Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 7339

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–97–AD; Amendment

39–9917; AD 97–03–12]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Jetstream

Model 4101 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

SUMMARY: This document corrects

information in an existing airworthiness

directive (AD), applicable to certain

Jetstream Model 4101 airplanes, that

requires a one-time inspection for

damage caused by arcing and

overheating of the electrical ground

posts (‘‘earth posts’’) and ground cables

for the direct current (DC) power

generation and propeller de-icing

systems of the left and right engines;

and repair and replacement, if

necessary. This action corrects the AD

number assigned to that AD.

DATES: Effective March 14, 1997.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations was previously approved by

the Director of the Federal Register as

of March 14, 1997 (62 FR 5743,

February 7, 1997).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William Schroeder, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2148; fax (206) 227–1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

January 29, 1997, the FAA issued AD

97–03–12, amendment 39–9917 (62 FR

5743, February 7, 1997), which is

applicable to certain Jetstream Model

4101 airplanes. That AD requires a onetime inspection for damage caused by

arcing and overheating of the electrical

ground posts (‘‘earth posts’’) and ground

cables for the direct current (DC) power

generation and propeller de-icing

systems of the left and right engines;

and repair and replacement, if

necessary. That action was prompted by

reports indicating that earth posts on

some airplanes had failed due to

overheating. The actions specified by

that AD are intended to prevent

potential consequences of overheating,

such as failure of the DC power

generation and propeller de-icing

systems.

Since the issuance of that AD, the

FAA has become aware of the fact that

the document that was published in the

Federal Register contained the incorrect

AD number that had been assigned to

that action. The published version

indicated an AD number of 96–03–12.

However, the correct AD number is 97–

03–12.

Action is taken herein to correct the

AD number to 97–03–12 and to

correctly add the AD as an amendment

to section 39.13 of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR 39.13).

The effective date of the rule remains

March 14, 1997.

Since no other part of the regulatory

information has been changed, the final

rule is not being republished.

§ 39.13 [Corrected]

On page 5743, in the issue of February

7, 1997, in the second column, the

heading that identifies the pertinent

agency numbers is corrected to read as

follows:

* * * * *

[Docket No. 96-NM–97–AD; Amendment 39–

9917, AD 97–03–12]

* * * * *

On page 5744, in the issue of February

7, 1997, in the first column, the

introductory text that specifies pertinent

agency numbers and the airplane

manufacturer is corrected to read as

follows:

* * * * *

97–03–12 Jetstream Aircraft Limited:

Amendment 39–9917. Docket 96–NM–

97–AD.

* * * * *

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February

11, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–3964 Filed 2–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–CE–45–AD; Amendment 39–

9938; AD 97–04–13]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Mitsubishi

Heavy Industries, Ltd., MU–2B Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that

applies to Mitsubishi Heavy Industries,

Ltd., (Mitsubishi) MU–2B series

airplanes. This AD requires removing

the vent check valve assembly from the

bulkhead between the fuel tanks. This

AD results from an incident where both

engines on an affected airplane failed

near the end of a flight because of lack

of fuel to the engines. The incident is

attributed to the fuel filler caps on the

top of the wings not sealing correctly.

The actions specified by this AD are

intended to prevent the inability of both

engines to utilize the entire fuel supply

because of the outboard fuel not

transferring to the center tank, which

could result in an uncommanded engine

shutdown.

DATES: Effective April 16, 1997.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of April 16,

1997.

ADDRESSES: Service information that

applies to this AD may be obtained from

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.,

Nagoya Aerospace Systems, 10, Oyecho,

Minato-Ku, Nagoya, Japan. This

information may also be examined at

the Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA), Central Region, Office of the

Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention:

Rules Docket 96–CE–45–AD, Room

1558, 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City,

Missouri 64106; or at the Office of the

Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Eric M. Smith, Aerospace Engineer,

FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification

Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard,

Lakewood, California 90712; telephone

(310) 627–5260; facsimile (310) 627–

5210.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Events Leading to the Issuance of This

AD

A proposal to amend part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) to include an AD that would

apply to Mitsubishi MU–2B series

airplanes was published in the Federal

Register as a notice of proposed

rulemaking (NPRM) on October 30, 1996

(61 FR 53939). The NPRM proposed to

require removing the vent check valve

assembly from the bulkhead between

the fuel tanks. Accomplishment of the

proposed action as specified in the

NPRM would be in accordance with

Mitsubishi MU–2 Service Bulletin No.

130A, dated July 19, 1971.

The NPRM is the result of an incident

where both engines on an affected

airplane failed near the end of a flight

because of lack of fuel to the engines.

The incident is attributed to the fuel

filler caps on the top of the wings not

sealing correctly.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. No

comments were received on the

proposed rule or the FAA’s

determination of the cost to the public.
7340 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 33 / Wednesday, February 19, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

The FAA’s Determination

After careful review of all available

information related to the subject

presented above, the FAA has

determined that air safety and the

public interest require the adoption of

the rule as proposed except for minor

editorial corrections. The FAA has

determined that these minor corrections

will not change the meaning of the AD

and will not add any additional burden

upon the public than was already

proposed.

Compliance Time of This AD

The compliance time for this AD is

presented in calendar time instead of

hours time-in-service. The fuel filler cap

may not seal properly regardless of

whether the airplane is in operation. For

this reason, the FAA has determined

that a calendar time for compliance is

the most desirable.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 14 airplanes

in the U.S. registry will be affected by

this AD, that it will take approximately

3 workhours (average: 4 workhours for

seven airplanes and 2 workhours for

seven airplanes) per airplane to

accomplish the required action, and that

the average labor rate is approximately

$60 an hour. Based on these figures, the

total cost impact of the AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $2,520.

The above figure is based on the

presumption that no owner/operator of

the affected airplanes has accomplished

the required vent check valve assembly

removal. The FAA is aware that seven

of the affected airplanes are already in

compliance with this AD. With this

information in mind, the cost impact

upon U.S. operators/owners is reduced

by $1,260 from $2,520 to$1,260.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein will

not have substantial direct effects 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, in

accordance with Executive Order 12612,

it is determined that this final rule does

not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this action (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); and (3)

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 final

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, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends part 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 USC 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding a new airworthiness directive

(AD) to read as follows:

97–04–13 Mitsubishi Heavy Industries,

Ltd.: Amendment 39–9938; Docket No.

96–CE–45–AD.

Applicability: Models MU–2B, MU–2B–10,

MU–2B–15, MU–2B–20, and MU–2B–30

airplanes (serial numbers 004 through 035,

037, 038, 101 through 230, 502 through 525,

and 527 through 547), certificated in any

category.

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 (c) 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 within the next 60

calendar days after the effective date of this

AD, unless already accomplished.

To prevent the inability of both engines to

utilize the entire fuel supply because of the

outboard fuel not transferring to the center

tank, which could result in an uncommanded

engine shutdown, accomplish the following:

(a) Remove the vent check valve assembly

in accordance with the instructions in

Mitsubishi MU–2 Service Bulletin No. 130A,

dated July 19, 1971.

(b) 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.

(c) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an equivalent level of safety may be

approved by the Manager, FAA, Los Angeles

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 3960

Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California

90712. The request shall be forwarded

through an appropriate FAA Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Los Angeles ACO.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.

(d) The removal required by this AD shall

be done in accordance with Mitsubishi MU–

2 Service Bulletin No. 130A, dated July 19,

1971. This incorporation by reference was

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)

and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained

from Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.,

Nagoya Aerospace Systems, 10, Oyecho,

Minato-Ku, Nagoya, Japan . Copies may be

inspected at the FAA, Central Region, Office

of the Assistant Chief Counsel, Room 1558,

601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri, or

at the Office of the Federal Register, 800

North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC.

(e) This amendment (39–9938) becomes

effective on April 16, 1997. Issued in Kansas

City, Missouri, on February 11, 1997.

Henry A. Armstrong,

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–3960 Filed 2–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–234–AD; Amendment

39–9929; AD 97–04–05]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Jetstream

Model 4101 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that is

applicable to certain Jetstream Model

4101 airplanes. This action requires a

one-time inspection of the airplane

records to determine the modification

status of the elevator trim servo, and, if

necessary, inspections to determine the

serial number of the servo, and

repetitive inspections for looseness or

movement of the motor housing of the

servo. This action also requires

replacement of certain elevator trim

servos with a serviceable assembly. This