Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 189 / Monday, October 2, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 45705 

Adoption of the Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 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): 

2017–20–07 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 

39–19064; Docket No. FAA–2017–0518; 

Product Identifier 2016–NM–167–AD. 

(a) Effective Date 

This AD is effective November 6, 2017. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc., 

Model DHC–8–400, –401, and –402 

airplanes, certificated in any category, serial 

numbers 4001, and 4003 through 4504 

inclusive. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 26, Fire protection. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by the failure of the 

fire control amplifier (FCA), which was likely 

caused by an electrical short in a discharged 

squib for a fire extinguishing bottle. We are 

issuing this AD to prevent failure of the FCA 

and subsequent discharge of fire 

extinguishing bottles and false fire 

indications, leaving the flight crew with 

reduced firefighting capability in the event of 

a fire. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Replacement of Affected Circuit Breakers 

Within 6,000 flight hours or 3 years, 

whichever occurs first, after the effective date 

of this AD: Replace the 7.5-amp circuit 

breakers specified in Bombardier Service 

Bulletin 84–26–16, Revision A, dated 

February 12, 2016, with 1-amp circuit 

breakers having part number MS3320–1, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 

84–26–16, Revision A, dated February 12, 

2016. 

(h) Credit for Previous Actions 

This paragraph provides credit for actions 

required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those 

actions were performed before the effective 

date of this AD using Bombardier Service 

Bulletin 84–26–16, dated August 14, 2015. 

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, New York ACO 

Branch, 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 manager of the certification office, 

send it to ATTN: Program Manager, 

Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New 

York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, 

Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 

516–228–7300; fax 516–794–5531. 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. 

(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any 

requirement in this AD to obtain corrective 

actions from a manufacturer, the action must 

be accomplished using a method approved 

by the Manager, New York ACO Branch, 

FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation 

(TCCA); or Bombardier, Inc.’s TCCA Design 

Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by 

the DAO, the approval must include the 

DAO-authorized signature. 

(j) Related Information 

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian 

Airworthiness Directive CF–2016–25, dated 

August 22, 2016, for related information. 

This MCAI may be found in the AD docket 

on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov 

by searching for and locating Docket No. 

FAA–2017–0518. 

(2) For more information about this AD, 

contact Assata Dessaline, Aerospace 

Engineer, Avionics and Administrative 

Services Section, FAA, New York ACO 

Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, 

Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516–228– 

7301; fax 516–794–5531. 

(3) Service information identified in this 

AD that is not incorporated by reference is 

available at the addresses specified in 

paragraphs (k)(3) and (k)(4) of this AD. 

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

(IBR) of the service information listed in this 

paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. 

(2) You must use this service information 

as applicable to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 84–26–16, 

Revision A, dated February 12, 2016. 

(ii) Reserved. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., Q-Series 

Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt Boulevard, 

Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; 

telephone 416–375–4000; fax 416–375–4539; 

email thd.qseries@aero.bombardier.com; 

Internet http://www.bombardier.com. 

(4) You may view this service information 

at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

(5) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

202–741–6030, or go to: http://

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 20, 2017. 

Dionne Palermo, 

Acting Director, System Oversight Division, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2017–20824 Filed 9–29–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2016–9522; Product 

Identifier 2016–NM–144–AD; Amendment 

39–19065; AD 2017–20–08] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Gulfstream 

Aerospace Corporation Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are superseding 

Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2009–17– 

01, which applied to certain Gulfstream 

Model G–IV, GIV–X, GV–SP airplanes 

and Model GV airplanes. AD 2009–17– 

01 required an inspection for sealant 

applied to the exterior of the auxiliary 

power unit (APU) enclosure (firewall), 

and a revision of the airplane flight 

manual (AFM), as applicable. This AD 

requires revising the AFM and revising 

the applicability to include additional 

airplanes. This AD was prompted by a 

report indicating that the type design 

sealant applied to the APU enclosure 

failed certain tests. We are issuing this 

AD to address the unsafe condition on 

these products. 

DATES: This AD is effective November 6, 

2017. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in this AD 

as of November 6, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: For service information 

identified in this final rule, contact 

Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation, 

Technical Publications Dept., P.O. Box 

2206, Savannah, GA 31402–2206; 

telephone 800–810–4853; fax 912–965– 

3520; email pubs@gulfstream.com; 

Internet http://www.gulfstream.com/ 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
45706 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 189 / Monday, October 2, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

product_support/technical_pubs/pubs/ 

index.htm. You may view this 

referenced service information at the 

FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 1601 

Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

It is also available on the Internet at 

http://www.regulations.gov by searching 

for and locating Docket No. FAA–2016– 

9522. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2016– 

9522; or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this AD, the regulatory 

evaluation, any comments received, and 

other information. The address for the 

Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is 

Docket Management Facility, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ky 

Phan, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion 

and Services Section, FAA, Atlanta 

ACO Branch, 1701 Columbia Avenue, 

College Park, GA 30337; phone: 404– 

474–5536; fax: 404–474–5606; email: 

ky.phan@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to supersede AD 2009–17–01, 

Amendment 39–15991 (74 FR 40061, 

August 11, 2009) (‘‘AD 2009–17–01’’). 

AD 2009–17–01 applied to certain 

Gulfstream Model G–IV, GIV–X, GV–SP 

airplanes, and Model GV airplanes. The 

NPRM published in the Federal 

Register on January 4, 2017 (82 FR 737) 

(‘‘the NPRM’’). The NPRM was 

prompted by a report indicating that the 

type design sealant (Aerospace Material 

Specification (AMS) 3374), applied to 

the APU enclosure, does not meet the 

requirement in 14 CFR 25.1191(b)(1) for 

a firewall to be fireproof, and failed a 

certification test and a company test. 

The NPRM proposed to require revising 

the AFM and revising the applicability 

to include additional airplanes. We are 

issuing this AD to provide the flight 

crew with operating procedures for 

airplanes that have AMS 3374 or 

Gulfstream Material Specification 

(GMS) 4107 sealant applied to the APU 

enclosure (firewall). Under certain 

anomalous conditions such as an APU 

failure/APU compartment fire, AMS 

3374 or GMS 4107 sealant could ignite 

the exterior surfaces of the APU 

enclosure, and result in propagation of 

an uncontained fire to other critical 

areas of the airplane. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. The 

following presents the comments 

received on the NPRM and the FAA’s 

response to each comment. 

Request To Withdraw the NPRM 

Gulfstream requested that the NPRM 

be withdrawn. The commenter stated 

that the FAA’s findings and decisions in 

the proposed AD are not based on 

analysis of the commenter’s supporting 

data and accepted risk and safety 

assessment methodologies. The 

commenter asserted that its risk 

assessments, performed using the FAA’s 

Transport Airplane Risk Assessment 

Methodology (TARAM) Handbook, are 

within the allowable guidelines of the 

FAA’s TARAM Handbook. 

We do not agree with the commenter’s 

request because this final rule is 

consistent with FAA policy and orders. 

The FAA’s TARAM is used to assess 

risk associated with a wide variety of 

potential safety issues. The FAA 

typically follows the defined risk 

guidelines contained in the TARAM 

Handbook for transport category 

airplanes. However, occasionally, other 

factors affect the decision on whether to 

issue an AD. FAA Order 8110.107A, 

‘‘Monitor Safety/Analyze Data,’’ 

paragraph 2–10.e. states: 

In rare situations the Aviation Safety 

Engineer or FAA management may, based on 

factors unrelated to the risk analysis, make 

recommendations not consistent with risk 

guidelines for ADs or other mandatory 

corrective actions. The decision to accept or 

reject these recommendations is made during 

the CARB [Corrective Action Review Board]. 

One such factor, unrelated to risk 

analysis, is whether the affected system 

provides an emergency or safety 

function. Examples of emergency/safety 

systems include seatbelts, life rafts, 

oxygen systems, and firewalls. Failure 

of emergency systems typically do not 

cause an accident, but can greatly 

increase the probability of fatalities in 

the event of an additional unrelated 

failure. TARAM analyses of emergency/ 

safety systems typically indicate a low 

TARAM risk. This is due to the fact that 

the precipitating event is very rare, for 

example, high-g decelerations due to an 

accident, ditching, explosive 

decompression, and engine fire. 

Ultimately, the decision regarding 

whether to mandate airworthiness 

action for a condition is the 

responsibility of the FAA’s CARB, 

which for this AD was comprised of 

representatives from the Atlanta ACO 

Branch, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Atlanta MIDO Section, and the Aircraft 

Evaluation Group. The CARB 

unanimously concluded that factors 

other than the TARAM risk indicated 

the need to mandate corrective action 

for Gulfstream APU firewalls assembled 

using AMS 3374 sealant, in addition to 

the previously mandated requirements 

for Gulfstream APU firewalls assembled 

using GMS 4107 sealant. 

Several 14 CFR part 25 regulations are 

intended to prevent the spread of a fire 

to other critical areas of an airplane in 

the event of an in-flight or ground fire; 

one of these regulations is 14 CFR 

25.1191 (‘‘Firewalls’’). The 14 CFR part 

25 regulations include requirements for 

(1) fire detection, (2) fire suppression, 

and (3) fire containment by a firewall. 

The AMS 3374 sealant, as applied to the 

Gulfstream APU firewall type designs 

that are the subject of this AD, has been 

shown by fire testing to result in 

backside (cold side) ignition of the 

firewall when exposed to a 2,000 degree 

Fahrenheit flame for 15 minutes, thus 

violating the 14 CFR part 25 

requirement for the firewall to be 

fireproof (refer to FAA Advisory 

Circular (AC) 20–135, ‘‘Powerplant 

Installation and Propulsion System 

Component Fire Protection Test 

Methods, Standards and Criteria,’’ dated 

February 6, 1990 (‘‘AC 20–135’’), for 

firewall fire testing guidance.) Previous 

fire testing also confirmed that 

Gulfstream APU firewalls assembled 

with GMS 4107 exhibited backside 

ignition during those tests. The backside 

ignition of the Gulfstream APU firewalls 

occurred in an area of the airplane that 

does not have fire detection or fire 

suppression. This is a non-compliance 

with the requirements of 14 CFR 

25.1191(b)(1) for firewalls to be 

fireproof. If an APU fire occurred in 

flight or on the ground on such a noncompliant airplane, it could result in 

backside ignition of the firewall, 

potentially resulting in propagation of 

an uncontained fire to other critical 

areas of the airplane. The area outside 

and adjacent to the Gulfstream APU 

firewall contains many airplane critical 

systems such as empennage structure, 

flight control components, fuel lines, 

and oil lines. The FAA finds that APU 

operations on the affected Gulfstream 

models without a firewall that is 

fireproof, as required by 14 CFR 

25.1191, constitutes an unsafe 

condition. The FAA performed an 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 189 / Monday, October 2, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 45707 

additional TARAM analysis, which 

indicated a higher risk than the results 

of the original Gulfstream TARAM 

analysis. However, we want to point out 

that neither TARAM analysis was the 

sole consideration for mandating 

corrective action. We have made no 

changes to this AD in this regard. 

Request for Separate AD Action for 

AMS 3374 Sealant 

Gulfstream requested that the FAA 

issue a separate rulemaking action to 

address the use of AMS 3374 sealant. 

The commenter deems it inaccurate to 

associate the GMS 4107 sealant unsafe 

condition with the application of the 

AMS 3374 sealant. Gulfstream also 

considers the corrective actions to be 

significantly different for the two types 

of sealants. 

We disagree with the commenter’s 

request. Many of the Gulfstream 

airplanes affected by this AD have both 

GMS 4107 and AMS 3374 sealants used 

in the fabrication of APU firewalls. The 

use of GMS 4107 and/or AMS 3374 

sealants, per the Gulfstream type design 

for the APU firewalls that are the subject 

of this AD action, has resulted in 

backside ignition of the APU firewall in 

fire tests that were intended to 

demonstrate that the firewalls are 

fireproof. The corrective action for both 

types of sealants is identical, applying 

restrictions on APU operations. The 

corrective actions specified in the AD 

being superseded, AD 2009–17–01, did 

not address APU firewalls fabricated 

using AMS 3374 sealant. Subsequent 

fire testing has shown that AMS 3374 

sealant, used as specified in the 

Gulfstream type design, does not 

comply with the regulations that require 

a firewall to be fireproof; therefore, AD 

2009–17–01 must be superseded to 

include APU firewalls fabricated using 

AMS 3374 sealant. Future rulemaking to 

incorporate a solution proposed by 

Gulfstream might be considered when 

and if a proposed solution is made 

available to the FAA. We have made no 

changes to this AD in this regard. 

