Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

Code · REGISTER · 2000-06-14 · Federal Aviation Administration, DOT · Proposed Rules

Proposed Rules. Proposed rule; withdrawal

543 words·~2 min read·/register/2000/06/14/00-14952·

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

Agency: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT
Action: Proposed rule; withdrawal
Citation: FR Doc. 00-14952 · RIN 2120-AA64 · Docket No. 92-NM-206-AD · 14 CFR 39

Summary

This action withdraws a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that proposed a new airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to certain Gulfstream Model G-IV series airplanes. That action would have required inspection of the data plate on the bottom of the hydraulic brake control module (HBCM) to verify the part and serial numbers, and replacement of the HBCM, if necessary. Since the issuance of the NPRM, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has received new data indicating that the proposed actions have been accomplished on all affected airplanes; therefore, the previously identified unsafe condition no longer exists. Accordingly, the proposed rule is withdrawn.

Supplementary Information

A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to add a new airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to certain Gulfstream Model G-IV series airplanes, was published in the Federal Register as a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on April 9, 1993 (58 FR 18347). The proposed rule would have required inspection of the data plate on the bottom of the hydraulic brake control module (HBCM) to verify the part and serial numbers, and replacement of the HBCM, if necessary. That action was prompted by a landing incident that involved a malfunction of the braking system. The proposed actions were intended to prevent a malfunction of the braking system, which could lead to reduced controllability of the airplane on the ground. Actions that Occurred Since the NPRM Was Issued Since the issuance of that NPRM, Gulfstream has provided evidence to the FAA that the actions proposed in the NPRM have been accomplished on all affected airplanes (Evidence was provided to the FAA in Gulfstream's letter of May 30, 2000, which is filed in the Rules Docket.) FAA's Conclusions Upon further consideration, the FAA has determined that, based on this evidence, the previously identified unsafe condition no longer exists with regard to the Gulfstream Model G-IV series airplanes. Accordingly, the proposed rule is hereby withdrawn. Withdrawal of this notice of proposed rulemaking constitutes only such action, and does not preclude the agency from issuing another notice in the future, nor does it commit the agency to any course of action in the future. Regulatory Impact Since this action only withdraws a notice of proposed rulemaking, 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, the notice of proposed rulemaking, Docket 92-NM-206-AD, published in the Federal Register on April 9, 1993 (58 FR 18347), is withdrawn. Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 7, 2000. Donald L. Riggin, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 00-14952 Filed 6-13-00; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 1
Traces to 1 document
1 reference not yet in our index
  • 14 CFR 39
Citation graph
cites case law
Proposed Rules
Proposed rule; withdrawal
Cite14 CFR 39
Cites 2Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.