Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Proposed Rules 58631 

testing requirements, in accordance with the 

service information listed in the Table 2 of 

this AD, prior to the effective date of this AD, 

is acceptable for compliance with the 

requirements of paragraph (h) of this AD. 

TABLE 2.—PREVIOUS ACCOMPLISHMENT

Boeing service information Revision Dated 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–25–1438 ........................................................................................... Original ........ March 15, 2001. 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–25–1439 ........................................................................................... Original ........ March 15, 2001. 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–25–1439 ........................................................................................... 1 .................. August 2, 2001. 

Service Bulletin 737–25–1439 ....................................................................................................................... 2 .................. December 19, 2001. 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 747–25–3264 ........................................................................................... Original ........ March 15, 2001. 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 747–25–3275 ........................................................................................... Original ........ March 15, 2001. 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–25–0238 ........................................................................................... Original ........ March 15, 2001. 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 757–25–0238 ........................................................................................... 1 .................. November 15, 2001. 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 767–25–0297 ........................................................................................... Original ........ March 15, 2001. 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 777–25–0180 ........................................................................................... Original ........ March 15, 2001. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(j)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested in accordance with the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

(2) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any 

replacement required by this AD, if it is 

approved by an Authorized Representative 

for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes 

Delegation Option Authorization 

Organization who has been authorized by the 

Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those 

findings. For a repair method to be approved, 

the repair must meet the certification basis of 

the airplane, and the approval must 

specifically refer to this AD. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 28, 2005. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–20270 Filed 10–6–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2005–22632; Directorate 

Identifier 2005–NM–158–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier 

Model CL–600–2C10 (Regional Jet 

Series 700, 701, & 702), CL–600–2D15 

(Regional Jet Series 705), and CL–600–

2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) 

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 Bombardier Model CL–600–

2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 

702), CL–600–2D15 (Regional Jet Series 

705), and CL–600–2D24 (Regional Jet 

Series 900) airplanes. This proposed AD 

would require repetitive inspections for 

cracking or fracturing of the output links 

of the power control unit (PCU) for the 

ailerons, and related investigative and 

corrective actions if necessary. This 

proposed AD results from reports of 

fractured output links of the aileron 

PCU. We are proposing this AD to 

prevent failure of an output link of the 

aileron PCU, which, if both links on one 

aileron fail, could result in reduced 

lateral control of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by November 7, 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. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• 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. 

Contact Bombardier, Inc., Canadair, 

Aerospace Group, P.O. Box 6087, 

Station Centre-ville, Montreal, Quebec 

H3C 3G9, Canada, for service 

information identified in this proposed 

AD. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Daniel Parrillo, Aerospace Engineer, 

Systems and Flight Test Branch, ANE–

172, FAA, New York Aircraft 

Certification Office, 1600 Stewart 

Avenue, suite 410, Westbury, New York 

11590; telephone (516) 228–7305; fax 

(516) 794–5531. 

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 in the 

ADDRESSES section. Include the docket 

number ‘‘FAA–2005–22632; Directorate 

Identifier 2005–NM–158–AD’’ at the 

beginning 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 received 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 may 

review the DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 

19477–78), or you may visit http:// 

dms.dot.gov. 

58632 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

Examining the Docket 

You may 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 Docket 

Management System receives them. 

Discussion 

Transport Canada Civil Aviation 

(TCCA), which is the airworthiness 

authority for Canada, notified us that an 

unsafe condition may exist on certain 

Bombardier Model CL–600–2C10 

(Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702), 

CL–600–2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705), 

and CL–600–2D24 (Regional Jet Series 

900) airplanes. TCCA advises that 

fractured output links of the power 

control unit (PCU) for the ailerons have 

been found on in-service Bombardier 

Model CL–600–2B19 (Regional Jet 

Series 100 & 440) airplanes. Cracking or 

fracture of an output link of the aileron 

PCU, if not corrected, could result in 

failure of the link. Failure of one link 

may be a dormant (undetected) failure. 

However, failure of both output links on 

one aileron could result in reduced 

lateral control of the airplane. 

The output links of the aileron PCU 

on certain Bombardier Model CL–600–

2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 

702), CL–600–2D15 (Regional Jet Series 

705), and CL–600–2D24 (Regional Jet 

Series 900) airplanes are similar to those 

on the affected Bombardier Model CL–

600–2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 

440) airplanes. Therefore, those 

Bombardier Model CL–600–2C10 

(Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702), 

CL–600–2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705), 

and CL–600–2D24 (Regional Jet Series 

900) airplanes may be subject to the 

unsafe condition revealed on the 

Bombardier Model CL–600–2B19 

(Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) 

airplanes. 

Other Relevant Rulemaking 

We previously issued AD 2005–03–

13, amendment 39–13969 (70 FR 7845, 

February 16, 2005). AD 2005–03–13 

requires doing repetitive inspections for 

fractures and cracks of the links of the 

aileron PCU; replacing any fractured/ 

cracked link; and doing applicable 

related investigative and corrective 

actions, if necessary. The actions 

required by that AD, which applies to 

certain Bombardier Model CL–600–

2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 and 440) 

airplanes, are similar to those that 

would be required by this proposed AD 

for Bombardier Model CL–600–2C10 

(Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702), 

CL–600–2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705), 

and CL–600–2D24 (Regional Jet Series 

900) airplanes. 

Relevant Service Information 

Bombardier has issued Alert Service 

Bulletin A670BA–27–023, including 

Appendix A, Revision A, dated May 18, 

2005. The service bulletin describes 

procedures for repetitive detailed 

inspections for cracking or fracturing of 

the output links of the aileron PCU, and 

related investigative and corrective 

actions if necessary. If any fractured or 

cracked link is found, the service 

bulletin specifies a corrective action of 

replacing the fractured/cracked link 

with a new link. The service bulletin 

also describes related investigative 

actions and corrective actions that must 

be done if any fractured or cracked link 

is found, which include: 

• Measuring the torque value of the 

forward and aft attachment bolts for 

both the damaged PCU output link and 

the adjacent PCU output link installed 

on the same aileron. 

• For any damaged PCU output link, 

testing and measuring, as applicable, to 

determine if there is any mismatch 

between the PCU output link and the 

aileron lugs. 

• For any damaged PCU output link, 

performing an eddy current inspection 

for cracking of the aileron lugs and 

flange bushings of the aileron lugs. 

• If any damage (including but not 

limited to cracking) of an aileron lug or 

flange bushing is found, contacting the 

manufacturer for instructions. 

• Reporting results of all inspections, 

measurements, and tests, to the 

manufacturer. 

TCCA mandated the service 

information and issued Canadian 

airworthiness directive CF–2005–23, 

dated June 29, 2005, to ensure the 

continued airworthiness of these 

airplanes in Canada. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of the Proposed AD 

These airplane models are 

manufactured in Canada and are type 

certificated for operation in the United 

States under the provisions of section 

21.29 of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the 

applicable bilateral airworthiness 

agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral 

airworthiness agreement, TCCA has 

kept the FAA informed of the situation 

described above. We have examined 

TCCA’s findings, evaluated all pertinent 

information, and determined that we 

need to issue an AD for airplanes of this 

type design that are certificated for 

operation in the United States. 

Therefore, we are proposing this AD, 

which would require accomplishing the 

actions specified in the service 

information described previously, 

except as discussed under ‘‘Difference 

Among the Proposed AD, Canadian 

Airworthiness Directive, and Service 

Information.’’ The proposed AD would 

also require sending the inspection 

results to the manufacturer. 

Difference Among the Proposed AD, 

Canadian Airworthiness Directive, and 

Service Information 

The Canadian airworthiness directive 

and service bulletin specify to contact 

the manufacturer for instructions on 

how to disposition certain damaged 

parts. This proposed AD would require 

you to disposition those parts using a 

method that we or TCCA (or its 

delegated agent) approve. In light of the 

type of action that would be required to 

address the unsafe condition, and 

consistent with existing bilateral 

airworthiness agreements, we have 

determined that, for this proposed AD, 

disposition of a damaged part in a 

manner that we or TCCA approve would 

be acceptable for compliance with this 

proposed AD. 

Clarification of Inspection Terminology 

The Canadian airworthiness directive 

specifies performing a ‘‘detailed visual’’

inspection for cracking or fracturing of 

the output links of the aileron PCU. We 

refer to this inspection as a ‘‘detailed 

inspection.’’ We have included the 

definition for a detailed inspection in a 

note in the proposed AD. (This 

terminology is consistent with the 

terminology used in the service 

information.) 

Interim Action 

We consider this proposed AD 

interim action. The inspection reports 

that are required by this AD will enable 

the manufacturer to obtain better insight 

into the nature, cause, and extent of the 

cracking, and eventually to develop 

final action to address the unsafe 

condition. Once final action has been 

identified, we may consider further 

rulemaking. 

Costs of Compliance 

This proposed AD would affect about 

205 airplanes of U.S. registry. The 

proposed inspection would take about 1 

work hour per airplane, per inspection 

cycle, at an average labor rate of $65 per 

work hour. Based on these figures, the 

estimated cost of this proposed 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Proposed Rules 58633 

inspection for U.S. operators is $13,325, 

or $65 per airplane, per inspection 

cycle. 

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 and placed it in the 

AD docket. 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 Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 

by adding the following new 

airworthiness directive (AD): 

Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly Canadair): 

Docket No. FAA–2005–22632; 

Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–158–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The FAA must receive comments on 

this AD action by November 7, 2005. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to the Bombardier 

airplanes identified in Table 1 of this AD, 

certificated in any category. 

TABLE 1.—APPLICABILITY

Bombardier airplane models Serial 

Nos. 

CL–600–2C10 (Regional Jet 

Series 700, 701, & 702).

10003 and 

subsequent. 

CL–600–2D15 (Regional Jet 

Series 705).

15001 and 

subsequent. 

CL–600–2D24 (Regional Jet 

Series 900).

15001 and 

subsequent. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from reports of 

fractured output links of the power control 

unit (PCU) for the ailerons. We are issuing 

this AD to prevent failure of an output link 

of the aileron PCU, which, if both links on 

one aileron fail, could result in reduced 

lateral control of 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. 

Repetitive Inspections, Related Investigative 

Actions, and Corrective Actions 

(f) Prior to the accumulation of 2,000 total 

flight hours, or within 550 flight hours after 

the effective date of this AD, whichever is 

later: Do a detailed inspection for cracking or 

fracturing of the output links of the aileron 

PCU and do all related investigative and 

corrective actions, as applicable, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Bombardier Alert Service 

Bulletin A670BA–27–023, including 

Appendix A, Revision A, dated May 18, 

2005, except as provided by paragraph (g) of 

this AD. Thereafter, repeat the inspection and 

applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions at intervals not to exceed 

1,000 flight hours. Any applicable related 

investigative and corrective actions must be 

done before further flight after the inspection. 

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.’’

Exception to Corrective Action Instructions 

(g) If any cracking or other damage is found 

on an aileron lug or flange bushing during 

any inspection required by this AD, and the 

service bulletin recommends contacting 

Bombardier for appropriate action: Before 

further flight, disposition and replace the 

cracked or damaged aileron lug or flange 

bushing with a new part, in accordance with 

a method approved by the Manager, New 

York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 

FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation 

(TCCA) (or its delegated agent). 

Reporting 

(h) Submit a report of the findings (both 

positive and negative) of the inspections 

required by paragraph (f) of this AD to 

Bombardier Aerospace; Attention: Christian 

Holzl, dept. 508; Location S666 1422 024; 

13100 Highway 50; Mirabel, Quebec, Canada, 

J7M 3C6; fax (450) 476–7321. Submit the 

report at the applicable time specified in 

paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD. The 

report must include the airplane serial 

number, the total accumulated flight cycles 

and flight hours on the airplane, the date of 

the inspection, the total accumulated flight 

cycles and flight hours at the last ‘‘C’’ check, 

the serial number of each PCU, and the 

results of all inspections, tests, and 

measurements done in accordance with 

paragraph (f) of this AD. Submitting 

Appendix A of Bombardier Alert Service 

Bulletin A670BA–27–023, including 

Appendix A, Revision A, dated May 18, 

2005, is an acceptable means of complying 

with this requirement. Under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved the information collection 

requirements contained in this AD and has 

assigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056. 

