Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules 33

The request should include an assessment of 

the effect of the modification, alteration, or 

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by 

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not 

been eliminated, the request should include 

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless 

accomplished previously. 

To prevent leakage of the hydraulically 

operated valve of the parking brake of the 

main landing gear, which could result in 

failure of the ‘‘blue’’ hydraulic system and 

consequent failure of alternate parking brake 

and emergency braking systems, accomplish 

the following: 

Inspections/Follow-On Actions 

(a) Within 7 days after the effective date of 

this AD: Do a one-time detailed visual 

inspection to determine the part number (P/

N) and serial number (S/N) of the 

hydraulically operated valve of the parking 

brake of the main landing gear per Airbus 

Service Bulletin A330–32A3139 (for Model 

A330 series airplanes) or A340–32A4176 (for 

Model A340 series airplanes), both including 

Appendix 01, both dated September 14, 

2001, as applicable. 

(1) If no P/N or S/N is identified as affected 

equipment per the applicable service 

bulletin, no further action is required by this 

AD. 

(2) If any P/N or S/N is identified as 

affected equipment per the applicable service 

bulletin: Before further flight, perform the 

follow-on actions (which may include a 

visual inspection for hydraulic fluid leakage 

at the valve; repair or replacement of the 

valve with a new or serviceable valve if 

leakage is found; repetitive inspections if 

valve is not replaced, or if the valve is 

replaced with a valve having the same P/N 

or S/N; and an operational test), according to 

the applicable service bulletin.

Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a 

detailed visual inspection is defined as: ‘‘An 

intensive visual examination of a specific 

structural area, system, installation, or 

assembly to detect damage, failure, or 

irregularity. Available lighting is normally 

supplemented with a direct source of good 

lighting at intensity deemed appropriate by 

the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror, 

magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface 

cleaning and elaborate access procedures 

may be required.’’

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(b) An alternative method of compliance or 

adjustment of the compliance time that 

provides an acceptable level of safety may be 

used if approved by the Manager, 

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, 

Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators 

shall submit their requests through an 

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance 

Inspector, who may add comments and then 

send it to the Manager, International Branch, 

ANM–116.

Note 3: Information concerning the 

existence of approved alternative methods of 

compliance with this AD, if any, may be 

obtained from the International Branch, 

ANM–116.

Special Flight Permits 

(c) Special flight permits may be issued in 

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to 

a location where the requirements of this AD 

can be accomplished.

Note 4: The subject of this AD is addressed 

in French airworthiness directives 2001–

516(B) and 2001–517(B), both dated October 

31, 2001.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

December 26, 2001. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–32193 Filed 12–31–01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. 2000–NM–335–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Dassault 

Model Mystere-Falcon 50 Series 

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking; reopening of 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: This document revises an 

earlier proposed airworthiness directive 

(AD), applicable to certain Dassault 

Model Mystere-Falcon 50 series 

airplanes, that would have required 

repetitive tests of double-skin feeder 

tanks for fuel leaks, and corrective 

actions, if necessary. It also would have 

required modification of seals in the 

feeder tanks, which would have 

terminated the repetitive leak tests. That 

proposal was prompted by issuance of 

mandatory continuing airworthiness 

information by a foreign airworthiness 

authority. This new action revises the 

proposed rule by making the proposed 

requirements applicable to additional 

airplanes. The actions specified by this 

new proposed AD are intended to 

prevent fuel leaks from the feeder tanks, 

which could result in fuel vapors in the 

cabin that could come into contact with 

ignition sources. The actions are 

intended to address the identified 

unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by 

February 6, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in 

triplicate to the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Transport 

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114, 

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

335–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 

Renton, Washington 98055–4056. 

Comments may be inspected at this 

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

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. Comments may be 

submitted via fax to (425) 227–1232. 

Comments may also be sent via the 

Internet using the following address: 9-

anm-nprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments 

sent via fax or the Internet must contain 

‘‘Docket No. 2000–NM–335–AD’’ in the 

subject line and need not be submitted 

in triplicate. Comments sent via the 

Internet as attached electronic files must 

be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for 

Windows or ASCII text. 

The service information referenced in 

the proposed rule may be obtained from 

Dassault Falcon Jet, P.O. Box 2000, 

South Hackensack, New Jersey 07606. 

This information may be examined at 

the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 

Renton, Washington.

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 

Interested persons are invited to 

participate in the making of the 

proposed rule by submitting such 

written data, views, or arguments as 

they may desire. Communications shall 

identify the Rules Docket number and 

be submitted in triplicate to the address 

specified above. All communications 

received on or before the closing date 

for comments, specified above, will be 

considered before taking action on the 

proposed rule. The proposals contained 

in this action may be changed in light 

of the comments received. 

Submit comments using the following 

format: 

• Organize comments issue-by-issue. 

For example, discuss a request to 

change the compliance time and a 

request to change the service bulletin 

reference as two separate issues. 

• For each issue, state what specific 

change to the proposed AD is being 

requested. 

• Include justification (e.g., reasons or 

data) for each request. 

Comments are specifically invited on 

the overall regulatory, economic, 

environmental, and energy aspects of 

the proposed rule. All comments 

34 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules 

submitted will be available, both before 

and after the closing date for comments, 

in the Rules Docket for examination by 

interested persons. A report 

summarizing each FAA-public contact 

concerned with the substance of this 

proposal will be filed in the Rules 

Docket. 

Commenters wishing the FAA to 

acknowledge receipt of their comments 

submitted in response to this action 

must submit a self-addressed, stamped 

postcard on which the following 

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to 

Docket Number 2000–NM–335–AD.’’

The postcard will be date-stamped and 

returned to the commenter. 

Availability of NPRMs 

Any person may obtain a copy of this 

NPRM by submitting a request to the 

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

ANM–114, Attention: Rules Docket No. 

2000–NM–335–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, 

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056. 

Discussion 

A proposal to amend part 39 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 

part 39) to add an airworthiness 

directive (AD) applicable to certain 

Dassault Model Mystere-Falcon 50 

series airplanes was published as a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

in the Federal Register on July 25, 2001 

(66 FR 38585). That NPRM would have 

required repetitive tests of double-skin 

feeder tanks for fuel leaks, and 

corrective actions, if necessary. It also 

would have required modification of 

seals in the feeder tanks, which would 

have terminated the repetitive leak tests. 

That NPRM was prompted by issuance 

of mandatory continuing airworthiness 

information by a foreign airworthiness 

authority. That condition, if not 

corrected, could result in fuel leaks from 

the feeder tanks, which could result in 

fuel vapors in the cabin that could come 

into contact with ignition sources. 

Actions Since Issuance of Previous 

Proposal 

Since the issuance of that NPRM, the 

FAA has received information that the 

defect of the seals on double-skin feeder 

tanks on frames 28, 29, and 31, which 

was the subject of the NPRM, may exist 

on additional airplanes. Though the 

NPRM would have applied to Model 

Mystere-Falcon 50 series airplanes with 

serial numbers 253 to 286 inclusive, 

288, 290, and 291; airplanes with serial 

numbers 222 to 252 inclusive are also 

subject to the identified unsafe 

condition. Therefore, these airplanes 

also must be made subject to the 

repetitive tests of double-skin feeder 

tanks for fuel leaks, corrective actions, 

if necessary, and modification of seals 

in the feeder tanks, as proposed in the 

original NPRM. 

Conclusion 

Since the change described previously 

expands the scope of the originally 

proposed rule, the FAA has determined 

that it is necessary to reopen the 

comment period to provide additional 

opportunity for public comment. 

Comments Received in Response to the 

NPRM 

Due consideration has been given to 

the following comments, which were 

received in response to the NPRM. 

Refer to New Service Information 

The commenter, the airplane 

manufacturer, requests that the FAA 

revise paragraphs (a) and (b) of the 

NPRM to refer to certain work cards of 

the Dassault Falcon 50 Maintenance 

Manual, Revision 7, dated August 2001. 

The NPRM refers to Temporary Revision 

No. 19 to the Dassault Falcon 50 

Maintenance Manual, dated April 2000, 

as the appropriate source of service 

information for the actions in those 

paragraphs. The commenter states that it 

is preferable to refer to the work cards 

in Revision 7 of the maintenance 

manual, rather than to Temporary 

Revision No. 19, because the work cards 

more clearly identify the relevant 

material. 

We concur that the work cards in 

Revision 7 of the Dassault Falcon 50 

Maintenance Manual, as specified by 

the commenter, are a more definitive 

source of service information. We have 

revised paragraphs (a) and (b) of the 

supplemental NPRM accordingly. 

Clarify Paragraph (c) 

The commenter also asks us to revise 

the wording of paragraph (c) of the 

NPRM to include the words ‘‘double 

skin.’’ We concur that this change will 

provide clarification and, accordingly, 

have revised paragraph (c) of this 

supplemental NPRM to specify that the 

action described in that paragraph 

consists of rework of the seals of the 

DOUBLE-SKIN feeder tanks at frames 28 

and 31. 

Cost Impact 

The FAA estimates that 46 airplanes 

of U.S. registry would be affected by this 

proposed AD. 

The FAA estimates that it would take 

approximately 8 work hours per 

airplane to accomplish the proposed 

leak tests, and that the average labor rate 

is $60 per work hour. Based on these 

figures, the cost impact of the proposed 

leak tests on U.S. operators is estimated 

to be $22,080, or $480 per airplane, per 

test. 

The FAA estimates that it would take 

approximately 50 work hours per 

airplane to accomplish the proposed 

reworking of the seals in the feeder 

tanks, and that the average labor rate is 

$60 per work hour. The required parts 

would be provided at no charge to the 

operator. Based on these figures, the 

cost impact of the reworking of the seals 

on U.S. operators is estimated to be 

$138,000, or $3,000 per airplane. 

The cost impact figures discussed 

above are based on assumptions that no 

operator has yet accomplished any of 

the proposed requirements of this AD 

action, and that no operator would 

accomplish those actions in the future if 

this proposed AD were not adopted. The 

cost impact figures discussed in AD 

rulemaking actions represent only the 

time necessary to perform the specific 

actions actually required by the AD. 

These figures typically do not include 

incidental costs, such as the time 

required to gain access and close up, 

planning time, or time necessitated by 

other administrative actions. 

Regulatory Impact 

The regulations proposed herein 

would not have a substantial direct 

effect on the States, on the relationship 

between the national Government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government. Therefore, 

it is determined that this proposal 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that this proposed regulation (1) 

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not 

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 

FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if 

promulgated, will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft 

regulatory evaluation prepared for this 

action is contained in the Rules Docket. 

A copy of it may be obtained by 

contacting the Rules Docket at the 

location provided under the caption 

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, pursuant to the 

authority delegated to me by the 

Administrator, the Federal Aviation 

Administration proposes to amend part 

Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2002 / Proposed Rules 35

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations 

(14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. Section 39.13 is amended by 

adding the following new airworthiness 

directive:

Dassault Aviation: Docket 2000–NM–335–

AD.

Applicability: Model Mystere-Falcon 50 

series airplanes, certificated in any category, 

serial numbers 222 to 286 inclusive, 288, 

290, and 291.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane 

identified in the preceding applicability 

provision, regardless of whether it has been 

modified, altered, or repaired in the area 

subject to the requirements of this AD. For 

airplanes that have been modified, altered, or 

repaired so that the performance of the 

requirements of this AD is affected, the 

owner/operator must request approval for an 

alternative method of compliance in 

accordance with paragraph (d) of this AD. 

The request should include an assessment of 

the effect of the modification, alteration, or 

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by 

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not 

been eliminated, the request should include 

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless 

accomplished previously. 

To prevent fuel leaks from the feeder tanks, 

which could result in fuel vapors in the cabin 

that could come into contact with ignition 

sources, accomplish the following: 

Leak Testing 

(a) Within 7 months after the effective date 

of this AD: Perform a feeder tank leak test by 

sampling at the drain ports of frames 29 and 

31, in accordance with Work Card No. 686.3/

1 of the Dassault Falcon 50 Maintenance 

Manual, Revision 7, dated August 2001. 

Repeat the leak test at intervals not to exceed 

13 months, until accomplishment of 

paragraph (c) of this AD. 

Corrective Action 

(b) If the feeder tank leak test indicates that 

a leak is present: Prior to further flight, renew 

the seal, in accordance with Work Card No. 

686.4/1 of the Dassault Falcon 50 

Maintenance Manual, Revision 7, dated 

August 2001. 

Modification 

(c) Within 78 months since the date of 

manufacture of the airplane: Rework the seals 

of the double-skin feeder tanks at frames 28 

and 31, in accordance with Dassault Service 

Bulletin F50–328, dated May 31, 2000. 

Accomplishment of the rework terminates 

the requirements of this AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(d) An alternative method of compliance or 

adjustment of the compliance time that 

provides an acceptable level of safety may be 

used if approved by the Manager, 

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA. 

Operators shall submit their requests through 

an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance 

Inspector, who may add comments and then 

send it to the Manager, International Branch, 

ANM–116.

Note 2: Information concerning the 

existence of approved alternative methods of 

compliance with this AD, if any, may be 

obtained from the Manager, International 

Branch, ANM–116.

Special Flight Permits 

(e) Special flight permits may be issued in 

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to 

a location where the requirements of this AD 

can be accomplished.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed 

in French airworthiness directive 2000–163–

030(B), dated April 19, 2000.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

December 26, 2001. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–32194 Filed 12–31–01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. 2001–NM–209–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 767 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This document proposes the 

adoption of a new airworthiness 

directive (AD) that is applicable to 

certain Boeing Model 767 series 

airplanes. This proposal would require 

an inspection of the tripod strut 

assembly of the inboard support of the 

leading edge slat of the wing for a 

preload condition, and follow-on 

actions. For certain airplanes, this 

proposal also would require inspection 

and replacement of the existing tripod 

struts with new, adjustable struts, if 

necessary. This action is necessary to 

prevent damage to the tripod strut 

assembly due to a preload condition, 

which could result in loss of control of 

the inboard leading edge slat or 

separation of the slat from the airplane, 

and consequent reduced controllability 

of the airplane. This action is intended 

to address the identified unsafe 

condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by 

February 19, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in 

triplicate to the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Transport 

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114, 

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001–NM–

209–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 

Renton, Washington 98055–4056. 

Comments may be inspected at this 

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

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. Comments may be 

submitted via fax to (425) 227–1232. 

Comments may also be sent via the 

Internet using the following address: 9-

anm-nprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments 

sent via fax or the Internet must contain 

‘‘Docket No. 2001–NM–209–AD’’ in the 

subject line and need not be submitted 

in triplicate. Comments sent via the 

Internet as attached electronic files must 

be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for 

Windows or ASCII text. 

The service information referenced in 

the proposed rule may be obtained from 

Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, 

P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 

98124–2207. This information may be 

examined at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind 

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Craycraft, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe 

Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind 

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2782; 

fax (425) 227–1181.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

Interested persons are invited to 

participate in the making of the 

proposed rule by submitting such 

written data, views, or arguments as 

they may desire. Communications shall 

identify the Rules Docket number and 

be submitted in triplicate to the address 

specified above. All communications 

received on or before the closing date 

for comments, specified above, will be 

considered before taking action on the 

proposed rule. The proposals contained 

in this action may be changed in light 

of the comments received. 

Submit comments using the following 

format: 

• Organize comments issue-by-issue. 

For example, discuss a request to 

change the compliance time and a 

request to change the service bulletin 

reference as two separate issues. 

• For each issue, state what specific 

change to the proposed AD is being 

requested.