10846 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 20, 2001 / Proposed Rules

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–

192–AD.

Applicability: Model MD–11 series

airplanes, as listed in McDonnell Douglas

Alert Service Bulletin MD–1124A187, dated

October 4, 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 (c) 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 arcing damage to the terminal

strips and damage to the adjacent structure

in the wing areas inboard of the pylons 1 and

3 and the No. 2 engine, which could result

in a fire inboard of the pylons 1 and 3 or the

No. 2 engine, accomplish the following:

Inspection and Corrective Actions, If

Necessary

(a) Within 18 months after the effective

date of this AD, do a general visual

inspection to detect arcing damage of the

electrical cables leading to the terminal strips

and the surrounding structure in the wing

areas inboard of the pylons 1 and 3 and the

No. 2 engine, per McDonnell Douglas Alert

Service Bulletin MD11–24A187, dated

October 4, 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.’’

(1) If no arcing or structure damage is

detected during the general visual inspection,

before further flight, do the action specified

in paragraph (b) of this AD.

(2) If any arcing damage is detected on any

terminal strip, before further flight, replace

the damaged terminal strip with a like part,

and seal the screw heads of any replaced

terminal strip, per the service bulletin.

(3) If any arcing damage is detected on any

cable and the damage is within the limits

specified in the service bulletin, before

further flight, repair the arcing per the service

bulletin, and do the action specified in

paragraph (b) of this AD.

(4) If any arcing damage is detected on any

cable and the damage is beyond the limits

specified in the service bulletin, before

further flight, replace the damaged cable with

a new cable, per the service bulletin, and do

the action specified in paragraph (b) of this

AD.

(5) If any structure damage is detected,

before further flight, do the actions specified

in paragraphs (a)(5)(i) and (a)(5)(ii) of this

AD.

(i) Repair the damaged structure per the

service bulletin, except if the type of

structural material that has been affected is

not covered in the SRM, repair per a method

approved by the Manager, Los Angeles

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA.

(ii) Do the action specified in paragraph (b)

of this AD.

Follow-On Revision of the Cable Connection

Stackup

(b) Revise the cable connection stackup of

the terminal strips on the left and right wings

and the No. 2 engine (including performing

a general visual inspection for damaged cable

assemblies; repairing of any damaged cable

assembly; and tightening terminal lug

hardware), per paragraph 3.B.4. of the

Acomplishment Instructions of McDonnell

Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD11–

24A187, October 4, 2000.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(c) 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.

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

(d) 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. 01–4057 Filed 2–16–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–191–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 an inspection to detect arcing

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 20, 2001 / Proposed Rules 10847

damage of the electrical cables leading

to the hydraulic pump terminal strips

and the surrounding structure in the

wheel well area of the right main

landing gear (MLG); and corrective

actions, if necessary. This proposal also

would require replacement of a certain

terminal strip with a new terminal strip,

and removal of the applicable

nameplate in the wheel well of the right

MLG. This action is necessary to

prevent arcing damage to the terminal

strips and damage to the adjacent

structure of the wheel well area of the

right MLG, which could result in a fire

in the wheel well of the right MLG. 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–

191–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 also be sent via the Internet using

the following address: 9-anmnprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments sent

via fax or the Internet must contain

‘‘Docket No. 2000–NM–191–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;

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–191–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–191–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 arcing

occurred between the power feeder

cables and support bracket of the

terminal strips on a McDonnell Douglas

Model MD–11 series airplane.

Investigation revealed that inadequate

clearance exists between the terminal

strips and associated support brackets.

This condition, if not corrected, could

result in arcing damage to the terminal

strips and damage to the adjacent

structure of the wheel well area of the

right main landing gear (MLG), which

could result in a fire in the wheel well

of the right MLG.

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 AD is

one of a series of actions identified

during that process. The process is

continuing and the FAA may consider

additional rulemaking actions as further

results of the review become available.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

The FAA has reviewed and approved

McDonnell Douglas Alert Service

Bulletin MD11–24A186, dated October

4, 2000, which describes procedures for

a general visual inspection to detect

arcing damage of the electrical cables

leading to the terminal strip and the

surrounding structure in the wheel well

area of the right MLG; and corrective

actions, if necessary. The corrective

actions include replacing any damaged

terminal strip with a like part, and

sealing the screw heads of any replaced

terminal strip; repairing any arcing or

structure damage; and replacing any

damaged cable with a new cable. The

service bulletin also describes

procedures for replacement of a certain

terminal strip with a new terminal strip,

and removal of the applicable

nameplate in the wheel well of the right

MLG. 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; except as

discussed below.

Differences Between Proposed Rule and

Service Bulletin

Operators should note that the service

bulletin specifies to repair damaged

structure per the Structural Repair

Manual (SRM). However, the SRM does

10848 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 20, 2001 / Proposed Rules

not provide adequate procedures for

repair of certain structural material.

Therefore, this proposal would require

the repair of damaged structure that is

not covered in the SRM to be

accomplished per a method approved

by the FAA.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 191 Model

MD–11 series airplanes of the affected

design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA

estimates that 60 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 actions, and

that the average labor rate is $60 per

work hour. Required parts would cost

approximately $25 per airplane. Based

on these figures, the cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $5,100, or $85 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–

191–AD.

Applicability: Model MD–11 series

airplanes, as listed in McDonnell Douglas

Alert Service Bulletin MD11–24A186, dated

October 4, 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 (c) 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 arcing damage to the terminal

strips and damage to the adjacent structure

of the wheel well area of the right main

landing gear (MLG), which could result in a

fire in the wheel well of the right MLG,

accomplish the following:

Inspection and Corrective Actions, if

Necessary

(a) Within 18 months after the effective

date of this AD, do a general visual

inspection to detect arcing damage of the

electrical cables leading to the hydraulic

pump terminal strips and the surrounding

structure in the wheel well area of the right

MLG, per McDonnell Douglas Alert Service

Bulletin MD11–24A186, dated October 4,

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.’’

(1) If no arcing or structure damage is

detected during the general visual inspection,

before further flight, do the actions specified

in paragraph (b) of this AD.

(2) If any arcing damage is detected on any

terminal strip, before further flight, replace

the damaged terminal strip with a like part,

and seal the screw heads of any replaced

terminal strip, per the service bulletin.

(3) If any arcing damage is detected on any

cable and the damage within the limits

specified in the service bulletin, before

further flight, repair the arcing damage per

the service bulletin, and do the actions

specified in paragraph (b) of this AD.

(4) If any arcing damage is detected on any

cable and the damage beyond the limits

specified in the service bulletin, before

further flight, replace the damaged cable with

a new cable per the service bulletin, and do

the actions specified in paragraph (b) of this

AD.

(5) If any structure damage is detected,

before further flight, do the actions specified

in paragarphs (a)(5)(i) and (a)(5)(ii) of this

AD.

(i) Repair the damaged structure per the

service bulletin; except if the type of

structural material that has been affected is

not covered in the SRM, repair per a method

approved by the Manager, Los Angeles

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA.

(ii) Do the actions specified in paragraph

(b) of this AD.

Follow-On Replacement and Removal of

Nameplate, if Necessary

(b) Do the actions specified in paragraphs

(b)(1) and (b)(2) of this AD per McDonnell

Douglas Alert Service Bulletin MD11–

24A186, October 4, 2000.

(1) Replace any terminal strip identified in

Table 1 of this AD with a base thickness of

0.445 inches or less that have 1⁄4-inch or

larger studs and/or 4 through 000 gauge size

terminal lugs with a new terminal strip.

Table 1 is as follows:

TABLE 1

Item No. System Location

S3–261 ....... Aux hydraulic

pump 1.

Wheel well of

the right

MLG (looking forward).

(2) Remove the applicable nameplate in the

wheel well of the right MLG.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(c) 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

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 20, 2001 / Proposed Rules 10849

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

(d) 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. 01–4056 Filed 2–16–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–190–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

supersedure of an existing airworthiness

directive (AD), applicable to certain

McDonnell Douglas Model MD–11

series airplanes, that currently requires

a one-time inspection to detect riding,

chafing, or damage of the wire bundles

adjacent to the disconnect panel bracket

of the observer’s station. That AD also

requires repair or replacement of

damaged wires with new or serviceable

wires; installation of anti-chafing

sleeving on the wire bundles, if

necessary; and installation of a grommet

along the entire upper aft edge of the

disconnect panel bracket. This action

would require an identical one-time

inspection, follow-on actions, and

similar corrective actions, if necessary;

but the proposed installation of antichafing sleeving would be required for

all airplanes. This action is necessary to

detect riding or chafing of the wire

bundles adjacent to the disconnect

panel bracket assembly, which could

result in a fire in the wire bundles and

smoke in the cockpit. 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–

190–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 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–

190–AD’’ in the subject line and need

not be submitted in triplicate.

Comments sent via the Internet as

attached electronic files must be

formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for

Windows or ASCII text.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Boeing Commercial Aircraft Group,

Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood

Boulevard, Long Beach, California

90846, Attention: Technical

Publications Business Administration,

Dept. C1–L51 (2–60). This information

may be examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Brett Portwood, Aerospace Engineer,

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–

130L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712;

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–190–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–190–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

On May 5, 1997, the FAA issued AD

97–10–12, amendment 39–10024 (62 FR

25839, May 12, 1997), applicable to

certain McDonnell Douglas Model MD–

11 series airplanes, to require a one-time

inspection to detect riding, chafing, or

damage of the wire bundles adjacent to

the disconnect panel bracket of the

observer’s station. That AD also requires

repair or replacement of damaged wires

with new or serviceable wires;

installation of anti-chafing sleeving on

the wire bundles, if necessary; and

installation of a grommet along the

entire upper aft edge of the disconnect

panel bracket. That action was

prompted by a report indicating that the

circuit breakers tripped on a Model

MD–11 series airplane due to inflight

arcing behind the avionics circuit

breaker panel as a result of chafing of

the wire bundles adjacent to the

disconnect panel bracket assembly. The

requirements of that AD are intended to

detect and correct such chafing, which

could result in a fire in the wire bundles

and smoke in the cockpit.

The incident that prompted AD 97–

10–12 is not considered to be related to

an accident that occurred off the coast

of Nova Scotia involving a McDonnell