Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 2, 2005 / Proposed Rules 5387

5The Commission has filed an appeal with the 

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit of certain 

aspects of the Shays decision, including the court’s 

conclusion that the $5,000 Exemption is 

inconsistent with the statutory intent of 2 U.S.C 

441i(b). The appeal is currently pending. In the 

event the Commission prevails on appeal, the 

Commission may terminate this rulemaking 

proceeding prior to adoption of final rules.

of federal and Levin funds.’’ Shays at 

116–17.

The court stated that for a regulatory 

de minimis exemption to stand, an 

agency has the burden of demonstrating 

that following the precise language of 

the statute would lead to ‘‘absurd or 

futile results,’’ or that the failure to 

create a de minimis exemption would be 

‘‘contrary to the primary legislative 

goal.’’ Shays at 117 (quoting 

Environmental Defense Fund v. EPA, 82 

F.3d 451, 466 (D.C. Cir. 1996) quoting, 

in turn, State of Ohio v. EPA, 997 F.2d 

1520, 1535 (D.C. Cir. 1993)). The court 

addressed each of the Commission’s 

reasons for adopting the $5,000 

Exemption and found that the 

Commission had not met the burden of 

demonstrating that following the precise 

statutory language would lead to absurd 

or futile results and had not shown that 

the $5,000 Exemption comported with 

BCRA’s purposes.5 Shays at 

117. The court then remanded the 

regulations to the Commission for 

further action consistent with its 

opinion. Shays at 130.

I. Proposed 11 CFR 300.32(c)(4)—

Conditions and Restrictions on 

Spending Levin Funds 

Because the court found the $5,000 

Exemption to be inconsistent with the 

statutory intent of 2 U.S.C 441i(b) and 

that the standards for upholding a de 

minimis exemption had not been met, 

the Commission proposes to delete the 

$5,000 Exemption from 11 CFR 

300.32(c)(4). Paragraph (c)(4) of the 

proposed rule would require State, 

local, and district political party 

committees to pay for all allocable FEA 

either entirely with Federal funds or 

with an allocation of Federal and Levin 

funds pursuant to 11 CFR 300.33. The 

Commission solicits comments on the 

proposed regulation. The Commission 

also invites comments on whether 

following the precise language of BCRA 

would lead to ‘‘absurd or futile results,’’

absent promulgation of a de minimis

exemption for disbursement of Levin 

funds by State, district, and local 

political party committees. 

II. Alternative Proposal for 11 CFR 

300.32(c)(4) 

Although not reflected in the attached 

proposed rules, the Commission also 

seeks comments on whether 11 CFR 

300.32(c)(4) should be revised to apply 

only to State, district, and local party 

committees with combined receipts and

disbursements for FEA (whether 

allocable or not) that together aggregate 

to less than $5,000 in a calendar year. 

See 2 U.S.C. 434(e)(2)(A). If a de 

minimis exemption allowing for the 

exclusive use of Levin funds for 

allocable Type 1&2 FEA were to apply 

only to State, district, and local party 

committees with FEA receipts and

disbursements aggregating less than 

$5,000 in a calendar year, the exemption 

would then apply only to those 

committees that are already statutorily 

exempt from having to report FEA 

under the exception contained in 2 

U.S.C. 434(e)(2)(A). The Commission 

invites comment on whether adoption 

of this alternative proposal would 

comport with the statutory intent of 2 

U.S.C 441i(b). 

Certification of No Effect Pursuant to 5 

U.S.C. 605(b) [Regulatory Flexibility 

Act] 

The Commission certifies that the 

attached proposed rules, if promulgated, 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. The basis for this certification 

is that the State, district, and local party 

committees of the two major political 

parties are not small entities under 5 

U.S.C. 601 because they are not small 

businesses, small organizations, or small 

governmental jurisdictions. To the 

extent that other political party 

committees may fall within the 

definition of ‘‘small entities,’’ their 

number is not substantial.

List of Subjects in 11 CFR Part 300 

Campaign funds, Nonprofit 

organizations, Political candidates, 

Political committees and parties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements.

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, the Federal Election 

Commission proposes to amend 

subchapter C of chapter I of title 11 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations as 

follows:

PART 300—NON-FEDERAL FUNDS 

1. The authority citation for part 300 

would continue to read as follows:

Authority: 2 U.S.C. 434(e), 438(a)(8), 

441a(a), 441i, 453.

2. Section 300.32 would be amended 

by revising paragraph (c)(4) to read as 

follows:

§ 300.32 Expenditures and disbursements

* * * * *

(c) * * * 

(4) The disbursements for allocable 

Federal election activity may be paid for 

entirely with Federal funds or may be 

allocated between Federal funds and 

Levin funds according to 11 CFR 300.33.

* * * * *

Dated: January 27, 2005. 

Scott E. Thomas, 

Chairman, Federal Election Commission.

[FR Doc. 05–1891 Filed 2–1–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6715–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2005–20251; Directorate 

Identifier 2004–NM–164–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Raytheon 

Model Hawker 800XP Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a 

new airworthiness directive (AD) for 

certain Raytheon Model Hawker 800XP 

airplanes. This proposed AD would 

require inspecting to detect damage of 

certain wiring in the flight 

compartment, performing corrective 

actions if necessary, modifying certain 

wiring connections, and revising the 

airplane flight manual. This proposed 

AD is prompted by reports of miswiring 

in the power distribution system. We 

are proposing this AD to ensure that the 

flightcrew is aware of the source of 

battery power for certain equipment, 

and to prevent damage to wiring and 

surrounding equipment that could 

result in smoke or fire on the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by March 21, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following 

addresses to submit comments on this 

proposed AD. 

• DOT Docket Web site: Go to

http://dms.dot.gov and follow the 

instructions for sending your comments 

electronically. 

• Government-wide rulemaking Web 

site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov

and follow the instructions for sending 

your comments electronically. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street SW., Nassif Building, 

Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590. 

• By fax: (202) 493–2251. 

5388 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 2, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on 

the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 

400 Seventh Street SW., 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 Raytheon 

Aircraft Company, Department 62, P.O. 

Box 85, Wichita, Kansas 67201–0085. 

You can examine the contents of this 

AD docket on the Internet at http://

dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility, U.S. Department 

of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street 

SW., Room PL–401, on the plaza level 

of the Nassif Building, Washington, DC. 

This docket number is FAA–2005–

20251; the directorate identifier for this 

docket is 2004–NM–164–AD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Philip Petty, Aerospace Engineer, 

Electrical Systems and Avionics, ACE–

119W, FAA, Wichita Aircraft 

Certification Office, 1801 Airport Road, 

Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport, 

Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone (316) 

946–4139; fax (316) 946–4107.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to submit any relevant 

written data, views, or arguments 

regarding this proposed AD. Send your 

comments to an address listed under 

ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–

2005–20251; Directorate Identifier 

2004–NM–164–AD’’ in the subject line 

of your comments. We specifically 

invite comments on the overall 

regulatory, economic, environmental, 

and energy aspects of the proposed AD. 

We will consider all comments 

submitted by the closing date and may 

amend the proposed AD in light of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http://

dms.dot.gov, including any personal 

information you provide. We will also 

post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact with FAA 

personnel concerning this proposed AD. 

Using the search function of that Web 

site, anyone can find and read the 

comments in any of our dockets, 

including the name of the individual 

who sent the comment (or signed the 

comment on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You can 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register

published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 

19477–78), or you can visit http://

dms.dot.gov.

Examining the Docket 

You can examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov, or in 

person at the Docket Management 

Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The Docket 

Management Facility office (telephone 

(800) 647–5227) is located on the plaza 

level of the Nassif Building at the DOT 

street address stated in the ADDRESSES

section. Comments will be available in 

the AD docket shortly after the DMS 

receives them. 

Discussion 

We have received a report indicating 

that miswiring in the flight 

compartment has been found on 

Raytheon Model Hawker 800XP 

airplanes. In one case, this miswiring 

affects the radio emergency switch, 

which is intended to ensure that the 

flightcrew is able to use navigation and 

communication radios when the 

airplane batteries are depleted during an 

electrical emergency. However, 

activating the radio emergency switch 

under normal aircraft operating 

conditions links the 35-amp essential 

radio bus and the radio emergency bus, 

which results in several wires being 

connected to the 35-amp essential radio 

bus without protection by circuit 

breakers or fuses. If one of these wires 

were to short to ground or be exposed 

to excessive current flow, wires, 

connectors, relays, or surrounding 

circuits or equipment may be damaged. 

Operating the radio emergency switch 

in accordance with the Emergency 

Procedures section of the airplane flight 

manual (AFM) will not cause the 

condition. In another case, miswiring 

has resulted in battery no. 3 supplying 

power to equipment that the Emergency 

Procedures section of the AFM 

identifies as being supplied by battery 

no. 4 and vice versa. These conditions, 

if not corrected, could cause the 

flightcrew to be misled about the source 

of battery power for certain equipment, 

or could lead to damage to wiring and 

surrounding equipment that could 

result in smoke or fire on the airplane. 

Relevant Service Information 

We have reviewed Raytheon Service 

Bulletin 24–3555, Revision 1, dated 

June 2004. Part 1 of the service bulletin 

describes procedures for visually 

inspecting for damage (primarily, but 

not limited to, evidence of heat damage) 

of wiring in the flight compartment. If 

any damage is found, corrective actions 

include performing repairs, or replacing 

damaged wiring with new wiring and 

replacing, with new parts, any relays or 

connectors from which damaged wiring 

extends. Part 2 of the service bulletin 

describes procedures for modifying 

certain wiring connections in the flight 

compartment, which includes replacing 

a certain circuitbreaker switch with an 

improved part, installing new busbars, 

and replacing a certain circuitbreaker 

with an improved part. 

The service bulletin also specifies 

revising the Emergency Procedures 

section of the AFM to include a certain 

temporary change. We have reviewed 

Raytheon Hawker 800XP Temporary 

Change 140–590032–0005TC7, dated 

June 3, 2003, which is intended to 

inform the flightcrew which standby 

batteries provide power to what 

equipment once the actions in Raytheon 

Service Bulletin 24–3555, Revision 1, 

have been done. 

Accomplishing the actions specified 

in Raytheon Service Bulletin 24–3555, 

Revision 1, is intended to adequately 

address the unsafe condition. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of the Proposed AD 

We have evaluated all pertinent 

information and identified an unsafe 

condition that is likely to exist or 

develop on other airplanes of this same 

type design. Therefore, we are 

proposing this AD, which would require 

accomplishing the actions specified in 

the service information described 

previously, except as discussed under 

‘‘Differences Between the Proposed AD 

and Service Information.’’

Clarification of Inspection Type 

Raytheon Service Bulletin 24–3555, 

Revision 1, specifies visually inspecting 

for damage of certain wiring in the flight 

compartment. We find that the 

procedures described in the service 

bulletin constitute a detailed inspection. 

Note 1 of this proposed AD defines what 

we mean by ‘‘detailed inspection.’’

Differences Between the Proposed AD 

and Service Information 

Where Raytheon Service Bulletin 24–

3555, Revision 1, specifies contacting 

the manufacturer for information on 

certain actions, this proposed AD 

requires that, before further flight, you 

must contact the FAA. Then, before 

further flight, any applicable action 

specified by the FAA must be 

accomplished in accordance with a 

method approved by the FAA. 

Raytheon Service Bulletin 24–3555, 

Revision 1, specifies that, on certain 

airplanes equipped with Airshow Cabin 

Display, the actions in Raytheon Service 

Bulletin 24–3664 must be done 

concurrently with or subsequent to the 

actions in Part 2 of Raytheon Service 

Bulletin 24–3555, Revision 1. We have 

determined that it is not necessary for 

this proposed AD to require 

accomplishing Raytheon Service 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 2, 2005 / Proposed Rules 5389

Bulletin 24–3664. It is possible to do all 

of the applicable actions in Raytheon 

Service Bulletin 24–3555, Revision 1, 

without first doing the actions in 

Raytheon Service Bulletin 24–3664.

Although the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Raytheon Service 

Bulletin 24–3555, Revision 1, describe 

procedures for reporting compliance 

with the service bulletin, this proposed 

AD would not require that action. 

Costs of Compliance 

There are about 45 airplanes of the 

affected design in the worldwide fleet. 

The following table provides the 

estimated costs for U.S. operators to 

comply with this proposed AD.

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Work hours Average labor 

rate per hour Parts Cost perairplane 

Number of 

U.S.-registered 

airplanes 

Fleet cost 

Inspection .............................................................. 18 $65 None $1,170 30 $35,100 

Modification ........................................................... 6 65 $435 825 30 24,750 

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 have 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 that the 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. See the ADDRESSES

section for a location to examine the 

regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, 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):

Raytheon Aircraft Company: Docket No. 

FAA–2005–20251; Directorate Identifier 

2004–NM–164–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) must receive comments on this AD 

action by March 21, 2005. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Raytheon Model 

Hawker 800XP airplanes, certificated in any 

category, serial numbers 258541, 258556, and 

258567 through 258608 inclusive. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD was prompted by reports of 

miswiring in the power distribution system. 

We are issuing this AD to ensure that the 

flightcrew is aware of the source of battery 

power for certain equipment, and to prevent 

damage to wiring and surrounding 

equipment that could result in smoke or fire 

on the airplane. 

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Service Information Reference 

(f) The term ‘‘service bulletin,’’ as used in 

this AD, means Raytheon Service Bulletin 

24–3555, Revision 1, dated June 2004. 

(1) Where the service bulletin specifies 

contacting the manufacturer for information, 

this proposed AD requires, before further 

flight, contacting the Manager, Wichita 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. 

Then, before further flight, any applicable 

action specified by the Manager, Wichita 

ACO, must be accomplished in accordance 

with a method approved by the Manager, 

Wichita ACO. 

(2) The service bulletin also refers to 

Raytheon Hawker 800XP Temporary Change 

140–590032–0005TC7, dated June 3, 2003, 

which is intended to be inserted into the 

Emergency Procedures section of the airplane 

flight manual to inform the flightcrew which 

standby batteries provide power to what 

equipment once the actions in the service 

bulletin have been done. 

(3) Where the service bulletin specifies to 

report compliance information to the 

manufacturer, this AD does not include that 

requirement. 

Inspection 

(g) Within 50 flight hours or 30 days after 

the effective date of this AD, whichever is 

first: Perform a detailed inspection for 

damage (primarily but not limited to 

evidence of heat damage) of wiring in the 

flight compartment, and all applicable 

corrective actions, by doing all actions in part 

1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the 

service bulletin, except as provided by 

paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(3) of this AD. Any 

applicable corrective action must be done 

before further flight.

Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a 

detailed inspection is: ‘‘An intensive 

examination of a specific item, installation, 

or assembly to detect damage, failure, or 

irregularity. Available lighting is normally 

supplemented with a direct source of good 

lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. 

Inspection aids such as mirror, magnifying 

lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface 

cleaning and elaborate procedures may be 

required.’’

5390 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 2, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

Modification 

(h) At the applicable time specified in 

paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD, modify 

wiring in the flight compartment by doing all 

actions in accordance with part 2 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of the service 

bulletin. Following accomplishment of the 

actions in part 2 of the service bulletin, 

before further flight, do all actions associated 

with the functional test, including revising 

the Emergency Procedures section of the 

Raytheon Hawker 800XP Airplane Flight 

Manual to include the information in 

Temporary Change Part Number 140–

590032–0005TC7, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of the service 

bulletin. 

(1) If no damage was found during the 

inspection required by paragraph (g) of this 

AD: Do paragraph (h) within 300 flight hours 

or 180 days after the effective date of this AD, 

whichever is first. 

(2) If any damage is found during the 

inspection required by paragraph (g) of this 

AD: Do paragraph (h) before further flight 

after the damage is found. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(i) The Manager, Wichita ACO, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested in accordance with the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 

26, 2005. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 05–1925 Filed 2–1–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. 2002–NE–40–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce 

plc RB211–524 Series Turbofan 

Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking; reopening of 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: This notice revises an earlier 

proposed airworthiness directive (AD), 

applicable to Rolls Royce plc (RR) 

RB211–524 series turbofan engines with 

certain part number (P/N) intermediate 

pressure (IP) compressor stage 5 disks 

installed. That proposal required new 

reduced IP compressor stage 5 disk 

cyclic limits. That proposal also 

required removing from service affected 

disks that already exceed the new 

reduced cyclic limit, and removing 

other affected disks before exceeding 

their cyclic limits, using a drawdown 

schedule. That proposal resulted from 

the discovery of cracks in the cooling air 

hole areas of the disk front spacer arm. 