Request To Clarify Terminology 

Gulfstream requested that the FAA 

revise the NPRM by removing all of the 

statements that AMS 3374 sealant is 

flammable. The commenter stated that it 

is not accurate to make a general 

statement that AMS 3374 sealant is 

flammable because there are many 

applications where AMS 3374 sealants 

are compliant with applicable fireproof 

certification requirements. 

We partially agree with the 

commenter’s request. The FAA’s 

certification requirement is that 

firewalls be fireproof, not that the 

sealant be fireproof. The FAA does not 

have specific requirements for sealant, 

apart from the requirement that its use 

in the assembly of firewalls must result 

in a fireproof firewall assembly. 

Also, the commenter’s statement that 

there are many applications where AMS 

3374 sealants are compliant with 

applicable fireproof certification 

requirements may be partially correct. 

There could be firewalls assembled 

using AMS 3374 sealants that do meet 

the applicable fireproof certification 

requirements. The issue addressed by 

this final rule is that Gulfstream’s 

application of AMS 3374 sealant to the 

APU firewall assemblies affected by this 

rulemaking action is not compliant with 

the airworthiness requirement for the 

firewall to be fireproof. The AMS 3374 

sealant does meet the requirements of 

an industry specification, the Society of 

Automotive Engineers (SAE) Standard 

AMS 3374. Compliance with an SAE 

standard is not equivalent to, and does 

not satisfy, compliance with the FAA 

certification requirement that firewalls 

be fireproof. AC 20–135 is used 

throughout the aviation industry as 

guidance material for how to show 

compliance with the FAA’s requirement 

that firewalls be fireproof. Regarding the 

use of sealants, AC 20–135 provides the 

following guidance: 

Outgassing. A characteristic of bonded 

construction firewall materials and seal 

materials is the outgassing of the volatile 

constituents of the bonding resins or seal 

materials. This can occur from either the hot 

or cool side surface of the specimens during 

the test. These gasses are, in most instances, 

highly flammable. Ignition occurring on the 

cool side is unacceptable in passing the fire 

test. . . . For these types of construction, no 

‘‘cool side’’ ignition is allowed and 

verification is required. 

There are many variables that determine 

if a given firewall configuration meets 

the airworthiness requirement to be 

fireproof. Sealants are known to outgas 

volatile constituents. In the case of the 

Gulfstream APU firewall type design, 

outgassed constituents of AMS 3374 

sealant ignited on the backside during 

fire testing, and therefore, the firewall 

does not meet the definition of fireproof 

per AC 20–135. We have changed the 

wording in this final rule to specify that 

the type design sealant (AMS 3374), as 

applied in the Gulfstream APU firewall, 

does not meet the airworthiness 

requirement in 14 CFR 25.1191(b)(1), for 

a firewall to be fireproof. 

We do not agree that AMS 3374 

sealant is compliant with applicable 

fireproof certification requirements 

because the FAA does not certificate 

sealants; the FAA certificates that 

firewalls are fireproof. Therefore, we 

have made no changes to this AD in this 

regard. 

Request To Revise the Estimated Costs 

of Compliance 

Gulfstream requested that the 

estimated costs of compliance in the 

NPRM be revised to include costs 

associated with an operator’s inability to 

use the APU during normal operations, 

and the cost associated with a 

terminating action. The commenter 

noted that the estimated costs in the 

NPRM are associated with physically 

revising the AFM by inserting the 

applicable AFM supplement (AFMS). 

The commenter stated that the costs 

associated with a terminating action that 

would allow an operator to use its APU 

in flight is much more expensive, and 

depending on the number of airplanes 

that need to be retrofitted, the costs are 

likely to be tens of millions of dollars. 

The FAA did not include any costs 

associated with an operator’s inability to 

use the APU during normal operations 

because APU usage is not required by 

the FAA for the operation of any of the 

affected aircraft. This final rule does 

allow APU usage during certain 

emergencies. 

We acknowledge that the costs 

associated with a terminating action, 

which would allow an operator to have 

use of its APU in flight, may be higher 

because the costs associated with 

retrofit of the airplane are likely to be 

higher than for implementing the 

change to the AFMS. This final rule 

only provides the costs associated with 

implementing the AFMS that restricts 

APU operations. There are no hardware 

or modification costs associated with 

this final rule. 

