10858 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 20, 2001 / Proposed Rules

estimates that 24 airplanes of U.S.

registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 2 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. Required parts

would be supplied by the airplane

manufacturer at no cost to the operators.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $2,880, or $120 per

airplane.

The cost impact figure discussed

above is 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 proposed 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

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

McDonnell Douglas: Docket 2000–NM–186–

AD.

Applicability: Model MD–11 series

airplanes, as listed in Boeing Alert Service

Bulletin MD11–24A189, dated June 22, 2000;

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 (b) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent possible overheating of cargo

control unit (CCU) components, which could

result in smoke and/or fire in the cargo

compartment, accomplish the following:

Replacement or Reidentification

(a) Within 6 months after the effective date

of this AD, do the applicable actions

specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of

this AD per Boeing Alert Service Bulletin

MD11–24A189, dated June 22, 2000.

(1) For airplanes identified as Group 1 and

Group 2 in the service bulletin: Replace the

cargo roller circuit breakers with new circuit

breakers.

(2) For airplane identified as Group 2 in

the service bulletin: Reidentify the aft circuit

breaker panel.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(b) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager, 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.

Special Flight Permit

(c) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February

12, 2001.

Vi L. Lipski,

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–4051 Filed 2–16–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–185–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model MD–11 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 McDonnell Douglas Model MD–

11 series airplanes. This proposal would

require a one-time general visual

inspection of the electrical wiring of the

right side of the cockpit to determine if

the electrical wiring is chafing against

the observer station and to detect

damaged wires; and corrective actions,

if necessary. This action is necessary to

prevent chafing and damage to electrical

wires of the cockpit and consequent

electrical arcing due to wires that were

routed improperly during production of

the airplane, which could result in fire

and smoke in the airplane. This action

is intended to address the identified

unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by

April 6, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

185–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, except Federal

holidays. Comments may be submitted

via fax to (425) 227–1232. Comments

may be submitted via fax to (425) 227–

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 20, 2001 / Proposed Rules 10859

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–

185–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; or at

the FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Brett Portwood, Aerospace Engineer,

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–

130L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California

90712–4137; telephone (562) 627–5350;

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–185–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–185–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, during

an inspection, electrical wires were

found chafing on the right side of the

cockpit against the observer station.

This incident occurred on a McDonnell

Douglas Model MD–11 series airplane.

Investigation revealed that the wires

were routed improperly during

production of the airplane. This

condition, if not corrected, could result

in chafing and damage to electrical

wires of the cockpit and consequent

electrical arcing, which could result in

fire and smoke in the airplane.

This incident is not considered to be

related to an accident that occurred off

the coast of Nova Scotia involving a

McDonnell Douglas Model MD–11

series airplane. The cause of that

accident is still under investigation.

Other Related Rulemaking

The FAA, in conjunction with Boeing

and operators of Model MD–11 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

airworthiness directive (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

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11–

24A117, dated May 18, 2000, which

describes procedures for a one-time

general visual inspection of the

electrical wiring of the right side of the

cockpit to determine if the electrical

wiring is chafing against the observer

station and to detect damaged wires;

and corrective actions, if necessary. The

corrective actions include loosening

wire clamps; repositioning wires;

tightening wire clamps; repairing

damaged insulation; and replacing

damaged wires with new wires.

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.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 148 Model

MD–11 series airplanes of the affected

design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA

estimates that 43 airplanes of U.S.

registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 1 work hour per airplane

to accomplish the proposed inspection,

and that the average labor rate is $60 per

work hour. Based on these figures, the

cost impact of the inspection proposed

by this AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $2,580, or $60 per

airplane.

The cost impact figure discussed

above is 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 proposed 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

10860 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 20, 2001 / Proposed Rules

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

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

McDonnell Douglas: Docket 2000–NM–185–

AD.

Applicability: Model MD–11 series

airplanes, as listed in Boeing Alert Service

Bulletin MD11–24A117, dated May 18, 2000;

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 prevent chafing and damage to

electrical wires of the cockpit and

consequent electrical arcing due to wires that

were routed improperly during production of

the airplane, which could result in fire and

smoke in the airplane, accomplish the

following:

One-Time General Visual Inspection

(a) Within 6 months after the effective date

of this AD, do a one-time general visual

inspection of the electrical wiring of the right

side of the cockpit to determine if the

electrical wiring is chafing against the

observer station and to detect damaged wires,

per Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11–

24A117, dated May 18, 2000.

Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a

general visual inspection is defined as ‘‘A

visual examination of an interior or exterior

area, installation, or assembly to detect

obvious damage, failure, or irregularity. This

level of inspection is made under normally

available lighting conditions such as

daylight, hangar lighting, flashlight, or droplight, and may require removal or opening of

access panels or doors. Stands, ladders, or

platforms may be required to gain proximity

to the area being checked.’’

Condition 1 (No Chafing)

(b) If all electrical wires are found not to

be chafing against the observer station during

the inspection required by paragraph (a) of

this AD, no further action is required by this

AD.

Condition 2 (Chafing and No Wire Damage)

(c) If any electrical wire is found to be

chafing against the observer station and if no

wire is found damaged during the inspection

required by paragraph (a) of this AD, before

further flight, loosen the wire clamps,

reposition the wires, and tighten the wire

clamps, per Boeing Alert Service Bulletin

MD11–24A117, dated May 18, 2000.

Condition 3 (Chafing and Wire Damage)

(d) If any electrical wire is found to be

chafing against the observer station and if

any wire is found damaged during the

inspection required by paragraph (a) of this

AD, before further flight, do the action

specified in paragraph (d)(1) or (d)(2) of this

AD, as applicable, AND do the action

specified in paragraph (d)(3) of this AD; per

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD11–24A117,

dated May 18, 2000.

(1) For damage within repairable limits:

Repair damaged insulation.

(2) For damage outside repairable limits:

Replace damaged wires with new wires.

(3) Loosen the wire clamps, reposition the

wires, and tighten the wire clamps.

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 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 3: 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 Permit

(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

12, 2001.

Vi L. Lipski,

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–4050 Filed 2–16–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 00–AEA–16]

Establishment of Class E Airspace;

South Albany, NY

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: This notice proposes to

establish Class E airspace at South

Albany, NY. An Area Navigation

(RNAV) GPS approach, has been

developed for South Albany Airport,

South Bethlehem, NY. Controlled

airspace extending upward from 700

feet Above Ground Level (AGL) is

needed to contain aircraft executing an

instrument approach. The area would be

depicted on aeronautical charts for pilot

reference.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before March 22, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on the

proposal in triplicate to: Manager,

Airspace Branch, AEA–520, Docket No.

00–AEA–16, F.A.A. Eastern Region, 1

Aviation Plaza, Jamaica, NY 11434–

4809.

The official docket may be examined

in the Office of the Regional Counsel,

AEA–7, F.A.A. Eastern Region, 1

Aviation Plaza, Jamaica, NY 11434–

4809. An informal docket may also be

examined during normal business hours

in the Airspace Branch, AEA–520,

F.A.A. Eastern Region, 1 Aviation Plaza,

Jamaica, NY 11434–4809.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Francis T. Jordan, Jr., Airspace

Specialist, Airspace Branch, AEA–520,

F.A.A. Eastern Region, 1 Aviation Plaza,

Jamaica, NY 11434–4809; telephone:

(718) 553–4521.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: