[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 185 (Friday, September 22, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57296-57298]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-24370]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000-CE-16-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Vulcanair S.p.A. Models P 68 
``OBSERVER'', P68 ``OBSERVER 2'', and P68TC ``OBSERVER'' Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This document proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive 
(AD) that would apply to certain Vulcanair S.p.A. (Vulcanair) Models P 
68 ``OBSERVER'', P68 ``OBSERVER 2'', and P68TC ``OBSERVER'' airplanes. 
The proposed AD would require you to inspect the nose landing gear 
(NLG) upper strut for evidence of cracking (cracks or crack 
beginnings), and replace the NLG upper strut if you find evidence of 
cracking. The proposed AD is the result of mandatory continuing 
airworthiness information (MCAI) issued by the airworthiness authority 
for Italy. The actions specified by the proposed AD are intended to 
prevent failure of the NLG upper strut caused by cracking in the area 
of the seeger retaining ring groove, which could result in loss of 
control of the airplane.

DATES: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must receive any 
comments on this proposed rule on or before October 25, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to FAA, Central Region, Office 
of the Regional Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000-CE-16-AD, 901 
Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Comments may be 
inspected at this location between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, holidays excepted.
    Service information that applies to the proposed AD may be obtained 
from Vulcanair S.p.A., Via G. Poscoli, 7, 80026 Casoria (Naples), 
Italy; telephone: +39-081-5918111; facsimile: +39-081-5918172. This 
information also may be examined at the Rules Docket at the address 
above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roman Gabrys, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, 
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 
64106; telephone: (816) 329-4141; facsimile: (816) 329-4090.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    How do I comment on the proposed AD? The FAA invites comments on 
this proposed rule. You may submit whatever written data, views, or 
arguments you choose. You need to include the rule's docket number and 
submit your comments in triplicate to the address specified under the 
caption ADDRESSES. The FAA will consider all comments received on or 
before the closing date. We may amend the proposed rule in light of 
comments received. Factual information that supports your ideas and 
suggestions is extremely helpful in evaluating the effectiveness of the 
proposed AD action and determining whether we need to take additional 
rulemaking action.
    Are there any specific portions of the proposed AD I should pay 
attention to? The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall 
regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed 
rule that might suggest a need to modify the rule. You may examine all 
comments we receive before and after the closing date of the rule in 
the Rules Docket. We will file a report in the Rules Docket that 
summarizes each FAA contact with the public that concerns the 
substantive parts of the proposed AD.
    We are re-examining the writing style we currently use in 
regulatory documents, in response to the Presidential memorandum of 
June 1, 1998. That memorandum requires federal agencies to communicate 
more clearly with the public. We are interested in your comments on 
whether the style of this document is clearer, and any other 
suggestions you might have to improve the clarity of FAA communications 
that affect you. You can get more information about the Presidential 
memorandum and the plain language initiative at http://www.plainlanguage.gov.
    How can I be sure FAA receives my comment? If you want us to 
acknowledge the receipt of your comments, you must include a self-
addressed, stamped postcard. On the postcard, write ``Comments to 
Docket No. 2000-CE-16-AD.'' We will date stamp and mail the postcard 
back to you.

Discussion

    What events have caused this proposed AD? The Ente Nazionale per 
l'Aviazione Civile (ENAC), which is the airworthiness authority for 
Italy, recently notified FAA that an unsafe condition may exist on 
certain Vulcanair Models P 68 ``OBSERVER'', P68 ``OBSERVER 2'', and 
P68TC ``OBSERVER'' airplanes. The ENAC reports three instances of 
cracking of the nose landing gear (NLG) upper strut, part number 
4.4173-1, in the area of the seeger retaining ring groove. 
Investigation of these instances reveals a work defect found during 
surface finishing within the groove. The groove is then susceptible to 
cracks after a hard landing.
    What are the consequences if the condition is not corrected? Such 
cracking, if not detected and corrected, could result in failure of the 
NLG upper strut, which could result in loss of control of the airplane.
    Is there service information that applies to this subject? 
Vulcanair has issued Service Bulletin No. 98, dated July 31, 1999.
    What are the provisions of this service bulletin? The service 
bulletin:
    <bullet> Includes procedures for inspecting the NLG upper strut in 
the area of the seeger retaining ring groove for evidence of cracking 
(cracks or crack beginnings); and
    <bullet> Specifies replacing the upper strut if evidence of 
cracking is found.
    What action did the ENAC take? The ENAC classified this service 
bulletin as mandatory and issued Italian AD No. 2000-004, dated January 
10, 2000, in order to assure the continued airworthiness of these 
airplanes in Italy.
    Was this in accordance with the bilateral airworthiness agreement? 
These airplane models are

[[Page 57297]]

manufactured in Italy and are type certificated for operation in the 
United States under the provisions of section 21.29 of the Federal 
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the applicable bilateral 
airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral airworthiness 
agreement, the ENAC has kept FAA informed of the situation described 
above.

The FAA's Determination and an Explanation of the Provisions of the 
Proposed AD

    What has FAA decided? The FAA has examined the findings of the 
ENAC; reviewed all available information, including the service 
information referenced above; and determined that:
    <bullet> The unsafe condition referenced in this document exists or 
could develop on other Vulcanair Models P 68 ``OBSERVER'', P68 
``OBSERVER 2'', and P68TC ``OBSERVER'' airplanes of the same type 
design;
    <bullet> The actions specified in the previously-referenced service 
information should be accomplished on the affected airplanes; and
    <bullet> AD action should be taken in order to correct this unsafe 
condition.
    What does the proposed AD require? This proposed AD would require 
you to inspect the NLG upper strut for evidence of cracking (cracks or 
crack beginnings), and replace the NLG upper strut if you find evidence 
of cracking. You would accomplish the proposed action in accordance 
with the previously referenced service bulletin.

Cost Impact

    How many airplanes does the proposed AD impact? We estimate that 
the proposed AD affects 15 airplanes in the U.S. registry.
    What is the cost impact of the proposed AD on owners/operators of 
the affected airplanes? We estimate the following costs to accomplish 
the proposed inspection:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Total cost
                                                 Total cost    on U.S.
          Labor cost              Parts cost        per        airplane
                                                  airplane    operators
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 workhours  x  $60 per hour  No parts                $600       $9,000
 = $600.                        required for
                                inspection.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to accomplish any necessary 
replacements that would be required based on the results of the 
proposed inspection. We have no way of determining the number of 
airplanes that may need such replacement:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Total cost
                  Labor cost                     Parts cost      per
                                                               airplane
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 workhours  x  $60 per hour = $600..........         $600       $1,200
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regulatory Impact

    Does this proposed AD impact various entities? 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 
proposed rule would not have federalism implications under Executive 
Order 13132.
    Does this proposed AD involve a significant rule or regulatory 
action? For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this proposed 
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) 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 has been placed 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 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.


Sec. 39.13  [Amended]

    2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding a new airworthiness directive 
(AD) to read as follows:

Vulcanair S.P.A. (Partenavia Costruzioni Aeronauticas S.p.A 
previously held Type Certificate A31EU): Docket No. 2000-CE-16-AD

    (a) What airplanes are affected by this AD? This AD affects 
Models P 68 ``OBSERVER'', P68 ``OBSERVER 2'', and P68TC ``OBSERVER'' 
airplanes, all serial numbers up to and including 400, that are 
certificated in any category.
    (b) Who must comply with this AD? Anyone who wishes to operate 
any of the above airplanes on the U.S. Register must comply with 
this AD.
    (c) What problem does this AD address? The actions specified by 
this AD are intended to prevent failure of the nose landing gear 
(NLG) upper strut caused by cracking in the area of the seeger 
retaining ring groove, which could result in loss of control of the 
airplane.
    (d) What actions must I accomplish to address this problem? To 
address this problem, you must accomplish the following:

[[Page 57298]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Action                 Compliance time       Procedures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Inspect, using magnetic       Within the next     Do this inspection
 particle methods, the NLG upper   200 hours time-in-  in accordance
 strut, part number 4.4173-1 (or   service (TIS)       with the
 FAA-approved equivalent part      after the           ACCOMPLISHMENT
 number), for evidence of          effective date of   INSTRUCTIONS
 cracking (cracks or crack         this AD.            section of
 beginnings).                                          Vulcanair Service
                                                       Bulletin No. 98,
                                                       dated July 31,
                                                       1999.
  ..............................
(2) If there is evidence of       Prior to further    Use the procedures
 cracking, replace the NLG upper   flight after the    in the
 strut with a new NLG upper        inspection where    maintenance
 strut, part number 4.4173-1 (or   evidence of         manual.
 FAA-approved equivalent part      cracking is found.
 number).
  ..............................
(3) Do not install any NLG upper  As of the           Not Applicable.
 strut, part number 4.4173-1,      effective date of
 unless it is new from the         this AD.
 factory, or has been inspected
 as required in paragraph (d)(1)
 of this AD and is found to not
 have any evidence of cracking.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (e) Can I comply with this AD in any other way? You may use an 
alternative method of compliance or adjust the compliance time if:
    (1) Your alternative method of compliance provides an equivalent 
level of safety; and
    (2) The Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, approves your 
alternative. Submit your request through an FAA Principal 
Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the 
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate.

    Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in paragraph 
(a) of this AD, 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 (e) 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 you have not eliminated the unsafe condition, specific 
actions you propose to address it.

    (f) Where can I get information about any already-approved 
alternative methods of compliance? Contact Roman Gabrys, Aerospace 
Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, 
Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329-4141; facsimile: 
(816) 329-4090.
    (g) What if I need to fly the airplane to another location to 
comply with this AD? The FAA can issue a special flight permit under 
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate your airplane to a location where 
you can accomplish the requirements of this AD.
    (h) How do I get copies of the documents referenced in this AD? 
You may obtain copies of the documents referenced in this AD from 
Vulcanair S.p.A., Via G. Poscoli, 7, 80026 Casoria (Naples), Italy. 
You may examine these documents at FAA, Central Region, Office of 
the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri 
64106.

    Note 2: The subject of this AD is addressed in Italian AD 2000-
004, dated January 10, 2000.


    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on September 13, 2000.
Larry E. Werth,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 00-24370 Filed 9-21-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U