Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 109 / Wednesday, June 6, 2001 / Proposed Rules 30343

after the effective date of this AD where

the HPT assembly is sufficiently

disassembled to afford access to the

stage 2 HPT aft cooling plate, but not

later than 4,500 part cycles-since-new

(CSN) in accordance with the ASB

described previously.

Economic Impact

There are approximately ten engines

of the affected design in the worldwide

fleet. The FAA estimates that nine

engines installed on airplanes of US

registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately four work hours per

engine to accomplish the proposed

inspection if the inspection did not take

place during scheduled maintenance,

and that the average labor rate is $60 per

work hour. Required parts would cost

approximately $1,536 per engine. Based

on these figures, the total cost impact of

the proposed AD on US operators is

estimated to be $15,484.

Regulatory Impact

This proposed rule does not have

federalism implications, as defined in

Executive Order 13132, because it

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.

Accordingly, the FAA has not consulted

with state authorities prior to

publication of this proposed rule.

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.

Adoption of the 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

removing Amendment 39–11497 (65 FR

691, January 6, 2000), and by adding a

new airworthiness directive, to read as

follows:

CFE Company: Docket No. 99–NE–39–AD.

Revises AD 99–27–16, Amendment 39–

11497.

Applicability

This airworthiness directive (AD) is

applicable to CFE Model CFE738–1–1B

turbofan engines, part number (P/N)

3050000–5, with gas generator modules P/N

6091T09G01, serial numbers (SN’s) 800421,

800422, 800423, 800424, 800425, 800426,

800427, 800428, 800429, and 800430

installed. These modules are currently

installed in engine SN’s 105323, 105324,

105325, 105326, 105328, 105329, 105331,

105332, 105333, and 105392. These engines

are installed on, but not limited to DassaultBreguet Falcon 2000 series airplanes.

Note 1: This AD applies to each engine

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

engines 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

Compliance with this AD is required as

indicated, unless already done.

To prevent stage 2 high pressure turbine

(HPT) aft cooling plate failure, which could

result in an uncontained engine failure and

damage to the airplane, accomplish the

following:

Inspections and Follow-On Actions

(a) At the next engine shop visit after the

effective date of this AD where the HPT

assembly is sufficiently disassembled to

afford access to the Stage 2 HPT aft cooling

plate, but not later than 4,500 part cyclessince-new (CSN), accomplish the following:

(1) Inspect the stage 2 HPT aft cooling plate

for nicks, dents, and scratches on surface D

in accordance with the requirements of CFE

Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. CFE738–

A72–8031, Revision 2, dated October 17,

2000, paragraph 2.B.(1).

(2) Repair those stage 2 HPT aft cooling

plates with indentation 0.003 inch deep or

less in accordance with ASB No. CFE738–

A72–8031, Revision 2, dated October 17,

2000, paragraph 2.B.(1).

(3) Remove from service prior to further

flight those stage 2 HPT aft cooling plates

that have nicks, dents, and/or scratches that

exceed the acceptance limits in accordance

with ASB No. CFE738–A72–8031, Revision

2, dated October 17, 2000, paragraph 2.B.(1),

and replace with serviceable parts.

(4) Inspect the stage 2 HPT rotor disk post

aft mating surface for raised metal, and

remove raised metal if present in accordance

with ASB No. CFE738–A72–8031, Revision

2, dated October 17, 2000, paragraph 2.B.(2).

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, Engine

Certification Office (ECO). Operators shall

submit their request through an appropriate

FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who

may add comments and then send it to the

Manager, ECO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this airworthiness directive,

if any, may be obtained from the ECO.

Special Flight Permits

(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 inspection requirements

of this AD can be accomplished.

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on

May 25, 2001.

Jay J. Pardee,

Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–14146 Filed 6–5–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–143–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Gulfstream

Aerospace Corporation Model G–159

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 all

Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation

Model G–159 airplanes. This proposal

would require repetitive non-destructive

testing inspections to detect corrosion of

the skin of certain structural assemblies,

and corrective action, if necessary. This

30344 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 109 / Wednesday, June 6, 2001 / Proposed Rules

proposal also would require x-ray and

ultrasonic inspections to detect

corrosion and cracking of the splicing of

certain structural assemblies, and repair,

if necessary. This action is necessary to

detect and correct corrosion of the skin

of certain structural assemblies, which

could cause local instability failures of

the wing under certain load conditions

and result in degradation of wing

capability. This action is intended to

address the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by

July 23, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 96–NM–

143–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00

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. 96–NM–143–

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

Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation, P.O.

Box 2206, M/S D–10, Savannah, Georgia

31402–9980. This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at

the FAA, Wichita Aircraft Certification

Office, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100,

Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Neil

Berryman, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ACE–

117A, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft

Certification Office, One Crown Center,

1895 Phoenix Boulevard, suite 450,

Atlanta, Georgia 30337–2748; telephone

(770) 703–6087; fax (770) 703–6097.

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 96–NM–143–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.

96–NM–143–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The method of fabrication on

Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation

Model G–159 airplanes of spotwelding

to join two layers of material precludes

the use of any corrosion inhibitor on the

faying surfaces. Therefore, corrosion can

form by the entrance and entrapment of

moisture or other corrosive agents

between layers of the metal. The FAA

has received reports that exfoliation

corrosion has been found in the lower

layer of the lower wing plank splices.

This corrosion typically follows the

grain boundaries into the ramp-up area.

As a consequence of such corrosion,

cracking may occur in the risers

adjacent to the splices of the lower wing

planks. This action is necessary to

detect and correct corrosion of the skin

of certain structural assemblies, which

could cause local instability failures of

the wing under certain load conditions

and result in degradation of wing

capability.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

The FAA has reviewed and approved

Gulfstream Customer Bulletin (CB) No.

337, dated December 10, 1993, which

describes procedures for certain

repetitive non-destructive testing (NDT)

inspections to detect corrosion on

certain areas (ailerons, elevators, rudder,

flaps, horizontal stabilizer, vertical

stabilizer, and aft fuselage skins, as well

as lower wing plank splices). The CB

also describes procedures for replacing

components, if necessary.

Accomplishment of the actions

specified in the service bulletin is

intended to adequately address the

identified unsafe condition.

Gulfstream has also issued Gulfstream

Tool No. ST905–377, an x-ray negative

that is a comparison chart, which

describes specific levels of corrosion,

and describes criteria for determining

those levels of corrosion (‘‘light,’’

‘‘moderate,’’ and ‘‘severe’’).

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 the CB and the

Proposed Rule

Operators should note that the

Gulfstream CB recommends that the

compliance time for the initital NDT

inspections should be 18 months from

the release of the CB (December 10,

1993). However, this proposed AD

would require the initial inspection

within 9 months after the effective date

of the AD. Operators also should note

that, although the Gulfstream CB does

not specify certain corrective actions for

levels of corrosion, this proposed AD

would require shortened repetitive

intervals for the NDT inspections based

on certain levels of corrosion, or

replacement of the corroded component

with a serviceable component.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 144

Gulfstream Model G–159 airplanes of

the affected design in the worldwide

fleet. The FAA estimates that 71

airplanes of U.S. registry would be

affected by this proposed AD, that it

would take approximately 80 work

hours per airplane to accomplish the

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 109 / Wednesday, June 6, 2001 / Proposed Rules 30345

proposed actions, and that the average

labor rate is $60 per work hour. Based

on these figures, the cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $340,800, or $4,800 per

airplane, per inspection cycle.

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:

Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation: Docket

96–NM–143–AD.

Applicability: All Model G–159 airplanes,

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 (d) 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 detect and correct corrosion of the skin

of certain structural assemblies, which could

cause local instability failures of the wing

under certain load conditions and result in

degradation of wing capability; accomplish

the following:

(a) Within 9 months after the effective date

of this AD, perform a non-destructive test

(NDT) to detect corrosion of the skins of the

aileron rudder, rudder trim tab, flap,

evaluator, fuselage, vertical stabilizer, and

horizontal stabilizer; in accordance with

Gulfstream Aerospace GI Customer Bulletin

No. 337, dated December 10, 1993.

(1) If no corrosion is detected, repeat the

NDT inspections thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 18 months.

(2) If any corrosion is detected that meets

the criteria of ‘‘light’’ corrosion, as defined by

Gulfstream Tool No. ST905–377, repeat the

NDT inspections of that component

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 12

months.

(3) If any corrosion is detected that meets

the criteria of ‘‘moderate’’ corrosion, as

defined by Gulfstream Tool No. ST905–377,

repeat the NDT inspection of that component

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 9 months.

(4) If any corrosion is detected that meets

the criteria of ‘‘severe’’ corrosion, as defined

by Gulfstream Tool No. ST905–377, prior to

further flight, replace the component with a

serviceable component, in accordance with

the Gulfstream I Maintenance Manual.

(b) Within 9 months after the effective date

of this AD, perform a non-destructive test

(NDT) to detect corrosion of the lower wing

plank splices, in accordance with Gulfstream

Aerospace GI Customer Bulletin No. 337,

dated December 10, 1993.

(1) If no corrosion is detected, repeat the

NDT inspection at intervals not to exceed 18

months.

(2) If any corrosion is detected, prior to

further flight, repair in accordance with the

customer bulletin.

Reporting Requirement

(c) Within 10 days of performing the

inspections required by paragraph (a) of this

AD: Submit a report of inspection findings

(both positive and negative) to Gulfstream

Aerospace Corporation; Attention: Technical

Operations—Mail Station D–10; P.O. Box

2206; Savannah, Georgia 31402–0080.

Information collection requirements

contained in this regulation have been

approved by the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.) and have been assigned OMB

Control Number 2120–0056.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(d) 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, Wichita

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, Wichita ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Wichita ACO.

Special Flight Permits

(e) 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 May 29,

2001.

Vi L. Lipski,

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–14145 Filed 6–5–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–NM–290–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–9–10, –20, –30, –40,

and –50 Series Airplanes; and C–9

(Military) 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 DC–

9–10, –20, –30, –40, and –50 series

airplanes; and C–9 (military) airplanes.