[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 155 (Thursday, August 12, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43966-43969]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-20940]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 99-NM-161-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-80 and MD-
90-30 Series Airplanes, and Model MD-88 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-9-80 and MD-90-30 series airplanes, and Model MD-88 airplanes. This
proposal would require that a determination be made of whether, and at
what locations, metallized polyethyleneteraphthalate (MPET) insulation
blankets are installed, and replacement of MPET insulation blankets
with new insulation blankets. This proposal is prompted by reports of
in-flight and ground fires on certain airplanes manufactured with
insulation blankets covered with MPET, which may contribute to the
spread of a fire when ignition occurs from small ignition sources such
as electrical arcing or sparking. The actions specified by the proposed
AD are intended to ensure that insulation blankets constructed of MPET
are removed from the fuselage. Such insulation blankets could propagate
a small fire that is the result of an otherwise harmless electrical arc
and could lead to a much larger fire.
DATES: Comments must be received by September 27, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 99-NM-161-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington 98055-4056. Comments may be inspected at this
location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00
[[Page 43967]]
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: Robert Stacho, 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) 627-5334;
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-161-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-161-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98055-4056.
Discussion
The FAA has received reports of a number of in-flight and ground
fires on McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-80 and MD-11 series airplanes
manufactured with insulation blankets covered with metallized
polyethyleneteraphthalate (MPET) (also known as metallized Mylar).
Investigation has revealed that MPET covered insulation blankets may
contribute to the spread of a fire when ignition occurs from small
ignition sources such as electrical arcing or sparking. The results of
extensive flammability testing, conducted by the manufacturer and the
FAA, revealed that this type of insulation material will propagate a
fire.
There are other materials on insulation blankets that exhibit
similar flammability characteristics if ignited. However, these
materials are much more difficult to ignite than MPET.
Insulation blankets constructed of MPET installed throughout the
fuselage, if not corrected, could propagate a small fire that is the
result of an otherwise harmless electrical arc and could lead to a much
larger fire.
The subject insulation blankets on certain McDonnell Douglas Model
MD-90-30 and DC-10 series airplanes, and Model MD-88 airplanes are
identical to those on the affected Model DC-9-80 and MD-11 series
airplanes. Therefore, all of these airplanes may be subject to the same
unsafe condition. The FAA is issuing a separate rulemaking action
[notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), Rules Docket No. 99-NM-162-AD]
to address McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10 and MD-11 series airplanes.
Other Relevant Investigations and Rulemaking
The FAA is continuing to investigate various wiring problems on
McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-80, MD-90-30, DC-10, and MD-11 series
airplanes, and Model MD-88 airplanes. The FAA may consider additional
rulemaking actions to address any identified unsafe condition. The FAA
will take into account the impact of those actions on U.S. operators to
minimize the duplication of aircraft downtime associated with
accomplishing the actions of this proposed AD.
Explanation of Relevant Service Information
The FAA has reviewed and approved McDonnell Douglas Service
Bulletin MD-90-25-015, Revision 01, dated November 5, 1997 (for Model
MD-90-30 series airplanes), and McDonnell Douglas Service Bulletin
MD80-25-355, Revision 01, dated November 5, 1997 (for Model DC-9-80
series airplanes and Model MD-88 airplanes). The service bulletins
describe procedures for replacement of MPET covered insulation blankets
with new blankets fabricated with metallized Tedlar or equivalent
blanket material. Accomplishment of the replacement procedures
specified in the service bulletins 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 bulletins described previously, except as discussed below.
Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletins
The referenced service bulletins describe procedures for
replacement of MPET covered insulation blankets with certain metallized
Tedlar or equivalent blanket material, which meet the current FAA
flammability standards (i.e., Bunsen burner test). However, this
proposed AD requires replacement with insulation blankets that are
constructed of materials tested in accordance with Standard Test Method
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) E648 and approved by
the FAA. The FAA finds that the current flammability standards are not
able to distinguish between different types of insulation covering
material in their flame spread properties from small ignition sources.
ASTM E648 provides a test that will differentiate flame spread
properties of different metallized Tedlars. Only one of the two
insulation blanket film materials specified in the service bulletins
has successfully passed the testing of the ASTM flammability standard
and has been found to be an acceptable replacement material for the
MPET covered insulation blankets. Other film material, such as certain
polyimide and fluoropolymer composites, also have been successfully
tested to ASTM E648 and could be found to be acceptable for compliance
with the requirements of this proposed AD if presented to the FAA for
approval. These materials are not listed in the service bulletins
described previously.
[[Page 43968]]
Operators should note that this proposed AD would require
replacement of MPET insulation blankets within 4 years after the
effective date of this AD. The service bulletins recommend that this
action should be accomplished ``at the earliest practical maintenance
period.'' Maintenance periods vary between operators and may involve
maintenance on an entire airplane or only portions of an airplane. As a
result, in developing an appropriate compliance time for this and other
proposed AD's, the FAA must adopt a time period that will apply to all
operators and airplanes. In establishing a compliance time for this
proposed AD, the FAA balanced the urgency associated with addressing
the subject unsafe condition against the need to ensure that operators
are provided sufficient time to perform a safe replacement of the
insulation. Because of the close proximity of the insulation to wiring
and other fixtures of various critical airplane systems, it is
imperative that operators be given the necessary time to ensure safe
replacement. Therefore, the FAA has determined that a 4-year compliance
time is appropriate in that it allows the proposed replacement to be
accomplished within an interval of time that encompasses normal
scheduled maintenance for the majority of affected operators, thereby,
allowing safe replacement. In order to meet the deadline, the FAA
expects early planning and anticipates that operators will have to take
advantage of every heavy maintenance opportunity.
Operators also should note that the effectivity listing of the
referenced service bulletins differs from the applicability of the
proposed AD. The applicability of the proposed AD affects airplanes
manufactured with MPET insulation blankets. The effectivity listing of
the service bulletins not only includes airplanes manufactured with
MPET insulation blankets, but airplanes equipped with other materials
that are much more difficult to ignite than MPET (as discussed
previously). The FAA has determined that only airplanes manufactured
with MPET insulation blankets are subject to the identified unsafe
condition. Therefore, paragraph (a) of the proposed AD would require
that a determination be made of whether, and at what locations, MPET
insulation blankets are installed, and the proposal would require
corrective action only with respect to those blankets. The proposal
would require that this determination be made in a manner approved by
the manager of the LAACO. Blankets that are stamped with ``DMS 2072,
Type 2, Class 1, Grade A'' or ``DMS 1996, Type 1'' are constructed of
MPET. On some blankets, because of their age or wear, it may not be
possible to identify these stamps. Boeing is currently developing
instructions for how to determine whether such blankets are constructed
of MPET. These instructions, if approved, may be referenced as
additional service information in any final rule resulting from this
rulemaking. In addition, if additional airplane models manufactured
with MPET insulation blankets are identified, the FAA may consider
additional rulemaking actions to address the identified unsafe
condition.
Regulatory Evaluation Summary
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.
The FAA conducted a Preliminary Cost Analysis and Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis to determine the regulatory impacts of
this and one other proposed AD to operators of all 699 U.S.-registered
McDonnell Douglas airplanes that have thermal/acoustical insulation
blankets covered with a film of MPET. This analysis is included in the
Rules Docket No.'s 99-NM-161-AD and 99-NM-162-AD. The FAA has
determined that 612 Model DC-9-80 series airplanes and 22 Model MD-90-
30 series airplanes operated by 16 entities would be affected by this
proposed AD. Thirteen of these entities operate N-registered Model DC-
9-80 series airplanes, three entities operate Model MD-90-30 series
airplanes, and two entities operate both Model DC-9-80 series airplanes
and Model MD-90-30 series airplanes.
The Preliminary Cost Analysis and Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis, completed by the FAA and included in this Rules Docket,
estimates that the affected airplanes could be retrofitted with
thermal/acoustic insulation blankets covered with film that exhibit no
flame propagation when tested in accordance with the requirements of
ASTM E648 or FAA-approved equivalent. Testing conducted by the FAA
indicates that there are films that are currently in use that meet the
test standard required by this proposed AD. These include certain
polyvinylfluoride films that weigh no more than the materials they
would replace. The FAA has identified three categories of costs
associated with the retrofit: (1) Material costs of the blankets; (2)
labor costs to remove existing blankets, install new blankets, and
reinstall wiring, panels, floors, and other items; and (3) net lost
revenues, or out of service costs. Over the four-year compliance
period, material costs would be $17.2 million, labor costs would be
$214.1 million, and net lost revenues would be $13.3 million. Total
costs would be $244.6 million, or $207.0 million discounted to present
value at seven percent.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980 establishes ``as a
principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall endeavor,
consistent with the objective of the rule and of applicable statutes,
to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the sale of the
business, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to
regulation. To achieve that principle, the RFA requires agencies to
solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the
rationale for their actions. The RFA covers a wide-range of small
entities, including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and
small governmental jurisdictions.
Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a proposed or
final rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. If the determination is that it will, the
Agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in
the RFA.
However, if an agency determines that a proposed or final rule is
not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the
head of the agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis
is not required. The certification must include a statement providing
the factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be
clear.
Three of the operators affected by the proposed AD are considered
small, that is, they employ fewer than 1,500 people. One of these
operators is a private corporation and the FAA is unable to ascertain
any financial information about it. The other two entities have
revenues in excess of $100 million. Two entities are not considered a
substantial number of small entities by Small Business Administration
criteria. Pursuant to the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the FAA certifies that
this proposed AD would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
[[Page 43969]]
The provisions of this proposed AD would have little or no impact
on trade for U.S. firms doing business in foreign countries and foreign
firms doing business in the United States.
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (the Act),
enacted as Pub. L. 104-4 on March 22, 1995, requires each Federal
agency, to the extent permitted by law, to prepare a written assessment
of the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final agency
rule that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100
million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year.
Section 204(a) of the Act, 2 U.S.C. 1534(a), requires the Federal
agency to develop an effective process to permit timely input by
elected officers (or their designees) of State, local, and tribal
governments on a proposed ``significant intergovernmental mandate.'' A
``significant intergovernmental mandate'' under the Act is any
provision in a Federal agency regulation that would impose an
enforceable duty upon State, local, and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, of $100 million (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one
year. Section 203 of the Act, 2 U.S.C. 1533, which supplements section
204(a), provides that before establishing any regulatory requirements
that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments, the
agency shall have developed a plan that, among other things, provides
for notice to potentially affected small governments, if any, and for a
meaningful and timely opportunity to provide input in the development
of regulatory proposals.
This proposed AD does not contain any Federal intergovernmental or
private sector mandate. Therefore, the requirements of Title II of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 do not apply.
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.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
McDonnell Douglas: Docket 99-NM-161-AD.
Applicability: Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83
(MD-83), DC-9-87 (MD-87) series airplanes; Model MD-90-30 series
airplanes; and MD-88 airplanes; manufacturer's fuselage numbers 1011
through 2241 inclusive; 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) 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 ensure that insulation blankets constructed of metallized
polyethyleneteraphthalate (MPET) are removed from the fuselage,
accomplish the following:
Inspection
(a) Within 4 years after the effective date of this AD,
determine whether, and at what locations, insulation blankets
constructed of MPET are installed. This determination shall be made
in a manner approved by the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate.
Note 2: Insulation blankets that are stamped with ``DMS 2072,
Type 2, Class 1, Grade A'' or ``DMS 1996, Type 1'' are constructed
of MPET.
Corrective Actions
(b) For insulation blankets that are determined not to be
constructed of MPET, no further action is required by this AD.
(c) For insulation blankets that are determined to be
constructed of MPET, within 4 years after the effective date of this
AD, replace the MPET insulation blankets with new insulation
blankets. The replacement procedures shall be done in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of McDonnell Douglas Service
Bulletin MD-90-25-015, Revision 01, dated November 5, 1997 (for
Model MD-90-30 series airplanes); or McDonnell Douglas Service
Bulletin MD80-25-355, Revision 01, dated November 5, 1997 (for Model
DC-9-80 series airplanes and Model MD-88 airplanes); as applicable.
The replacement insulation blankets must be constructed of materials
tested in accordance with Standard Test Method American Society for
Testing and Materials (ASTM) E648 and approved by the Manager, Los
Angeles ACO.
Note 3: Although this paragraph allows up to 4 years for the
required replacement, the FAA anticipates that operators will comply
at the earliest practicable maintenance opportunity.
Note 4: Only one of the two metallized Tedlar covers specified
in the service bulletins has been shown to have successfully passed
the testing of the ASTM flammability standard and is considered
acceptable for compliance with the requirements of paragraph (c) of
this AD.
Spares
(d) As of the effective date of this AD, no person shall install
an MPET insulation blanket on any airplane.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(e) 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 5: 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
(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 August 9, 1999.
D. L. Riggin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 99-20940 Filed 8-11-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
