[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 173 (Monday, September 8, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52864-52865]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-22707]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000-NM-192-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model MD-11 Series 
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This action withdraws a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 
that proposed a new airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to certain 
McDonnell Douglas Model MD-11 series airplanes. That action would have 
required an inspection to detect arcing damage of the electrical cables 
leading to the terminal strips and surrounding structure in the wing 
areas inboard of the pylons 1 and 3 and the No. 2 engine; and 
corrective actions, if necessary. That action also would have required 
revising the cable connection stackup of the terminal strips on the 
wings and No. 2 engine. Since the issuance of the NPRM, the Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA) has received new data indicating that the 
identified unsafe condition specified in NPRM does not exist on the 
affected airplanes. Accordingly, the proposed rule is withdrawn.

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: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal 
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to add a new airworthiness 
directive (AD), applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model MD-11 
series airplanes, was published in the Federal Register as a Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on February 20, 2001 (66 FR 10844). The 
proposed rule would have required an inspection to detect arcing damage 
of the electrical cables leading to the terminal strips and surrounding 
structure in the wing areas inboard of the pylons 1 and 3 and the No. 2 
engine; and corrective actions, if necessary. The proposed rule also 
would have required revising the cable connection stackup of the 
terminal strips on the wings and No. 2 engine. That action was prompted 
by 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. The proposed actions were intended 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.

Actions That Occurred Since the NPRM Was Issued

    Since the issuance of that NPRM, the results of an FAA analysis 
have revealed that there is a lack of materials and fuels in the 
vicinity of the terminal strips and

[[Page 52865]]

surrounding structure in the wing areas inboard of the pylons 1 and 3 
and the No. 2 engine, and that a fire in that area is highly unlikely. 
The probable result is that a power feed arc in the pylon area would 
typically damage and pit the feeder line and, perhaps, damage and pit 
the terminal bracket at the chafing location. As the arc current level 
increases, the electrical power system differential fault protection 
would detect this condition and disconnect electrical loads supplied to 
that particular feeder. In addition, the flightcrew would be alerted to 
this condition, allowing the operator/owner to correct the problem at 
the next maintenance interval. On the basis of this analysis, we have 
determined that the potential arcing on the terminal strips in the wing 
areas inboard of the pylons 1 and 3 and the No. 2 engine does not 
constitute an unsafe condition.

FAA's Conclusions

    Upon further consideration, we have determined that the identified 
unsafe condition does not exists on the affected airplanes. 
Accordingly, the proposed rule is hereby withdrawn.
    Withdrawal of this NPRM constitutes only such action, and does not 
preclude the agency from issuing another action in the future, nor does 
it commit the agency to any course of action in the future.

Regulatory Impact

    Since this action only withdraws a notice of proposed rulemaking, 
it is neither a proposed nor a final rule and therefore is not covered 
under Executive Order 12866, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, or DOT 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979).

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Withdrawal

    Accordingly, the notice of proposed rulemaking, Docket 2000-NM-192-
AD, published in the Federal Register on February 20, 2001 (66 FR 
10844), is withdrawn.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 29, 2003.
Vi L. Lipski,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 03-22707 Filed 9-5-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P