### 8919 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 32 / Wednesday, February 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules

following special conditions as part of the type certification basis for the GVI airplanes.

1. In lieu of compliance with § 25.335(b)(1), if the flight control system includes functions that act automatically to initiate recovery before the end of the 20 second period specified in § 25.335(b)(1), VD /M D must be determined from the greater of the speeds resulting from conditions (a) and (b) below. The speed increase occurring in these maneuvers may be calculated if reliable or conservative aerodynamic data are used.

(a) From an initial condition of stabilized flight at V C /M C , the airplane is upset so as to take up a new flight path 7.5 degrees below the initial path. Control application, up to full authority, is made to try to maintain this new flight path. Twenty seconds after initiating the upset, manual recovery is made at a load factor of 1.5 g (0.5 acceleration increment), or a greater load factor that is automatically applied by the system with the pilot’s pitch control neutral. Power, as specified in § 25.175(b)(1)(iv), is assumed until recovery is initiated, at which time power reduction and the use of pilot controlled drag devices may be used.

(b) From a speed below V C /M C , with power to maintain stabilized level flight at this speed, the airplane is upset so as to accelerate through V C /M C at a flight path 15 degrees below the initial path (or at the steepest nose down attitude that the system will permit with full control authority if less than 15 degrees). The pilot’s controls may be in the neutral position after reaching V C /M C and before recovery is initiated. Recovery may be initiated three seconds after operation of high speed warning system by application of a load factor of 1.5g (0.5 acceleration increment), or such greater load factor that is automatically applied by the system with the pilot’s pitch control neutral. Power may be reduced simultaneously. All other means of decelerating the airplane, the use of which are authorized up to the highest speed reached in the maneuver, may be used. The interval between successive pilot actions must not be less than one second.

2. The applicant must also demonstrate that the speed margin, established as above, will not be exceeded in inadvertent or gust induced upsets resulting in initiation of the dive from non-symmetric attitudes, unless the airplane is protected by the flightcontrol laws from getting into nonsymmetric upset conditions. The upset maneuvers described in Advisory Circular 25–7A, Change 1, section 32, paragraphs c.(3)(i) and (iii) may be used to comply with this requirement.

3. Any failure of the high speed protection system that would affect the speed margin determined by paragraphs 1. and 2. must be improbable (occur at a rate less than 10 -5 per flight hour).

4. Failures of the system must be annunciated to the pilots, and flight manual instructions must be provided to reduce the maximum operating speeds, VMO /MMO . The operating speed must be reduced to a value that maintains a speed margin between VMO /MMO and VD /M D that is consistent with showing compliance with § 25.335(b) without the benefit of the high speed protection system.

5. Master minimum equipment list (MMEL) relief for the high speed protection system may be considered by the FAA Flight Operations Evaluation Board (FOEB) provided that the flight manual instructions indicate reduced maximum operating speeds as described in paragraph 4., and that no additional hazards are introduced with the high speed protection system inoperative. In addition, the cockpit display of the reduced operating speeds, as well as the overspeed warning for exceeding those speeds, must be equivalent to that of the normal airplane with the high speed protection system operative.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 3, 2011. Jeffrey E. Duven, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–3412 Filed 2–15–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2011–0042; Directorate Identifier 2010–NM–267–AD]** 

**RIN 2120–AA64**

**Airworthiness Directives; DASSAULT AVIATION Model MYSTERE-FALCON**  **50 Airplanes**

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

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

**SUMMARY :**  We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the products listed above that would supersede an existing AD. This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

On two occurrences on Myste ` re-Falcon 50 aeroplanes in service, it was detected that two pipes of the emergency brake system #2 located near the nose landing gear bearing were swapped.

The swapping of these two pipes implies that when the Left Hand (LH) brake pedal is depressed, the Right Hand (RH) brake unit is activated, and conversely, when the RH brake pedal is depressed, the LH brake unit is actuated. This constitutes an unsafe condition, which may go unnoticed as the condition is latent until the emergency brake system #2 is used. This condition, if not corrected, could ultimately lead to a runway excursion of the aeroplane.

* * * * * The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

**DATES :**  We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 4, 2011.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may send comments 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: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–40, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Dassault Falcon Jet, P.O. Box 2000, South Hackensack, New Jersey 07606; telephone 201–440–6700; Internet http://www.dassaultfalcon.com. You may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. 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; or in person at the Docket Operations office 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 Operations


### 8920 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 32 / Wednesday, February 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules

office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is in the **ADDRESSES** section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–1137; fax (425) 227–1149.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 
Comments Invited

We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the

**ADDRESSES** section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2011–0042; Directorate Identifier 2010–NM–267–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 based on 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

On November 15, 2010, we issued AD 2010–24–08, Amendment 39–16527 (75 FR 71530, November 24, 2010). That AD required actions intended to address anunsafe condition on Model MYSTEREFALCON 50 Airplanes.

In AD 2010–24–08, we pointed out that the corresponding EASA AD, AD 2010–0208–E, dated October 12, 2010, requires painting the pipes end of the emergency brake system number 2 and related unions within 7 months after the effective date of that AD. We explained that AD 2010–24–08 did not require that action, and that we might consider additional rulemaking to require this action in the future. We have determined that further rulemaking is indeed necessary to require that action, and this AD follows from that determination.

You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket. FAA’s Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information provided in the MCAI and related service information.

We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are highlighted in a Note within the proposed AD. Costs of Compliance

Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD would affect about 248 products of U.S. registry.

The actions that are required by AD 2010–24–08 and retained in this proposed AD take about 2 work-hours per product, at an average labor rate of $85 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the currently required actions is $170 per product.

We estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product to comply with the new basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $21,080, or $85 per product. 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); and

3. 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.

We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. 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 removing Amendment 39–16527 (75 FR 71530, November 24, 2010) and adding the following new AD:

Dassault Aviation: Docket No. FAA–2011– 0042; Directorate Identifier 2010–NM– 267–AD.

Comments Due Date

(a) We must receive comments by April 4,
2011.

Affected ADs

(b) This AD supersedes AD 2010–24–08, Amendment 39–16527.


### 8921 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 32 / Wednesday, February 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Applicability

(c) This AD applies to DASSAULT AVIATION Model MYSTERE–FALCON 50 airplanes, certificated in any category, all serial numbers.
Subject

(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32: Landing Gear.

Reason

(e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) states:

On two occurrences on Myste ` re-Falcon 50 aeroplanes in service, it was detected that two pipes of the emergency brake system #2 located near the nose landing gear bearing were swapped.

The swapping of these two pipes implies that when the Left Hand (LH) brake pedal is depressed, the Right Hand (RH) brake unit is activated, and conversely, when the RH brake pedal is depressed, the LH brake unit is actuated. This constitutes an unsafe condition, which may go unnoticed as the condition is latent until the emergency brake system #2 is used. This condition, if not corrected, could ultimately lead to a runway excursion of the aeroplane.
Compliance

(f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done.
Restatement of Requirements of AD 2010–
24–08

Actions

(g) Within 7 days after December 9, 2010 (the effective date of AD 2010–24–08), do a general visual inspection for correct installation (as defined in Dassault Service Bulletin F50–515, dated October 12, 2010) of the emergency brake system number 2, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Dassault Service Bulletin F50–515, dated October 12, 2010, except that work required by this AD can only be done by persons prescribed in 14 CFR 43.3 and
43.7.

(h) If the emergency brake system number 2 is found installed incorrectly during the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD: Before further flight, install the emergency brake system number 2 correctly, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Dassault Service Bulletin F50–515, dated October 12, 2010.
New Requirements of This AD

(i) Within 7 months after the effective date of this AD, paint the pipe ends of the emergency brake system #2 and related unions, in accordance with paragraph 2.C. of the Accomplishment Instructions of Dassault Service Bulletin F50–515, dated October 12,
2010.

FAA AD Differences

Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information as follows:

(1) European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2010–0208–E, dated October 12, 2010, has a compliance time of ‘‘before the next flight after the effective date of this AD. ’’ This AD requires that the actions be done within 7 days after the effective date of AD

2010–24–08.

(2) EASA AD 2010–0208–E, dated October 12, 2010, allows the flightcrew to inspect the emergency brake system number 2 specified in accordance with Dassault Service Bulletin F50–515, dated October 12, 2010. However, this AD requires the inspection to be performed by certificated maintenance personnel.

Other FAA AD Provisions

(j) The following provisions also apply to this AD:

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 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 appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Branch, send it to Attn: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057– 3356; telephone (425) 227–1137; fax (425) 227–1149. 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. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority (or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service.

Related Information

(k) Refer to MCAI EASA AD 2010–0208– E, dated October 12, 2010; and Dassault Service Bulletin F50–515, dated October 12, 2010; for related information.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February
7, 2011.

Kalene C. Yanamura, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 2011–3532 Filed 2–15–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION** 

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 71**

**[Docket No. FAA–2011–0016; Airspace Docket No. 11–ANM–1]** 

**Proposed Modification of Class E Airspace; Poplar, MT** 

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

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

**SUMMARY :**  This action proposes to modify Class E airspace at Poplar Municipal Airport, Poplar, MT. The airport was moved 1.5 nautical miles (NM) to the northeast. Controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate aircraft using new Area Navigation (RNAV) Global Positioning System (GPS) standard instrument approach procedures at Poplar Municipal Airport, Poplar, MT. The FAA is proposing this action to enhance the safety and management of aircraft operations at Poplar Municipal Airport, Poplar, MT. This will also correct the airport name from Poplar Airport.

**DATES :**  Comments must be received on or before April 4, 2011.

**ADDRESSES :**  Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202) 366–9826. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA–2011–0016; Airspace Docket No. 11–ANM–1, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone (425) 203–4537.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 
Comments Invited

Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.