(1) If the inspection was done after the 

effective date of this AD: Submit the report 

within 30 days after the inspection. 

(2) If the inspection was done prior to the 

effective date of this AD: Submit the report 

within 30 days after the effective date of this 

AD. 

Actions Accomplished Previously 

(i) Inspections and corrective actions done, 

and reports submitted, before the effective 

date of this AD in accordance with 

Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A670BA–

27–023, including Appendix A, dated May 3, 

2005, are acceptable for compliance with the 

corresponding requirements of paragraphs (f) 

and (h) of this AD. 

58634 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(j)(1) The Manager, New York ACO, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested in accordance with the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

(2) Before using any AMOC approved in 

accordance with 14 CFR 39.19 on any 

airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify 

the appropriate principal inspector in the 

FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding 

District Office. 

Related Information 

(k) Canadian airworthiness directive CF–

2005–23, dated June 29, 2005, also addresses 

the subject of this AD. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 30, 2005. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–20271 Filed 10–6–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2005–22633; Directorate 

Identifier 2005–NM–155–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Dassault 

Model Falcon 2000 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 Dassault Model Falcon 2000 

airplanes. This proposed AD would 

require an inspection for the presence of 

fail-safe pins, nuts, and washers on each 

engine, and replacement of the fail-safe 

fastener assembly with a new assembly 

if necessary. This proposed AD results 

from a report of a missing pin of a failsafe fastener. We are proposing this AD 

to prevent reduced structural integrity 

of an engine mount due to a missing pin 

of a fail-safe fastener, and possible 

separation of an engine from the 

airplane during flight. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by November 7, 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. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• 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. 

Contact Dassault Falcon Jet, P.O. Box 

2000, South Hackensack, New Jersey 

07606, for service information identified 

in this proposed AD. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom 

Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–1137; 

fax (425) 227–1149. 

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 in the 

ADDRESSES section. Include the docket 

number ‘‘FAA–2005–22633; Directorate 

Identifier 2005–NM–155–AD’’ at the 

beginning 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 received 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 may 

review the DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 

19477–78), or you may visit http:// 

dms.dot.gov. 

Examining the Docket 

You may 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 Docket 

Management System receives them. 

Discussion 

The Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation 

Civile (DGAC), which is the 

airworthiness authority for France, 

notified us that an unsafe condition may 

exist on certain Dassault Model Falcon 

2000 airplanes. The DGAC advises that 

the inner pin of a fail-safe fastener, 

which ensures the link between the rear 

of the engine and the fuselage, has been 

found missing on an in-service airplane. 

Lack of clarity in a production 

procedure is suspected to be the cause 

of this event. A missing pin of a fail-safe 

fastener, if not corrected, could result in 

reduced structural integrity of an engine 

mount, and possible separation of an 

engine from the airplane during flight. 

Relevant Service Information 

Dassault has issued Service Bulletin 

F2000–301, dated February 2, 2005. The 

service bulletin describes procedures for 

a detailed inspection for the presence of 

fail-safe pins, nuts, and washers on each 

engine, and replacement of the fail-safe 

fastener assembly with a new assembly 

if necessary. Accomplishing the actions 

specified in the service information is 

intended to adequately address the 

unsafe condition. The DGAC mandated 

the service information and issued 

French airworthiness directive F–2005–

018, dated February 2, 2005, to ensure 

the continued airworthiness of these 

airplanes in France. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of the Proposed AD 

This airplane model is manufactured 

in France and is type certificated for 

operation in the United States under the 

provisions of section 21.29 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 

21.29) and the applicable bilateral 

airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to 

this bilateral airworthiness agreement, 

the DGAC has kept the FAA informed 

of the situation described above. We 

have examined the DGAC’s findings, 

evaluated all pertinent information, and 

determined that we need to issue an AD 

for airplanes of this type design that are 

certificated for operation in the United 

States. 

Therefore, we are proposing this AD, 

which would require accomplishing the 

actions specified in the service 

information described previously,