### 13301 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2016–4223; Directorate Identifier 2015–NM–108–AD]** 

**RIN 2120–AA64**

**Airworthiness Directives; Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation Airplanes** 

**AGENCY :**  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

**ACTION :**  Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

**SUMMARY :**  We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation Model GV and GV–SP airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a new revision to the airworthiness limitations of the maintenance planning document based on fatigue and damage tolerance testing, and updated analysis. This proposed AD would require revising the maintenance or inspection program to update inspection requirements and life limits that address fatigue cracking of principal structural elements (PSEs). We are proposing this AD to ensure fatigue cracking of PSEs is detected and corrected; such fatigue cracking could result in reduced structural integrity of the PSEs and critical components.

**DATES :**  We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 28, 2016.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

• Fax: 202–493–2251.

• Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation, Technical Publications Dept., P.O. Box 2206, Savannah, GA 31402–2206; telephone: 800–810–4853; fax: 912–965–3520; email: pubs@gulfstream.com; Internet: http://www.gulfstream.com/product

_ support/technical

_

pubs/pubs/ index.htm. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA–2016– 4223; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is in the

**ADDRESSES** section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Ronald Wissing, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ACE–117A, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; phone: 404–474–5552; fax: 404–474–5606; email: ronald.wissing@faa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 
Comments Invited

We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the **ADDRESSES** section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 2016–4223; Directorate Identifier 2015– NM–108–AD’’ at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD because of those
comments.

We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

We received a new revision to the airworthiness limitations of the maintenance planning document based on fatigue and damage tolerance testing, and updated analysis. The airworthiness limitations of the maintenance planning document update inspection requirements and life limits that address fatigue cracking of PSEs. We determined that these actions are necessary to address the identified unsafe condition. This condition, if not corrected, could result in fatigue cracking of PSEs, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the PSEs and critical components.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

We reviewed Gulfstream Document GV–GER–9973, Summary of Changes to the GV Series Airworthiness Limitations, Revision C, dated January 8, 2015. The service information describes inspection requirements and life limits that address fatigue cracking of the PSEs. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the

**ADDRESSES** section.

FAA’s Determination

We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design. Proposed AD Requirements

This proposed AD would require revising the maintenance or inspection program to update inspection requirements and life limits to detect fatigue cracking of PSEs.

This proposed AD would require revisions to certain operator maintenance documents to include new actions ( e.g., inspections). Compliance with these actions is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in the areas addressed by this AD, the operator may not be able to accomplish the actions described in the revisions. In this situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request approval for an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) according to paragraph (i) of this AD. The request should include a description of changes to the required actions that will ensure the continued operational safety of the airplane. Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

Section 4.0, ‘‘Excluded Aircraft Due to Special Operation or Modifications,’’ of Gulfstream Document GV–GER–9973, Summary of Changes to the GV Series Airworthiness Limitations, Revision C, dated January 8, 2015, states that aircraft on which the listed supplemental type certificates (STCs) have been accomplished are excluded from the effectivity of that document. However, we have determined that these airplanes could have inspections and limits specified in Gulfstream Document GV–


### 13302 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules

GER–9973, Summary of Changes to the GV Series Airworthiness Limitations, Revision C, dated January 8, 2015, that are applicable and, therefore, those airplanes are included in the applicability of this proposed AD. The referenced STCs provide a specific airworthiness limitation section (ALS). An operator that has one of these STCs installed may be able to review their installation and the ALS revisions being mandated, and develop an alternate program. The alternate program may be submitted for approval as an AMOC under the provisions of paragraph (i) of this proposed AD. We have coordinated this difference with Gulfstream. Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this proposed AD affects 392 airplanes of U.S. registry.

We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:



### E STIMATED 

### COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. operators

Revise the maintenance or inspection program ...... 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 ............... $0 $85 $33,320.

Authority for This Rulemaking

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA’s authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency’s authority.

We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings

We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD 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.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify 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),

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and

(4) 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. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 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. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):
Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation: Docket No. FAA–2016–4223; Directorate Identifier 2015–NM–108–AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

We must receive comments by April 28,
2016.
(b) Affected ADs

None. (c) Applicability

This AD applies to Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation Model GV airplanes, serial numbers 501 through 693 inclusive and serial number 699; and Model GV–SP airplanes, serial numbers 5001 through 5433 inclusive; certificated in any category.
(d) Subject

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32, Landing Gear; 53, Fuselage; 54, Nacelles/Pylons; 55, Stabilizers; and 57, Wings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

This AD was prompted by a new revision to the airworthiness limitations of the maintenance planning document based on fatigue and damage tolerance testing, and updated analysis. We are issuing this AD to ensure fatigue cracking of principal structural elements (PSEs) is detected and corrected; such fatigue cracking could result in reduced structural integrity of the PSEs and critical components. (f) Compliance

Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
(g) Revise Maintenance or Inspection Program

Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, revise the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate the airworthiness limitations specified in Gulfstream Document GV–GER– 9973, Summary of Changes to the GV Series Airworthiness Limitations, Revision C, dated January 8, 2015. The initial compliance times for the tasks identified in Gulfstream Document GV–GER–9973, Summary of Changes to the GV Series Airworthiness Limitations, Revision C, dated January 8, 2015, are at the applicable times specified in Gulfstream Document GV–GER–9973, Summary of Changes to the GV Series Airworthiness Limitations, Revision C, dated January 8, 2015, or within twelve months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

Note 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD: For Model GV airplanes, the airplane maintenance manual (AMM) is currently at Revision 43, dated February 15, 2015. For Model GV–SP airplanes, the G500 AMM is currently at Revision 24, dated February 15, 2015, and the G550 AMM is currently at Revision 24, dated February 15, 2015.

(h) No Alternative Actions or Intervals

After the maintenance or inspection program has been revised as required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative actions ( e.g., inspections) or intervals may be used unless the actions or intervals are approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (i) of this AD. (i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

(1) The Manager, Atlanta ACO, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as


### 13303 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules

appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD.

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/ certificate holding district office.
(j) Related Information

(1) For more information about this AD, contact Ronald Wissing, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ACE–117A, FAA, Atlanta ACO, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; phone: 404–474–5552; fax: 404– 474–5606; email: ronald.wissing@faa.gov.

(2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation, Technical Publications Dept., P.O. Box 2206, Savannah, GA 31402–2206; telephone: 800–810–4853; fax: 912–965– 3520; email: pubs@gulfstream.com; Internet: http://www.gulfstream.com/product

_ support/technical

_ pubs/pubs/index.htm. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425–227–1221.

Issued in Renton, WA, on March 3, 2016. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–05606 Filed 3–11–16; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2009–0559; Directorate Identifier 2008–SW–66–AD]** 

**RIN 2120–AA64**

**Airworthiness Directives; Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (Sikorsky)**  **Helicopters**

**AGENCY :**  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule; withdrawal.

**SUMMARY :**  The FAA is withdrawing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). The NPRM proposed a new airworthiness directive (AD) for Sikorsky Model S–92A helicopters. The proposed action would have required revising the Limitations section of the Rotorcraft Flight Manual (RFM) to clarify that the Model S–92A helicopter was certificated as a transport category rotorcraft in both Categories A and B with different operating limitations for each category and must be operated accordingly. Since we issued the NPRM, we have determined that operating the helicopter in Category B with 10 or more passenger seats is not an unsafe condition but an inconsistency with 14 CFR 29.1(c). Accordingly, we withdraw the proposed rule.

**DATES :**  As of March 14, 2016, the proposed rule to amend 14 CFR part 39 published June 19, 2009 (74 FR 29148) is withdrawn.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  John Coffey, Flight Test Engineer, Boston Aircraft Certification Office, Engine & Propeller Directorate, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803; telephone (781) 238–7173; email john.coffey@faa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  The FAA proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 to add a new AD (74 FR 29148, June 19, 2009) for Sikorsky Model S–92A helicopters. The NPRM proposed to require revising the Limitations section of the RFM by clarifying that the Model S–92A helicopter was certificated as a transport category rotorcraft in both Categories A and B with different operating limitations for each category and must be operated accordingly. When the Model S–92A is configured with 10 or more passenger seats, it is a Category A helicopter, and operators must follow the limitations for Category A. When it is configured with 9 or fewer passenger seats, it may be considered a Category B helicopter, and operators may follow the less stringent Category B limitations. At the time the NPRM was published, the limitation language in the RFM did not make a clear distinction between Category A and Category B based on the seating configuration. The proposed actions were intended to prevent operating under less stringent requirements.
Actions Since NPRM (74 FR 29148, June 19, 2009) Was Issued

Since we issued the NPRM (74 FR 29148, June 19, 2009), one commenter noted the proposed AD misinterprets certification rules as operational rules.We considered the comment and reevaluated the details that went into the determination of the unsafe condition for this concern. We determined that operating the helicopter in Category B with 10 or more passengers is not an unsafe condition, and the associated level of risk does not warrant AD action. Rather, this was an inconsistency with 14 CFR 29.1(c). Sikorsky has since revised the RFM to clarify that a helicopter configured with a maximum of 19 passenger seats must be operated as a Category A but if configured with 9 or fewer passenger seats may be operated as a Category B. This action mitigates the inconsistency with 14 CFR 29.1(c).

Withdrawal of the NPRM constitutes only such action and does not preclude the agency from issuing another notice in the future nor does it commit the agency to any course of action in the future.

Since this action only withdraws an NPRM, it is neither a proposed nor a final rule; therefore, it 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, Incorporation by reference, Safety.

The Withdrawal

Accordingly, the notice of proposed rulemaking, Docket No. FAA–2009– 0559; Directorate Identifier 2008–SW– 66–AD, published in the Federal Register on June 19, 2009 (74 FR 29148), is withdrawn.

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on March 4,
2016. Scott A. Horn, Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–05517 Filed 3–11–16; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE**

**National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration** 

**15 CFR Part 922**

**[Docket No. 140207122–4122–01]**

**RIN 0648–BD97**

**Withdrawal of Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National Marine**  **Sanctuary Proposed Regulations**

**AGENCY :**  Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce (DOC).

**ACTION :**  Notice of proposed rulemaking; withdrawal.

**SUMMARY :**  This action withdraws a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published in the Federal Register on March 26, 2015 (80 FR 16224), to amend the regulations for the Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National Marine Sanctuary (HIHWNMS or sanctuary) and to revise the sanctuary’s terms of designation and management plan.