This Supplemental Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (SNPRM) revises the 

proposed rule by correcting certain 

cycle life limits specified in Table 3 of 

that AD and by clarifying certain 

inspections. We are proposing this AD 

to prevent IP compressor stage 5 disk 

failure, which could result in 

uncontained engine failure and possible 

damage to the airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by 

April 4, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following 

addresses to comment on this proposed 

AD: 

• By mail: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), New England 

Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2002–NE–

40–AD, 12 New England Executive Park, 

Burlington, MA 01803–5299. 

• By fax: (781) 238–7055. 

• By e-mail: 9-aneadcomment@faa.gov.

You can get the service information 

identified in this proposed AD from 

Rolls-Royce plc, PO Box 31 Derby, 

DE248BJ, United Kingdom; telephone 

011–44–1332–242424; fax 011–44–

1332–249936. 

You may examine the AD docket, by 

appointment, at the FAA, New England 

Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 

12 New England Executive Park, 

Burlington, MA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ian 

Dargin, Aerospace Engineer, Engine 

Certification Office, FAA, Engine and 

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803–

5299; telephone (781) 238–7178; fax 

(781) 238–7199.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to submit any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments 

regarding this proposal. Send your 

comments to an address listed under 

ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘AD Docket No. 

2002–NE–40–AD’’ in the subject line of 

your comments. If you want us to 

acknowledge receipt of your mailed 

comments, send us a self-addressed, 

stamped postcard with the docket 

number written on it; we will datestamp your postcard and mail it back to 

you. We specifically invite comments 

on the overall regulatory, economic, 

environmental, and energy aspects of 

the proposed AD. If a person contacts us 

verbally, and that contact relates to a 

substantive part of this proposed AD, 

we will summarize the contact and 

place the summary in the docket. We 

will consider all comments received by 

the closing date and may amend the 

proposed AD in light of those 

comments. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD Docket 

(including any comments and service 

information), by appointment, between 

8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. See 

ADDRESSES for the location. 

Discussion 

On October 21, 2003 we issued a 

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal 

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to 

add an AD to apply to RR RB211–524 

series turbofan engines, with certain P/

N IP compressor stage 5 disks installed. 

The Office of the Federal Register 

published that proposal as a notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the 

Federal Register on October 27, 2003 

(68 FR 61158). That NPRM would have 

required new reduced IP compressor 

stage 5 disk cyclic limits. The NPRM 

also required removing from service 

affected disks that already exceed the 

new reduced cyclic limit, and removing 

other affected disks before exceeding 

their cyclic limits, using a drawdown 

schedule. That NPRM resulted from the 

discovery of cracks in the cooling air 

hole areas of the disk front spacer arm. 

That condition, if not corrected, could 

result in IP compressor stage 5 disk 

failure, which could result in 

uncontained engine failure and possible 

damage to the airplane.

Since we issued that NPRM, we found 

an error in Table 3 at the date December 

1, 2008 row. The cycle life limits in 

columns 4 and 5 of this row were 

written incorrectly as 12,000. We have 

corrected those cycle life limits to 8,900 

and 9,000 CIS, respectively. We have 

removed the phrase ‘‘one-time’’ in 

reference to on-wing inspections. We 

also added a sentence to clarify that an 

on-wing inspection may be used to 

extend service life only once between 

shop visit inspections of the disk. 

Since these changes expand the scope 

of the originally proposed rule, we 

determined that it is necessary to reopen 

the comment period to provide 

additional opportunity for public 

comment. 

Manufacturer’s Service Information 

We have reviewed and approved the 

technical contents of RR Mandatory 

Service Bulletin (MSB) No. RB.211–72–

D428, Revision 3, dated June 30, 2003, 

that specifies a drawdown schedule for