
clear of ice accumulation when any of the following conditions
occur:
(1) When the ambient temperature is less than 50 degrees F and
high humidity or visible moisture (rain, drizzle, sleet, snow, fog,
etc.) is present;
(2) When frost or ice is present on the lower surface of either
wing;
(3) After completion of de-icing.
When inspection aids (i.e. tufts, decals, mount pads, painted
symbols, and paint stripes) are installed in accordance with
McDonnell Douglas MD-80 Service Bulletin 30-59, the physical check
may be made by assuring that all installed tufts move freely.
NOTE
This limitation does not relieve the requirement that aircraft
surfaces are free of frost, snow, and ice accumulation, as required
by Federal Aviation Regulations Sections 91.527 and 121.629. [END OF
NOTE]''
AFM Configuration Deviation List Revision
(b) Within 10 days after January 17, 1992, revise the
Configuration Deviation List (CDL) Appendix of the FAA-approved AFM
to include the following. This may be accomplished by inserting a
copy of this AD in the AFM.
``30-80-01 Triangular Decal and Tuft Assemblies
Up to two (2) decals or tufts per side may be missing, provided:
(a) At least one decal and tuft on each side is located along
the aft spar line; and
(b) The tufts are used for performing the physical check to
determine that the upper wing is free of ice by observing that the
tufts move freely.
Up to eight (8) decals and/or tufts may be missing, provided:
(a) Takeoff may not be initiated unless the flight crew verifies
that a physical (hands-on) check is made of the upper wing in the
location of the missing decals and/or tufts to assure that there is
no ice on the wing when icing conditions exist;
OR
(b) When the ambient temperature is more than 50 degrees F.''
Installation of Inspection Aids
(c) Within 30 days after January 17, 1992, install inspection
aids (i.e., tufts, decals, mount pads, painted symbols, and paint
stripes) on the inboard side of the wings' upper surfaces, in
accordance with McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin 30-59, dated
September 18, 1989; Revision 1, dated January 5, 1990; or Revision
2, dated August 15, 1990.
New Requirements of This AD
Repetitive Tests and One-Time Inspection
(d) For airplanes on which an overwing heater blanket system was
installed without installation of a heater protection panel (HPP) or
an equipment protection device (EPD) prior to the effective date of
this AD: Within 60 days after the effective date of this AD,
accomplish the actions specified in paragraph (d)(1) or (d)(2) of
this AD, as applicable.
(1) For airplanes on which the overwing heater blanket system
was installed in accordance with McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin
MD80-30-071, Revision 02, dated February 6, 1996; or McDonnell
Douglas Service Bulletin MD80-30-078, Revision 01, dated April 8,
1997: Accomplish paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (d)(1)(ii) of this AD.
(i) Remove secondary access covers, and perform a one-time
detailed visual inspection to detect discrepancies (mechanical
damage or punctures in the upper skin of the blanket, prying damage
on the panel, and fuel leakage) of the overwing heater blanket, in
accordance with McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD80-
30A087, dated September 22, 1997. And,
(ii) Accomplish paragraph (d)(1)(ii)(A) or (d)(1)(ii)(B) of this
AD.
(A) Perform dielectric withstanding voltage and resistance tests
in accordance with McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD80-
30A087, dated September 22, 1997. Repeat the tests thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 150 days, until installation of an HPP in
accordance with paragraph (f)(1)(i) or (f)(1)(ii) of this AD, as
applicable.
(B) Deactivate the overwing heater blanket system until
accomplishment of dielectric withstanding voltage and resistance
tests specified in paragraph (d)(1)(ii)(A). If the overwing heater
blanket system is deactivated as provided by this paragraph,
continue to accomplish the requirements of paragraphs (a), (b), and
(c) of this AD.
Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed visual
inspection is defined as: ``An intensive visual examination of a
specific structural area, system, installation, or assembly to
detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available lighting is
normally supplemented with a direct source of good lighting at
intensity deemed appropriate by the inspector. Inspection aids such
as mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface cleaning
and elaborate access procedures may be required.''
(2) For airplanes on which the overwing heater blanket system
was installed in accordance with TDG Aerospace, Inc., STC SA6042NM:
Accomplish paragraphs (d)(2)(i) and (d)(2)(ii) of this AD.
(i) Remove secondary access covers, and perform a one-time
detailed visual inspection to detect discrepancies (mechanical
damage or punctures in the upper skin of the blanket, prying damage
on the panel, and fuel leakage) of the overwing heater blanket, in
accordance with McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD80-
30A087, dated September 22, 1997. And,
(ii) Accomplish paragraph (d)(2)(ii)(A) or (d)(2)(ii)(B) of this
AD.
(A) Perform dielectric withstanding voltage and resistance tests
in accordance with McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD80-
30A087, dated September 22, 1997. Repeat the tests thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 150 days, until installation of an EPD in
accordance with paragraph (f)(1)(iii)(B) of this AD.
(B) Deactivate overwing heater blanket system until
accomplishment of dielectric withstanding voltage and resistance
tests specified in paragraph (d)(2)(ii)(A). If the overwing heater
blanket system is deactivated as provided by this paragraph,
continue to accomplish the requirements of paragraphs (a), (b), and
(c) of this AD.
Corrective Action
(e) If any discrepancy is detected during any inspection or test
performed in accordance with paragraph (d) of this AD, prior to
further flight, repair or replace the affected heater blanket, in
accordance with McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD80-
30A087, dated September 22, 1997; except as provided in paragraph
(h) of this AD.
Note 3: McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD80-30A087,
dated September 22, 1997, references TDG Aerospace Document E95-451,
Revision B, dated January 31, 1996, as an additional source of
service information for accomplishment of repair or replacement of
the overwing heater blanket.
Installation of Overwing Heater Blanket or Primary Upper Wing Ice
Detection System
(f) Within 3 years after the effective date of this AD, do the
requirements of either paragraph (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this AD.
(1) Do the actions specified in paragraph (f)(1)(i) or
(f)(1)(ii) of this AD, as applicable.
(i) For airplanes listed in Group 1 in McDonnell Douglas Service
Bulletin MD80-30-090, dated October 19, 1999: Install an overwing
heater blanket system in accordance with McDonnell Douglas Service
Bulletin MD80-30-071, Revision 02, dated February 6, 1996; and
modify and reidentify the existing HPP in accordance with McDonnell
Douglas Service Bulletin MD80-
[[Page 17505]]
30-090. Modification of the existing HPP in accordance with this
paragraph constitutes terminating action for the repetitive
inspections required by (d)(1)(ii)(A) of this AD.
(ii) For airplanes listed in Group 2 in McDonnell Douglas
Service Bulletin MD80-30-090, dated October 19, 1999: Install an
overwing heater blanket system in accordance with McDonnell Douglas
Service Bulletin MD80-30-078, Revision 01, dated April 8, 1997; and
install an HPP and associated wiring in accordance with McDonnell
Douglas Service Bulletin MD80-30-090. Installation of an HPP and
associated wiring in accordance with this paragraph constitutes
terminating action for the repetitive inspections required by
(d)(1)(ii)(A) of this AD.
Note 4: For other airplanes, accomplishment of the requirements
of paragraph (f)(1)(i) or (f)(1)(ii) of this AD may be acceptable
per paragraph (i)(1) of this AD.
(2) Accomplish the actions specified in either paragraph
(f)(2)(i), (f)(2)(ii), or (f)(2)(iii) of this AD.
(i) Install an overwing heater blanket system, and install an
EPD that provides a circuit protection function to the overwing
heater blanket, in accordance with a method approved by the Manager,
Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. Installation
of an EPD in accordance with this paragraph constitutes terminating
action for the repetitive inspections required by (d)(2)(ii)(A) of
this AD.
Note 5: Installation of an overwing heater blanket system and
installation of an EPD that provides a circuit protection function
to the overwing heater blanket, in accordance with TDG Aerospace,
Inc., SA6042NM, or TDG Master Drawing List (MDL) E93-104, Revision
R, dated October 25, 2000; is an approved means of compliance with
the requirements of paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this AD.
(ii) Install an overwing heater blanket system in accordance
with a method approved by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO.
Note 6: Installation of an overwing heater blanket system in
accordance with AlliedSignal STC SA6061NM, is an approved means of
compliance with the requirements of paragraph (f)(2)(ii) of this AD.
(iii) Install an FAA-approved primary upper wing ice detection
system in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Los
Angeles ACO.
Note 7: Boeing (McDonnell Douglas) has received FAA approval of
an acceptable primary upper wing ice detection system. This
modification has been assigned a Boeing (McDonnell Douglas) service
bulletin number but, at this time, no service bulletin is available.
AFM Revision
(g) Except as provided by paragraph (h) of this AD, prior to
further flight after accomplishment of the installation required by
paragraph (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this AD, revise the Limitations
Section of the FAA-approved AFM to include the following. This may
be accomplished by inserting a copy of this AD in the AFM. After
accomplishment of the installation required by paragraph (f)(1) or
(f)(2) of this AD and this AFM revision, the AFM revisions required
by paragraphs (a) and (b) of this AD may be removed from the AFM,
and the inspection aids required by paragraph (c) of this AD may be
removed from the airplane.
``Ice on Wing Upper Surfaces
CAUTION
Ice shedding from the wing upper surface during takeoff can
cause severe damage to one or both engines, leading to surge,
vibration, and complete thrust loss. The formation of ice can occur
on wing surfaces during exposure of the airplane to normal icing
conditions. Clear ice can also occur on the wing upper surfaces when
cold-soaked fuel is in the main wing fuel tanks, and the airplane is
exposed to conditions of high humidity, rain, drizzle, or fog at
ambient temperatures well above freezing. Often, the ice
accumulation is clear and difficult to detect visually. The ice
forms most frequently on the inboard, aft corner of the main wing
tanks. [END OF CAUTIONARY NOTE]''
(h) An airplane may be operated with an inoperative overwing
heater blanket or primary upper wing ice detection system for 10
days per the Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL), provided that the
actions specified in paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), and (h)(3) of this
AD are done before further flight.
(1) Revise the Limitations Section of the FAA-approved AFM to
include the following. This may be accomplished by inserting a copy
of this AD in the AFM.
``Ice on Wing Upper Surfaces
CAUTION
The wing upper surfaces must be physically checked for ice when
the airplane has been exposed to conditions conducive to ice
formation. Takeoff may not be initiated unless the flight crew
verifies that a visual check and a physical (hands-on) check of the
wing upper surfaces have been accomplished, and that the wing is
clear of ice accumulation when any of the following conditions
occur:
(1) When the ambient temperature is less than 50 degrees F and
high humidity or visible moisture (rain, drizzle, sleet, snow, fog,
etc.) is present;
(2) When frost or ice is present on the lower surface of either
wing;
(3) After completion of de-icing.
When inspection aids (i.e. tufts, decals, mount pads, painted
symbols, and paint stripes) are installed in accordance with
McDonnell Douglas MD-80 Service Bulletin 30-59, the physical check
may be made by assuring that all installed tufts move freely.
NOTE
This limitation does not relieve the requirement that aircraft
surfaces are free of frost, snow, and ice accumulation, as required
by Federal Aviation Regulations Sections 91.527 and 121.629. [END OF
NOTE]''
(2) Revise the CDL Appendix of the FAA-approved AFM to include
the following. This may be accomplished by inserting a copy of this
AD in the AFM.
``30-80-01 Triangular Decal and Tuft Assemblies
Up to two (2) decals or tufts per side may be missing, provided:
(a) At least one decal and tuft on each side is located along
the aft spar line; and
(b) The tufts are used for performing the physical check to
determine that the upper wing is free of ice by observing that the
tufts move freely.
Up to eight (8) decals and/or tufts may be missing, provided:
(a) Takeoff may not be initiated unless the flight crew verifies
that a physical (hands-on) check is made of the upper wing in the
location of the missing decals and/or tufts to assure that there is
no ice on the wing when icing conditions exist;
OR
(b) When the ambient temperature is more than 50 degrees F.''
(3) Install inspection aids (i.e., tufts, decals, mount pads,
painted symbols, and paint stripes) on the inboard side of the
wings' upper surfaces, in accordance with McDonnell Douglas Service
Bulletin 30-59, dated September 18, 1989; Revision 1, dated January
5, 1990; or Revision 2, dated August 15, 1990.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(i)(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 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.
(2) The following alternative methods of compliance (AMOC) were
approved previously per AD 92-03-02, amendment 39-8156, and are
approved as AMOC's with the indicated paragraphs of this AD:
(i) Installation of a non-skid, striped triangular symbol per
Option 5 of McDonnell Douglas Service bulletin MD80-30-059, Revision
4 though Revision 7, is approved as an AMOC with paragraph (b) of
this AD.
(ii) Revision of the Configuration Deviation List (CDL) Appendix
of the AFM by inserting a copy of CDL Appendix, Section I, Page 2A,
dated March 10, 1993, into the AFM, is approved as an AMOC with
paragraph (c) of this AD.
Note 8: 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 Permits
(j) 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.
Incorporation by Reference
(k) The actions required by paragraphs (c), (d), (e), (f)(1),
and (h)(3) of this AD shall be done in accordance with the
applicable service document identified in Table 1 of this AD.
[[Page 17506]]
Table 1.--Referenced Service Documents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Service document Revision level Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin 30-59. Original.................... September 18, 1989.
McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin 30-59. 1........................... January 5, 1990.
McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin 30-59. 2........................... August 15, 1990.
McDonnell Douglas Alert Service Bulletin Original.................... September 22, 1997.
MD80-30A087.
McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin MD80- Original.................... October 19, 1999.
30-090.
McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin MD80- 01.......................... April 8, 1997.
30-078.
McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin MD80- 02.......................... February 6, 1996.
30-071.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) The incorporation by reference of McDonnell Douglas Service
Bulletin 30-59, dated September 18, 1989; McDonnell Douglas Service
Bulletin 30-59, Revision 1, dated January 5, 1990; and McDonnell
Douglas Service Bulletin 30-59, Revision 2, dated August 15, 1990;
was approved previously by the Director of the Federal Register as
of January 17, 1992 (57 FR 2014, January 17, 1992).
(2) The incorporation by reference of the remaining service
bulletins listed in Table 1 of this AD, is approved by the Director
of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51.
(3) Copies 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). 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, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California; or at the
Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite
700, Washington, DC.
Effective Date
(l) This amendment becomes effective on May 7, 2001.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 23, 2001.
Donald L. Riggin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 01-7732 Filed 3-30-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P