We do not agree with the commenter’s 

request to revise the estimated costs of 

compliance. The FAA uses a standard 

labor rate of $85 per hour for evaluation 

of all airworthiness actions, regardless 

of who performs the corrective action. 

The only cost associated with this final 

rule is for revising the AFM by inserting 

the applicable AFMS. Therefore, we 

have made no changes to this final rule 

regarding this issue. 

Additional Change Made to This Final 

Rule 

The FAA no longer considers this 

final rule to be an ‘‘interim action’’ and 

reference to ‘‘interim action,’’ which 

was included in the NPRM, has been 

omitted from this final rule. The FAA 

will accept the AFMS restrictions on 

APU operation as terminating action. If 

Gulfstream proposes design changes 

that would eliminate the APU firewall 

unsafe condition addressed by this AD, 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
45708 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 189 / Monday, October 2, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

the FAA might consider further 

rulemaking. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the relevant data, 

considered the comments received, and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting this AD 

with the changes described previously, 

and minor editorial changes. We have 

determined that these minor changes: 

• Are consistent with the intent that 

was proposed in the NPRM for 

correcting the unsafe condition; and 

• Do not add any additional burden 

upon the public than was already 

proposed in the NPRM. 

We also determined that these 

changes will not increase the economic 

burden on any operator or increase the 

scope of this AD. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

We reviewed the following 

Gulfstream AFMSs. The AFMSs provide 

operating limitations on the use of the 

APU during certain ground and flight 

operations. These documents are 

distinct since they apply to different 

airplane models. 

• Gulfstream GIV/G300/G400 AFM 

Supplement GIV–2016–01, dated July 

27, 2016, to the Gulfstream GIV AFM, 

dated April 22, 1987; the Gulfstream 

G300 AFM, dated January 15, 2003; and 

the Gulfstream G400 AFM, dated 

November 18, 2002. 

• Gulfstream G450/G350 AFM 

Supplement G450–2016–01, dated July 

27, 2016, to the Gulfstream G450 AFM, 

dated August 12, 2004; and the 

Gulfstream G350 AFM, dated October 

28, 2004. 

• Gulfstream GV AFM Supplement 

GV–2016–01, dated July 27, 2016, to the 

Gulfstream GV AFM, dated April 11, 

1997. 

• Gulfstream G550/G500 AFM 

Supplement G550–2016–01, dated July 

27, 2016, to the Gulfstream G550 AFM, 

dated August 14, 2003; and the 

Gulfstream G500 AFM, dated December 

5, 2003. 

• Gulfstream GVI (G650) AFM 

Supplement G650–2016–01, dated July 

27, 2016, to the Gulfstream GVI (G650) 

AFM, dated September 7, 2012. 

• Gulfstream GVI (G650ER) AFM 

Supplement G650ER–2016–03, dated 

July 27, 2016, to the Gulfstream GVI 

(G650ER) AFM, dated October 2, 2014. 

This service information is reasonably 

available because the interested parties 

have access to it through their normal 

course of business or by the means 

identified in the ADDRESSES section. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD affects 1,220 

airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate 

the following costs to comply with this 

AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

Cost on U.S. 

operators 

AFM revision ........................... 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 ......................................... $0 $85 $103,700 

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. 

This AD is issued in accordance with 

authority delegated by the Executive 

Director, Aircraft Certification Service, 

as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. 

In accordance with that order, issuance 

of ADs is normally a function of the 

Compliance and Airworthiness 

Division, but during this transition 

period, the Executive Director has 

delegated the authority to issue ADs 

applicable to transport category 

airplanes to the Director of the System 

Oversight Division. 

Regulatory Findings 

We have determined that this AD will 

not have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD will 

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 this AD: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), 

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska, and 

(4) Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 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 Airworthiness Directive (AD) 

2009–17–01, Amendment 39–15991 (74 

FR 40061, August 11, 2009), and adding 

the following new AD: 

2017–20–08 Gulfstream Aerospace 

Corporation: Amendment 39–19065; 

Docket No. FAA–2016–9522; Product 

Identifier 2016–NM–144–AD. 

(a) Effective Date 

This AD is effective November 6, 2017. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD replaces AD 2009–17–01, 

Amendment 39–15991 (74 FR 40061, August 

11, 2009) (‘‘AD 2009–17–01’’). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to the Gulfstream 

Aerospace Corporation airplanes, certificated 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 189 / Monday, October 2, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 45709 

in any category, identified in paragraphs 

(c)(1) through (c)(5) of this AD. 

(1) Model G–IV airplanes, having serial 

numbers (S/Ns) 1000 and subsequent. 

(2) Model GIV–X airplanes, having S/Ns 

4001 and subsequent. 

(3) Model GV airplanes, having S/Ns 501 

and subsequent. 

(4) Model GV–SP airplanes, having S/Ns 

5001 and subsequent. 

(5) Model GVI airplanes, having S/Ns 6001 

and subsequent. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 49, Airborne Auxiliary Power; 

and 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by a report 

indicating that the type design sealant 

(Aerospace Material Specification (AMS) 

3374), as applied to the auxiliary power unit 

(APU) enclosure (firewall), does not meet the 

requirement in 14 CFR 25.1191(b)(1) for a 

firewall to be fireproof, and failed a 

certification test and a company test. We are 

issuing this AD to provide the flight crew 

with operating procedures for airplanes that 

have AMS 3374 or Gulfstream Material 

Specification (GMS) 4107 sealant applied to 

the APU enclosure. Under certain anomalous 

conditions such as an APU failure/APU 

compartment fire, AMS 3374 or GMS 4107 

sealant could ignite the exterior surfaces of 

the APU enclosure and result in propagation 

of an uncontained fire to other critical areas 

of the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) Revision 

Within 30 days after the effective date of 

this AD, revise the Limitations Section of the 

applicable Gulfstream AFM specified in 

paragraphs (h)(1) through (h)(6) of this AD to 

include the information in the applicable 

Gulfstream AFM supplement (AFMS) 

specified in paragraphs (h)(1) through (h)(6) 

of this AD. These AFMSs introduce operating 

limitations on the use of the APU during 

certain ground and flight operations. This 

AFM revision may be done by inserting a 

copy of the applicable AFMS into the 

applicable AFM specified in paragraphs 

(h)(1) through (h)(6) of this AD. When the 

AFMS has been included in the general 

revision of the AFM, the general revision 

may be inserted into the AFM, provided the 

relevant information in the general revision 

is identical to that in the applicable AFMS 

specified in paragraphs (h)(1) through (h)(6) 

of this AD. 

(h) AFMSs 

For the AFM revision required by 

paragraph (g) of this AD, insert the applicable 

AFMS into the applicable Gulfstream AFM 

identified in paragraphs (h)(1) through (h)(6) 

of this AD. 

(1) Gulfstream GIV/G300/G400 AFM 

Supplement GIV–2016–01, dated July 27, 

2016, to the Gulfstream GIV AFM, dated 

April 22, 1987; the Gulfstream G300 AFM, 

dated January 15, 2003; and the Gulfstream 

G400 AFM, dated November 18, 2002. 

(2) Gulfstream G450/G350 AFM 

Supplement G450–2016–01, dated July 27, 

2016, to the Gulfstream G450 AFM, dated 

August 12, 2004; and the Gulfstream G350 

AFM, dated October 28, 2004. 

(3) Gulfstream GV AFM Supplement GV– 

2016–01, dated July 27, 2016, to the 

Gulfstream GV AFM, dated April 11, 1997. 

(4) Gulfstream G550/G500 AFM 

Supplement G550–2016–01, dated July 27, 

2016, to the Gulfstream G550 AFM, dated 

August 14, 2003; and the Gulfstream G500 

AFM, dated December 5, 2003. 

(5) Gulfstream GVI (G650) AFM 

Supplement G650–2016–01, dated July 27, 

2016, to the Gulfstream GVI (G650) AFM, 

dated September 7, 2012. 

(6) Gulfstream GVI (G650ER) AFM 

Supplement G650ER–2016–03, dated July 27, 

2016, to the Gulfstream GVI (G650ER) AFM, 

dated October 2, 2014. 

(i) Credit for Previous Actions 

This paragraph provides credit for the 

action required by paragraph (g) of this AD, 

if that action was performed before the 

effective date of this AD using the applicable 

service information specified in paragraphs 

(i)(1) through (i)(4) of this AD. This service 

information was incorporated by reference in 

AD 2009–17–01. 

(1) Gulfstream G–IV/G300/G400 AFM 

Supplement G–IV–2009–02, Revision 1, 

dated June 25, 2009, to the Gulfstream GIV 

AFM, the Gulfstream G300 AFM, and the 

Gulfstream G400 AFM. 

(2) Gulfstream G450/G350 AFM 

Supplement G450–2009–03, Revision 1, 

dated June 25, 2009, to the Gulfstream G450 

AFM and the Gulfstream G350 AFM. 

(3) Gulfstream GV AFM Supplement GV– 

2009–03, Revision 1, dated June 25, 2009, to 

the Gulfstream GV AFM. 

(4) Gulfstream G550/G500 AFM 

Supplement G550–2009–03, Revision 1, 

dated June 25, 2009, Gulfstream G550 AFM 

and the Gulfstream G500 AFM. 

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Atlanta ACO Branch, 

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 manager of the 

certification office, send it to the attention of 

the person identified in paragraph (k)(1) of 

this AD. 

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 

of the local flight standards district office/ 

certificate holding district office. 

(3) AMOCs approved previously for 

paragraph (h) of AD 2009–17–01 are 

approved as AMOCs for the corresponding 

provisions of paragraph (g) of this AD. 

(k) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Ky Phan, Aerospace Engineer, 

Propulsion and Services Section, FAA, 

Atlanta ACO Branch, 1701 Columbia 

Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; phone: 

404–474–5536; fax: 404–474–5606; email: 

ky.phan@faa.gov. 

(2) Service information identified in this 

AD that is not incorporated by reference is 

available at the addresses specified in 

paragraphs (l)(3) and (l)(4) of this AD. 

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

(IBR) of the service information listed in this 

paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. 

(2) You must use this service information 

as applicable to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) Gulfstream GIV/G300/G400 Airplane 

Flight Manual (AFM) Supplement GIV– 

2016–01, dated July 27, 2016, to the 

Gulfstream GIV AFM, dated April 22, 1987; 

the Gulfstream G300 AFM, dated January 15, 

2003; and the Gulfstream G400 AFM, dated 

November 18, 2002. 

(ii) Gulfstream G450/G350 Airplane Flight 

Manual (AFM) Supplement G450–2016–01, 

dated July 27, 2016, to the Gulfstream G450 

AFM, dated August 12, 2004; and the 

Gulfstream G350 AFM, dated October 28, 

2004. 

(iii) Gulfstream GV Airplane Flight Manual 

(AFM) Supplement GV–2016–01, dated July 

27, 2016, to the Gulfstream GV AFM, dated 

April 11, 1997. 

(iv) Gulfstream G550/G500 Airplane Flight 

Manual (AFM) Supplement G550–2016–01, 

dated July 27, 2016, to the Gulfstream G550 

AFM, dated August 14, 2003; and the 

Gulfstream G500 AFM, dated December 5, 

2003. 

(v) Gulfstream GVI (G650) Airplane Flight 

Manual (AFM) Supplement G650–2016–01, 

dated July 27, 2016, to the Gulfstream GVI 

(G650) AFM, dated September 7, 2012. 

(vi) Gulfstream GVI (G650ER) Airplane 

Flight Manual (AFM) Supplement G650ER– 

2016–03, dated July 27, 2016, to the 

Gulfstream GVI (G650ER) AFM, dated 

October 2, 2014. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Gulfstream Aerospace 

Corporation, Technical Publications Dept., 

P.O. Box 2206, Savannah, GA 31402–2206; 

telephone 800–810–4853; fax 912–965–3520; 

email pubs@gulfstream.com; Internet http://

www.gulfstream.com/product_support/ 

technical_pubs/pubs/index.htm. 

(4) You may view this service information 

at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

(5) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

202–741–6030, or go to: http://

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
45710 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 189 / Monday, October 2, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 18, 2017. 

Dionne Palermo, 

Acting Director, System Oversight Division, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2017–20831 Filed 9–29–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2017–0099; Product 

Identifier 2017–NE–02–AD; Amendment 39– 

19035; AD 2017–19–05] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Siemens 

S.A.S. Smoke Detectors 

Republication 

Editorial Note: Rule document 2017– 

20425 was originally published on pages 

44717 through 44720 in the issue of Tuesday, 

September 26, 2017. In that publication, on 

page 44719, in Figure 1, a number was 

omitted from the first entry under column 

‘‘P/N’’. Also in that publication, on page 

44720, in Figure 3, a number was omitted 

from the table heading. The corrected 

document is published here in its entirety. 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

Siemens S.A.S. smoke detectors 

installed on various transport category 

airplanes. This AD requires inspection 

and replacement of the affected smoke 

detectors. This AD was prompted by a 

report that the affected smoke detectors 

failed an acceptance test. We are issuing 

this AD to correct the unsafe condition 

on these products. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

October 31, 2017. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in this AD 

as of October 31, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: For service information 

identified in this final rule, contact 

Siemens, Aviation Customer Support, 

697 Rue Fourny, 78530 Buc, France; 

phone: (33) 1 3084 6650; fax: (33) 1 3956 

1364. You may view this service 

information at the FAA, Engine and 

Propeller Standards Branch, Policy and 

Innovation Division, 1200 District 

Avenue, Burlington, MA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 781- 238–7125. 

It is also available on the Internet at 

http://www.regulations.gov by searching 

for and locating Docket No. FAA–2017– 

0099. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2017– 

0099; or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this AD, the mandatory 

continuing airworthiness information 

(MCAI), the regulatory evaluation, any 

comments received, and other 

information. The address for the Docket 

Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is 

Document Management Facility, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin 

Hulverson, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, 

Boston ACO Branch, Compliance and 

Airworthiness Division, 1200 District 

Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: 

781–238–7655; fax: 781–238–7199; 

email: erin.hulverson@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 by adding an AD that would 

apply to the specified products. The 

NPRM was published in the Federal 

Register on April 20, 2017 (82 FR 

18588). The NPRM proposed to correct 

an unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The MCAI states: 

During a maintenance operation, some 

smoke detectors P/N PMC1102–02 failed an 

acceptance test, due to a significant degraded 

optical sensitivity. Investigation results 

concluded that light-emitting diodes (LED) 

were abnormally degraded, affecting specific 

batches where changes occurred in the LED 

manufacturer production process. Further 

investigation has determined that the affected 

LED have been installed on smoke detectors 

manufactured between November 2010 and 

January 2013, and on certain repaired units. 

This condition, if not corrected, will 

generate an abnormal ageing of the smoke 

detector, leading to a decrease of the light 

intensity capability, possibly resulting in 

failure to detect smoke and consequent risk 

of an on-board uncontrolled fire. 

You may obtain further information 

by examining the MCAI in the AD 

docket on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2017– 

0099. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

considered the comments received. 

Comment on Certifying Authority 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA) commented that the affected 

smoke detectors were approved by 

EASA rather than by France. 

We agree. These smoke detectors were 

approved by EASA. We did not change 

this AD because this AD does not 

reference the certifying authority for 

these smoke detectors. The section 

commented on by EASA exists only in 

the ‘‘Determination and Requirements of 

This Proposed AD’’ section of the 

NPRM. We did not change this AD. 

Request To Revise Applicability 

Delta Air Lines (Delta) requested that 

we revise the Applicability section of 

this AD to remove the reference to the 

date range when certain affected smoke 

detectors were produced. Delta 

indicated that the NPRM may be 

interpreted as implying that there are 

more affected smoke detector serial 

numbers than those identified in 

paragraph 1/D/ of Siemens Service 

Information Letter (SIL) PMC–26–002, 

Revision No. 1, dated January 2016, and 

of SIL PMC–26–003, Revision No. 2, 

dated February, 2016. Delta commented 

that removing the date range from the 

Applicability section of this AD would 

clarify applicability for operators. 

We agree. We find that providing the 

part numbers (P/Ns) and serial numbers 

(S/Ns) for the affected smoke detectors 

sufficiently identifies all affected 

detectors. We revised this AD by 

removing the reference to the 

production date range from the 

Applicability section of this AD. 

Request To Revise Compliance 

Schedule 

Delta requested that we revise 

paragraph (f)(2) in the compliance 

section of this AD to indicate that 

repaired units identified in Figure (1) to 

paragraph (c) of this AD should be 

replaced within 5 months after the 

effective date of this AD. Delta 

commented that the NPRM does not 

specify when these affected detectors 

are to be replaced. 

We agree. We revised the compliance 

section of this AD to specify that smoke 

detectors identified in paragraph (c)(2) 

of this AD must be replaced within 5 

months after the effective date of this 

AD. 

Support for This AD 

The Air Line Pilots Association, 

International, commented that it 


jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES