Airworthiness Directives; Gulfstream Model GV-SP Series Airplanes, 18253-18254 [E6-5253]

Agencies

• Federal Aviation Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 11, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18253-18254]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-5253]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2005-23249; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-219-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Gulfstream Model GV-SP Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FAA withdraws a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that 
proposed a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Gulfstream 
Model GV-SP series airplanes. The proposed AD would have required an 
inspection to determine the serial number of the anti-skid control unit 
(ACU) in the right electronics equipment rack, and replacement of the 
ACU with a new or serviceable ACU if necessary. Since the proposed AD 
was issued, we have received new data that indicate the identified 
unsafe condition has been corrected on all airplanes that would have 
been affected by the NPRM, and on all ACUs in the affected range of 
serial numbers. Accordingly, the proposed AD is withdrawn.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://
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 U.S. 
Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Room PL-401, 
Washington, DC. This docket number is FAA-2005-23249; the directorate 
identifier for this docket is 2005-NM-219-AD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Darby Mirocha, Aerospace Engineer, 
Systems and Equipment Branch, ACE-119A, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft 
Certification Office, One Crown Center, 1895 Phoenix Boulevard, suite 
450, Atlanta, Georgia 30349; telephone (770) 703-6095; fax (770) 703-
6097.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We proposed to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations 
(14 CFR part 39) with a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for a new 
AD for certain Gulfstream Model GV-SP series airplanes. That NPRM was 
published in

[[Page 18254]]

the Federal Register on December 9, 2005 (70 FR 73173). The NPRM would 
have required an inspection to determine the serial number of the anti-
skid control unit (ACU) in the right electronics equipment rack, and 
replacement of the ACU with a new or serviceable ACU if necessary. The 
NPRM resulted from a report that an airplane temporarily lost normal 
braking function during landing rollout on a pre-delivery flight. The 
proposed actions were intended to prevent loss of normal braking 
function, which could result in a runway overrun that could cause 
injury to flightcrew or passengers or damage to the airplane.

Actions Since NPRM Was Issued

    Since we issued the NPRM, Gulfstream Aerospace has provided data 
that indicate the identified unsafe condition has been corrected on all 
airplanes that would have been affected by the NPRM, and on all ACUs in 
the affected range of serial numbers (S/Ns). Gulfstream Aerospace 
therefore requests that we withdraw the NPRM. We agree with the 
commenter.

Request To Incorporate by Reference (IBR) the Service Information

    The Modification and Replacement Parts Association (MARPA) requests 
that we either publish the relevant service information with the AD, or 
IBR it with the NPRM. If we IBR rather than publish the relevant 
service information, then MARPA further requests that we identify the 
S/Ns of the defective ACUs in the AD. As justification, MARPA states 
that parts purveyors and maintenance facilities cannot identify the 
defective parts unless we specify them in the AD because they do not 
possess the proprietary service information referenced in the NPRM. For 
the same reason, MARPA states that those in the alternative parts 
industry (operating under 14 CFR 21.303) also cannot identify any parts 
manufacturer approval (PMA) parts equivalent to the defective ACUs. 
MARPA asserts that there are many ACUs in its PMA database that also 
may be affected by unsafe condition identified in the NPRM.
    MARPA also comments on our practice of IBR and referencing 
propriety service information. MARPA asserts that if we IBR proprietary 
service information with a public document, such as an AD, then that 
service information loses its protected status and becomes a public 
document. Also, MARPA claims that IBR requires we provide a copy of the 
relevant service information to the Director of the Federal Register 
before the NPRM can be published. MARPA further states that: ``Merely 
referencing a service document without incorporation thus becomes an 
``end run'' around the publication requirement while still requiring 
possession of a proprietary document in order to comply with the law.'' 
MARPA believes our practice of IBR is flawed legally where it is 
impossible to comply with the requirements of an AD without first 
obtaining the necessary propriety service information.
    Although we acknowledge MARPA's comments, we do not agree with its 
request, since the identified unsafe condition has been corrected on 
all airplanes that would have been affected by the NPRM and on all ACUs 
in the affected range of S/Ns. Those affected parts are ACUs having 
part number 1159SCL501-1 and S/Ns 355 through 400 inclusive. The unsafe 
condition identified in the NPRM was caused by the installation of 
incorrect capacitors in the affected ACUs only. Since that NPRM 
addresses a quality control issue limited to a range of S/Ns, we find 
that the MARPA's statements regarding PMA equivalent parts are not 
relevant to that particular NPRM.
    We have one correction regarding MARPA's comments on our practice 
of IBR and referencing propriety service information; we are required 
to provide a copy of any relevant service information to the Director 
of the Federal Register for publication of a final rule, not an NPRM. 
We are currently reviewing our practice of referencing proprietary 
service information. Once we have thoroughly examined all aspects of 
this issue, and have made a final determination, we will consider 
whether our current practice needs to be revised.

FAA's Conclusions

    Upon further consideration, we have determined that the actions 
that would have been required by the NPRM have already been 
accomplished on all affected airplanes, and that the identified unsafe 
condition has been corrected on all affected ACUs. Accordingly, the 
NPRM is withdrawn.
    Withdrawal of the NPRM does not preclude the FAA from issuing 
another related action or commit the FAA to any course of action in the 
future.

Regulatory Impact

    Since this action only withdraws an NPRM, it is neither a proposed 
nor a final rule and therefore is not covered under Executive Order 
12866, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, or DOT Regulatory Policies and 
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979).

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Withdrawal

    Accordingly, we withdraw the NPRM, Docket No. FAA-2005-23249, 
Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-219-AD, which was published in the 
Federal Register on December 9, 2005 (70 FR 73173).

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 31, 2006.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. E6-5253 Filed 4-10-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P