This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

41005 

Vol. 78, No. 131 

Tuesday, July 9, 2013 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0602; Directorate 

Identifier 2012–CE–010–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Vulcanair 

S.p.A. Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for 

Vulcanair S.p.A. (type certificate 

previously held by Partenavia) Models P 

68, P 68B, P 68C, P 68C–TC, P 68 

‘‘OBSERVER,’’ P68TC ‘‘OBSERVER,’’ 

and P68 ‘‘OBSERVER 2’’ airplanes that 

would supersede AD 2008–24–11, 

Amendment 39–15751. This proposed 

AD results from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

originated by an aviation authority of 

another country to identify and correct 

an unsafe condition on an aviation 

product. The MCAI describes the unsafe 

condition as cracking and/or corrosion 

of the wing spar, which could result in 

structural failure of the wing. We are 

issuing this proposed AD to require 

actions to address the unsafe condition 

on these products. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by August 23, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Vulcanair 

Airworthiness Office, Via G Pascoli, 7, 

80026 Casoria, Italy; phone: +39 081 59 

18 135; fax: +39 081 59 18 172; email: 

airworthiness@vulcanair.com; Internet: 

http://www.vulcanair.com/pageview.php?pagename=Service Bulletins. 

You may review copies of the 

referenced service information at the 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 

Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. 

For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call (816) 329– 

4148. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; 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 proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(telephone (800) 647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mike Kiesov, Aerospace Safety 

Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane 

Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, 

Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329– 

4144; fax: (816) 329–4090; email: 

mike.kiesov@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2013–0602; Directorate Identifier 

2012–CE–010–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

regulations.gov, including any personal 

information you provide. We will also 

post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

On November 19, 2008, we issued AD 

2008–24–11, Amendment 39–15751 (73 

FR 72314; November 28, 2008). That AD 

required actions intended to address an 

unsafe condition on the Vulcanair 

S.p.A. Models P 68, P 68B, P 68C, P 

68C–TC, P 68 ‘‘OBSERVER,’’ 

AP68TP300 ‘‘SPARTACUS,’’ P68TC 

‘‘OBSERVER,’’ AP68TP 600 ‘‘VIATOR,’’ 

and P68 ‘‘OBSERVER 2’’ airplanes. 

Since we issued AD 2008–24–11 (73 

FR 72314; November 28, 2008), 

Vulcanair S.p.A. developed 

modification kits to repair certain lower 

spar caps. They also developed a 

maintenance manual supplement with 

special inspections of the wing and 

stabilator structures and new limitations 

for the wing structure. 

The FAA also realized that the 

Models AP68TP300 ’’SPARTACUS’’ and 

AP68TP 600 ’’VIATOR’’ were 

inadvertenly included in AD 2008–24– 

11. 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued AD No.: 2010– 

0051, dated March 25, 2010 (referred to 

after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an 

unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The MCAI states: 

Safe Life Limits of the wing structure of 

P.68 Series aeroplanes have now been 

extended up to a maximum of 23 900 Flight 

Hours (FH), depending on the condition of 

the spar lower cap angles and on the 

embodiment of some modification kits. 

Furthermore, special inspections of the wing 

and stabilator structures, different from those 

previously required by EASA AD 2007–0027, 

have also been introduced. This change has 

been developed by Vulcanair under change 

No. MOD. P68/144 approved by EASA with 

approval No. 10028661 on 02 February 2010. 

Consequently this AD, which supersedes 

EASA AD 2007–0027, allows the 

implementation of the extended Safe Life 

Limits, in accordance with the instructions of 

Vulcanair SB 162, and requires the 

accomplishment of special inspections for 

the wing and stabilator structures, in 

accordance with the Aircraft Maintenance 

Manual (AMM) Supplement part number (P/ 

N) NOR 10.771–52. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

41006 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

You may obtain further information by 

examining the MCAI in the AD docket. 

EASA AD No.: 2010–0051, dated 

March 25, 2010; Vulcanair S.p.A. 

Maintenance Manual Supplement 

NOR10.771–52, dated March 1, 2010; 

Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 

162, dated March 1, 2010; Vulcanair 

S.p.A. Service Instruction No. 88, dated 

March 1, 2010; and Vulcanair S.p.A. 

Service Instruction No. 89, dated March 

1, 2010, base the extended safe life 

limits on repetitive inspections and 

other required preventive and corrective 

actions that under certain conditions 

allow flight with known cracks in 

critical structure. The FAA’s Small 

Airplane Directorate does not allow 

further flight with known cracks in 

critical structure without additional 

substantiating data. Advisory Circular 

(AC) 23–13A, Chapter 6, dated 

September 29, 2005, describes what 

additional data is required to allow 

flight with known cracks (found on the 

Internet at http://rgl.faa.gov/ 

Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/ 

rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf). 

Relevant Service Information 

Vulcanair S.p.A. has issued 

Maintenance Manual Supplement 

NOR10.771–52, dated March 1, 2010; 

Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 

162, dated March 1, 2010; Vulcanair 

S.p.A. Service Instruction No. 88, dated 

March 1, 2010; and Vulcanair S.p.A. 

Service Instruction No. 89, dated March 

1, 2010. The actions described in this 

service information are intended to 

correct the unsafe condition identified 

in the MCAI. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of the Proposed AD 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of another 

country, and is approved for operation 

in the United States. Pursuant to our 

bilateral agreement with this State of 

Design Authority, they have notified us 

of the unsafe condition described in the 

MCAI and service information 

referenced above. We are proposing this 

AD because we evaluated all 

information and determined the unsafe 

condition exists and is likely to exist or 

develop on other products of the same 

type design. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

will affect 75 products of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it would take 

about 60 work-hours per product to 

comply with the basic requirements of 

this proposed AD. The average labor 

rate is $85 per work-hour. 

Based on these figures, we estimate 

the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. 

operators to be $382,500, or $5,100 per 

product. 

We estimate that the wing 

replacement would take about 300 

work-hours and require parts costing 

$443,406, for a cost of $468,906 per 

product. Wing replacement is only 

required when the wing structure 

exceeds the safe life established in this 

AD. 

In addition, we estimate that any 

necessary follow-on actions for kit 

installation would take about 120 workhours and require parts costing $2,595, 

for a cost of $12,795 per product. We 

have no way of determining the number 

of products that may need these actions. 

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. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

This section presents the initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) 

that was done for this action. We have 

reworded and reformatted for Federal 

Register publication purposes. The 

IRFA in its original form can be found 

in the docket at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Introduction and Purpose of This 

Analysis 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(Pub. L. 96–354) (RFA) establishes ‘‘as a 

principle of regulatory issuance that 

agencies shall endeavor, consistent with 

the objectives of the rule and of 

applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and 

informational requirements to the scale 

of the businesses, organizations, and 

governmental jurisdictions subject to 

regulation.’’ To achieve this principle, 

the RFA requires agencies to solicit and 

consider flexible regulatory proposals 

and to explain the rationale for their 

actions to assure that such proposals are 

seriously considered.’’ The RFA covers 

a wide-range of small entities, including 

small businesses, not-for-profit 

organizations, and small governmental 

jurisdictions. 

Agencies must perform a review to 

determine whether a rule will have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. If 

the agency determines that it will, the 

agency must prepare an IRFA as 

described in the RFA. 

Section 603(a) of the RFA requires 

that each initial regulatory flexibility 

analysis contain the following 

information: 

• A description of the reasons action 

by the agency is being considered; 

• A succinct statement of the 

objectives of, and legal basis for, the 

proposed rule; 

• A description of and, where 

feasible, an estimate of the number of 

small entities to which the proposed 

rule will apply; 

• A description of the projected 

reporting, recordkeeping and other 

compliance requirements of the 

proposed rule, including an estimate of 

the classes of small entities which will 

be subject to the requirement and the 

type of professional skills necessary for 

preparation of the report or record; 

• To the extent practicable, an 

identification of all relevant Federal 

rules which may duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with the proposed rule; and 

• A description of any significant 

alternatives to the proposed rule which 

accomplish the stated objectives of 

applicable statues and which minimize 

any significant economic impact of the 

proposed rule on small entities. 

The following represents a detailed 

description of the six items required by 

section 603(a) of the RFA. 

1. A Description of the Reasons Action 

by the Agency Is Being Considered 

This proposed AD results from 

mandatory continuing airworthiness 

information (MCAI) originated by EASA 

and would supersede AD 2008–24–11, 

Amendment 39–15751 (73 FR 72314; 

November 28, 2008). AD 2008–24–11 

established safe limits for the wing 

structure of Vulcanair P 68 series 

airplanes and required repetitive 

inspection and repair of the wing and 

stabilator structures when the airplanes 

reach safe life limits. Operation beyond 

existing conservative safe limits (with 

inspections and repair) is allowed 

pending establishment of final safe 

limits and a terminating action. 

The proposed AD significantly 

increases wing structure life limits (in a 

few cases requiring kit modification of 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2013 / Proposed Rules 41007 

the wing structure), but establishes a 

terminating action requiring 

replacement of the wing structure and 

wing fuselage attachments and bolts 

when new established safe limits are 

reached. Prior to the wing structure safe 

life limit being reached, the proposed 

AD also requires special inspections of 

the wing structure with time limits, 

since new, of 6,000; 12,000; and 18,000 

flight hours. 

2. Objectives of, and Legal Basis for, the 

Proposed Rule 

Title 49 of the U.S. 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 FAA’s authority. We 

propose 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 the 

airplanes identified in this AD. 

3. A Description of and an Estimate of 

the Number of Small Entities to Which 

the Proposed Rule Will Apply 

This proposed rule would affect 67 

U.S.-registered airplanes, of which 40 

are owned by corporations, 8 by 

individuals, 2 by the Federal 

Government, and 17 by state 

governments. Of the 48 airplanes held 

by private sector parties, one financing 

firm owns 2 of them, and 2 operators 

each own 2 of them. The remaining 36 

airplanes are owned by 36 corporations 

and individuals. The FAA believes that 

all, or nearly all, of these private sector 

owners are privately held small firms, 

for which we cannot obtain financial 

records. We conclude that the proposed 

rule would affect a substantial number 

of small entities. 

4. Reporting, Record Keeping, and Other 

Compliance Requirements of the 

Proposed Rule 

Small entities will incur no new 

reporting and record-keeping 

requirements as a result of this rule. 

The additional requirements of the 

proposed AD compared to AD 2008–24– 

11, Amendment 39–15751 (73 FR 

72314; November 28, 2008) are the 

special wing structure inspections at 

6,000; 12,000; and 18,000 flight hours; 

the terminating action to replace the 

wing structure when the wing structure 

safe limit is reached; and, for airplanes 

with serial numbers 1–256 for which a 

spar crack was found under previous 

Partenavia Costruzioni Aeronautiche 

S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 65, Revison 

3, dated September 30, 1985, 

replacement of the four main spar lower 

cap angles using Vulcanair S.p.A. 

Service Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 

2010. The costs of the required actions 

provided in the proposed AD are as 

follows: 

Requirement Work-hours Labor cost Cost of 

materials Total cost 

Special inspections .......................................................................................... 60 $5,100 

Wing structure replacement ............................................................................. 300 25,500 $443,406 $468,906 

Replacement of lower spar cap angles with Service Bulletin 162 (S/N 1– 

256) .............................................................................................................. 120 10,200 2,595 12,795 

Figure 1 of the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis in this AD. 

The requirement to replace the wing 

structure, at considerable cost, occurs 

when the airplanes are old and have low 

value, often less than the cost of wing 

structure replacement. Therefore, in 

many cases airplane retirement is the 

least cost alternative, in which case the 

effective cost of the requirement is the 

loss in airplane value net of salvage 

value. The requirement to replace the 

lower spar cap angles applies to at most 

ten U.S.-registered airplanes and only if 

a front spar crack was previously found 

under Partenavia Costruzioni 

Aeronautiche S.p.A. Service Bulletin 

No. 65, Revison 3, dated September 30, 

1985. The expected present value cost of 

this requirement is thus minimal. The 

requirement for special inspections at 

6,000; 12,000; and 18,000 flight hours 

applies to all AD-affected airplanes. 

Economic Impact on Small Entities 

Since we have no financial 

information of the privately held firms 

that constitute most of the operators of 

the affected airplanes, we assess the 

economic impact of the proposed rule 

using airplane values. As the Vulcanair 

P 68 airplanes are not listed in the 

Aircraft Bluebook Price Digest, we 

undertook an internet search and found 

that the resale value of older P 68 

airplanes, manufactured between 1975 

and 1984 ranged from about $80,000 to 

$300,000. Many of these airplanes will 

be subject to the special inspection at 

6,000 hours or even the special 

inspection at 12,000 hours. Using a 

significant economic impact criterion of 

2 percent of airplane value, for operators 

of many of these airplanes there is a 

significant economic impact based on 

just one $5,100 inspection. Taking into 

account the present value cost of two to 

three possible future inspections and 

possible repair, as well as the present 

value cost of forced early retirement, 

there is a significant economic impact 

on most if not all of these operators. 

Therefore, we conclude that this 

proposed rule will have a significant 

impact on a substantial number of firms. 

5. Duplicative, Overlapping or 

Conflicting Federal Rules 

The FAA is unaware of any Federal 

rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict 

with this proposed rule. 

6. Significant Alternatives to the 

Proposed Rule 

Because of an unsafe condition that is 

likely to exist or develop on the 

airplanes identified in this proposed 

AD, there is no feasible significant 

alternative to requiring the actions of 

this proposed AD. The FAA invites 

public comment on this determination. 

Regulatory Findings 

We 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 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), 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

41008 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska, and 

(4) Will 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. 

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 FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing Amendment 39–15751 (73 FR 

72314; November 28, 2008), and adding 

the following new AD: 

Vulcanair S.p.A. (Type Certificate 

Previously Held by Partenavia): Docket 

No. FAA–2013–0602; Directorate 

Identifier 2012–CE–010–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by August 23, 

2013. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD supersedes AD 2008–24–11, 

Amendment 39–15751 (73 FR 72314; 

November 28, 2008). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Vulcanair S.p.A. 

Models P 68, P 68B, P 68C, P 68C–TC, P 68 

‘‘OBSERVER,’’ P68TC ‘‘OBSERVER,’’ and 

P68 ‘‘OBSERVER 2’’ airplanes, serial 

numbers (S/N) 01 through 429, S/Ns 431 

through 452, and S/N 454, certificated in any 

category. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association of America 

(ATA) Code 57: Wings. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by mandatory 

continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) 

originated by an aviation authority of another 

country to identify and correct an unsafe 

condition on an aviation product. The MCAI 

describes the unsafe condition as cracking 

and/or corrosion of the wing spar. We are 

issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking 

and corrosion of the wing spars, which, if not 

corrected, could result in structural failure of 

the wing. 

(f) Actions and Compliance 

Unless already done, do the following 

actions specified in paragraphs (f)(1) through 

(f)(8) of this AD, to include all 

subparagraphs. 

(1) Within 10 days after the effective date 

of this AD, incorporate Vulcanair S.p.A. 

Maintenance Manual Supplement 

NOR10.771–52, dated March 1, 2010, into the 

FAA-approved maintenance program 

(maintenance manual) following Vulcanair 

S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 162, dated March 

1, 2010. 

(2) Within 10 days after the effective date 

of this AD, determine the safe life limit of the 

wing structure as follows: 

(i) For all rows except rows (c) and (e) in 

table 1, of paragraph 1.3, of Vulcanair S.p.A. 

Service Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 

2010, use the safe life limit specified in the 

appropriate row of the table; and 

(ii) For rows (c) and (e) in table 1, of 

paragraph 1.3, of Vulcanair S.p.A. Service 

Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 2010, before 

further flight, you must modify the wing 

structure following Vulcanair S.p.A. Service 

Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 2010. After 

modification, use the safe life limit specified 

in the appropriate row of the table. 

(3) Before reaching the life limit as 

determined in paragraph (f)(2) of this AD, 

before further flight, you must replace the 

wing structure and wing fuselage 

attachments and bolts with new ones. Do the 

replacement following Vulcanair S.p.A 

Maintenance Manual Supplement 

NOR10.771–52, dated March 1, 2010, as 

specified in the instructions in WORK 

PROCEDURE, paragraph 2 of Vulcanair 

S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 162, dated March 

1, 2010. 

(4) Do an initial inspection of the wing 

structure as specified in the instructions in 

paragraph 2.1 of Vulcanair S.p.A. Service 

Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 2010, at the 

applicable times as specified in paragraphs 

(f)(4)(i) and (f)(4)(ii). Repetitively thereafter 

inspect and replace the wing structure 

following the limitations in Vulcanair S.p.A. 

Maintenance Manual Supplement 

NOR10.771–52, dated March 1, 2010. 

(i) For aircraft that have not exceeded the 

safe life limit hours time-in-service (TIS) on 

the wing structure as determined in 

paragraph (f)(2) of this AD: Before 

accumulating 6,000 hours TIS on the wing 

structure or within 100 hours TIS after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 

later, follow Vulcanair S.p.A. Maintenance 

Manual Supplement NOR10.771–52, dated 

March 1, 2010. You may take unless already 

done credit for this inspection if inspected in 

compliance with AD 2008–24–11 (73 FR 

72314; November 28, 2008); or 

(ii) For aircraft that have exceeded the safe 

life limit hours TIS on the wing structure as 

determined in paragraph (f)(2) of this AD: 

Within 100 hours TIS after the effective date 

of this AD, follow Vulcanair S.p.A. Service 

Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 2010. 

(5) Before accumulating 8,500 hours TIS 

since new on the stabilator, within 500 hours 

TIS after January 2, 2009 (the effective date 

of AD 2008–24–11 (73 FR 72314; November 

28, 2008)), or within 500 hours TIS from the 

last inspection done in compliance with AD 

2008–24–11, whichever occurs later, do the 

initial inspection of the stabilator following 

Vulcanair S.p.A. Maintenance Manual 

Supplement NOR10.771–52, paragraph 2.2, 

dated March 1, 2010, or Vulcanair S.p.A. 

Service Bulletin No. 120 Rev. 1, dated June 

7, 2006. Repetitively thereafter inspect the 

stabilator following the limitations in 

Vulcanair S.p.A. Maintenance Manual 

Supplement NOR10.771–52, dated March 1, 

2010. 

(6) If any cracks are found during the 

inspections required in paragraphs (f)(4) and/ 

or (f)(5) of this AD, before further flight, 

modify the wing structure following 

Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 162, 

dated March 1, 2010. 

(7) For certain Model P 68 airplanes, AD 

2009–24–03, Amendment 39–16090 (74 FR 

62211, November 27, 2009) requires 

repetitive inspections of the front and rear 

wing spars for cracks and modification if 

cracks are found. The modification 

terminates the repetitive inspections required 

in AD 2009–24–03 and may be done 

regardless if cracks are found. The actions of 

AD 2009–24–03 are independent of this AD 

action and remain in effect. 

(8) EASA AD No.: 2010–0051, dated March 

25, 2010; Vulcanair S.p.A. Maintenance 

Manual Supplement NOR10.771–52, dated 

March 1, 2010; Vulcanair S.p.A. Service 

Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 2010; 

Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Instruction No. 88, 

dated March 1, 2010; and Vulcanair S.p.A. 

Service Instruction No. 89, dated March 1, 

2010, base the required preventive and 

corrective actions on allowing flight with 

known cracks in critical structure. The FAA’s 

Small Airplane Directorate does not allow 

further flight with known cracks in critical 

structure without additional substantiating 

data. Advisory Circular (AC) 23–13A,Chapter 

6, dated September 29, 2005, describes what 

additional data is required to allow flight 

with known cracks (found on the Internet at 

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_

Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf). 

(g) Other FAA AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Office, 

FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs 

for this AD, if requested using the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to 

ATTN: Mike Kiesov, Aerospace Safety 

Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 

901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 

telephone: (816) 329–4144; fax: (816) 329– 

4090; email: mike.kiesov@faa.gov. Before 

using any approved AMOC on any airplane 

to which the AMOC applies, notify your 

appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the 

FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), 

or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(h) Related Information 

(1) Refer to MCAI European Aviation 

Safety Agency (EASA) AD No. 2010–0051, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2013 / Proposed Rules 41009 

dated March 25, 2010, which may be found 

in the AD docket on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; Vulcanair S.p.A. 

Service Instruction No. 88, dated March 1, 

2010; and Vulcanair S.p.A. Service 

Instruction No. 89, dated March 1, 2010, for 

related information. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Vulcanair Airworthiness 

Office, Via G Pascoli, 7, 80026 Casoria, Italy; 

phone: +39 081 59 18 135; fax: +39 081 59 

18 172; email: airworthiness@vulcanair.com; 

Internet: http://www.vulcanair.com/pageview.php?pagename=Service-Bulletins. 

(3) You may view this service information 

at FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 

Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call (816) 329–4148. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on July 2, 

2013. 

Earl Lawrence, 

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–16394 Filed 7–8–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2013–0501] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone; National Governors 

Association, Milwaukee, WI 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

establish two safety zones in 

Milwaukee, Wisconsin for the 2013 

National Governors Association summer 

meeting. The first zone is intended to 

restrict vessels from a portion of 

Milwaukee Harbor; the second zone is 

intended to restrict vessels from a 

portion of the Menomonee River. These 

two proposed safety zones are necessary 

to protect the public and transiting 

vessels from the hazards associated with 

the anticipated congregation of 

spectator, volunteer, and government 

vessels in these areas. The proposed 

safety zones are also necessary to 

protect the public from the hazards 

associated with a fireworks display. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before August 8, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2013–0501 using any one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

(2) Fax: 202–493–2251. 

(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility 

(M–30), U.S. Department of 

Transportation, West Building Ground 

Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590– 

0001. 

(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail 

address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The telephone number 

is 202–366–9329. 

To avoid duplication, please use only 

one of these four methods. See the 

‘‘Public Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below for instructions on submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this proposed 

rule, call or email Petty Officer Joseph 

McCollum, U.S. Coast Guard Sector 

Lake Michigan; telephone 414–747– 

7148, email 

Joseph.P.McCollum@uscg.mil. If you 

have questions on viewing or submitting 

material to the docket, call Barbara 

Hairston, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Acronyms 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

A. Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 

comments and related materials. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. 

1. Submitting Comments 

If you submit a comment, please 

include the docket number for this 

rulemaking (USCG–2013–0501), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and provide a reason for each 

suggestion or recommendation. You 

may submit your comments and 

material online at, http:// 

www.regulations.gov or by fax, mail, or 

hand delivery, but please use only one 

of these means. If you submit a 

comment it will be considered received 

by the Coast Guard when you 

successfully transmit the comment. If 

you fax, hand deliver, or mail your 

comment, it will be considered as 

having been received by the Coast 

Guard when it is received at the Docket 

Management Facility. We recommend 

that you include your name and a 

mailing address, an email address, or a 

telephone number in the body of your 

document so that we can contact you if 

we have questions regarding your 

submission. 

To submit your comment online, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, type the 

docket number USCG–2013–0501 in the 

‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’ 

Click on the ‘‘submit a comment’’ box, 

which will then become highlighted in 

blue. If you submit your comments by 

mail or hand delivery, submit them in 

an unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2

by 11 inches, suitable for copying and 

electronic filing. If you submit 

comments by mail and would like to 

know that they reached the Facility, 

please enclose a stamped, self-addressed 

postcard or envelope. We will consider 

all comments and material received 

during the comment period and may 

change the rule based on your 

comments. 

2. Viewing Comments and Documents 

To view comments, as well as 

documents mentioned in this preamble 

as being available in the docket, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, click on the 

‘‘read comments’’ box, which will then 

become highlighted in blue. In the 

‘‘SEARCH’’ box insert ‘‘USCG–2013– 

0501’’ and click ‘‘Search.’’ Click the 

‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ in the ‘‘Actions’’ 

column. You may also visit the Docket 

Management Facility in Room W12–140 

on the ground floor of the Department 

of Transportation West Building, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. 

3. Privacy Act 

Anyone can search the electronic 

form of comments received into any of 

our dockets by the name of the 

individual submitting the comment (or 

signing the comment, if submitted on 

behalf of an association, business, labor 

union, etc.). You may review a Privacy 

Act notice regarding our public dockets 

in the January 17, 2008, issue of the 

Federal Register (73 FR 3316). 

4. Public Meeting 

We do not now plan to hold a public 

meeting. But you may submit a request 

for one using one of the four methods 

specified under ADDRESSES. Please 

explain why you believe a public 

meeting would be beneficial. If we 

determine that one would aid this 

rulemaking, we will hold one at a time 

and place announced by a later notice 

in the Federal Register. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS