65800 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 213 / Thursday, November 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Action Compliance time Procedures

(2) Repair any cracked, damaged, or distorted

parts, as necessary, and reassemble any incorrectly installed staked bearing.

Prior to further flight after the inspection required by paragraph (d)(1) of this AD.Accomplish any repairs in accordance with an

FAA-approved repair scheme obtained from

the manufacturer. Accomplish the reassembly in accordance with the instructions in the maintenance manual.

(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 T. 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

Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., Customer Liaison

Manager, CH–6371 Stans, Switzerland;

telephone: +41 41 619 65 09; facsimile: +41

41 610 33 51. 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 Swiss AD HB 99–507, dated October 1,

1999.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on

October 26, 2000.

Michael Gallagher,

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft

Certfication Service.

[FR Doc. 00–28096 Filed 11–1–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–CE–54–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; British

Aerospace HP137 Mk1, Jetstream

Series 200, and Jetstream Models 3101

and 3201 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 all British

Aerospace HP137 Mk1, Jetstream series

200, and Jetstream Models 3101 and

3201 airplanes that are equipped with

certain main landing gear (MLG) radius

rods. The proposed AD would require

inspection of the MLG radius rods for

cracks with replacement of any cracked

rod. The proposed AD is the result of

mandatory continuing airworthiness

information (MCAI) issued by the

airworthiness authority for the United

Kingdom. The actions specified by the

proposed AD are intended to detect and

correct cracks in the MLG radius rods.

Such cracks could result in MLG failure

during takeoff, landing, or taxi

operations, with consequent loss of

airplane control.

DATES: The Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA) must receive any

comments on this proposed rule on or

before December 15, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to FAA, Central Region, Office

of the Regional Counsel, Attention:

Rules Docket No. 2000–CE–54–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

British Aerospace Regional Aircraft,

Prestwick International Airport,

Ayrshire, KA9 2RW, Scotland;

telephone: (01292) 479888; facsimile:

(01292) 479703. This information also

may be examined at the Rules Docket at

the address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

S.M. Nagarajan, Aerospace Engineer,

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901

Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,

Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–

4145; 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

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 213 / Thursday, November 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules 65801

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–54–

AD.’’ We will date stamp and mail the

postcard back to you.

Discussion

What Events Have Caused This

Proposed AD?

The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA),

which is the airworthiness authority for

the United Kingdom, recently notified

the FAA that an unsafe condition may

exist on certain British Aerospace

HP137 Mk1, Jetstream series 200, and

Jetstream Models 3101 and 3201

airplanes. The CAA reports an incident

where a MLG radius rod cylinder

cracked, which allowed the gland nut to

separate from the housing and caused

the MLG unit to move 30 degrees

outboard.

The cause has been traced to a quality

control problem with the MLG

manufacturer, AAPH Ltd. In particular,

the cause is inadequate countersinking

of a drilled hole for the attachment of

a flexible hose on a batch of MLG radius

rods, part numbers 1847 and 1862, all

suffixes.

What Are the Consequences If the

Condition Is Not Corrected?

Cracks in the MLG radius rods, if not

detected and corrected, could result in

MLG failure during takeoff, landing, or

taxi operations, with consequent loss of

airplane control.

Is There Service Information That

Applies to This Subject?

The following service bulletins apply

to this subject:

—British Aerospace Mandatory Service

Bulletin 32–JA 991140, Issued: April

14, 2000: This service bulletin

specifes inspection of the APPH Ltd.

part numbers 1847 and 1862 MLG

radius rods for cracks with

replacement of cracked rods;

—APPH Ltd. Service Bulletin No. 1847–

32–07, dated February 2000: This

service bulletin includes procedures

for inspecting the APPH Ltd. part

number 1847 MLG radius rods for

cracks; and

—APPH Ltd. Service Bulletin No. 1862–

32–07, dated February 2000: This

service bulletin includes procedures

for inspecting the part number APPH

Ltd. part number 1862 MLG radius

rods for cracks.

What Action Did the CAA Take?

The CAA classified these service

bulletins as mandatory and issued

British AD Number 002–04–2000, not

dated, in order to assure the continued

airworthiness of these airplanes in the

United Kingdom.

Was This in Accordance With the

Bilateral Airworthiness Agreement?

These airplane models are

manufactured in the United Kingdom

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 CAA 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 CAA; reviewed all available

information, including the service

information referenced above; and

determined that:

—The unsafe condition referenced in

this document exists or could develop

on other British Aerospace HP137

Mk1, Jetstream series 200, and

Jetstream Models 3101 and 3201

airplanes of the same type design that

are equipped with the referenced

MLG radius rods;

—The actions specified in the

previously-referenced service

information should be accomplished

on the affected airplanes; and

—AD action should be taken in order to

correct this unsafe condition.

What Would the Proposed AD Require?

This proposed AD would require

inspection of the MLG radius rods for

cracks, with replacement of any cracked

rod.

Are There Differences Between the

Proposed AD and the Service

Information?

British Aerospace Mandatory Service

Bulletin 32–JA 991140, Issued: April 14,

2000; APPH Ltd. Service Bulletin 1847–

32–07, dated February 2000; and APPH

Ltd. Service Bulletin 1862–32–07, dated

February 2000, specify reporting the

results of the inspections to British

Aerospace Regional Aircraft. This

NPRM does not specify this action. The

FAA recommends that each owner/

operator submit this information and we

are including a note in the proposed AD

to communicate this. British Aerospace

and the British CAA will use this

information to determine whether

further action is necessary.

The FAA will evaluate the

information from the British CAA and

may initiate further rulemaking action.

Cost Impact

How Many Airplanes Would the

Proposed AD Impact?

We estimate that the proposed AD

would affect 264 airplanes in the U.S.

registry.

What Would Be the Cost Impact of the

Proposed AD on Owners/Operators of

the Affected Airplanes?

We estimate the following costs to

accomplish the proposed inspection:

Labor cost Parts cost Total cost per

airplane

Total cost on

U.S. airplane

operators

10 workhours × $60 per hour = $600 .......................... No parts required for inspection ................................... $600 $158,400

We estimate the following costs to

accomplish any necessary MLG radius

rod 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 MLG radius rod

replacement:

65802 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 213 / Thursday, November 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Labor cost Parts cost Total cost per airplane

2 workhours × $60 per hour = $120 to accomplish each MLG radius rod replacement..$7,315 per MLG radius rod .............................. $7,435 per airplane where the MLG radius rod

needs replaced.

Regulatory Impact

Would 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.

Would 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, under 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.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. FAA amends § 39.13 by adding a

new airworthiness directive (AD) to

read as follows:

British Aerospace: Docket No. 2000–CE–54–

AD

(a) What airplanes are affected by this AD?

This AD affects HP137 Mk1, Jetstream Series

200, and Jetstream Models 3101 and 3201

airplanes, all serial numbers, that are:

(1) certificated in any category; and

(2) equipped with a main landing gear

(MLG) radius rod, APPH Ltd. part number

1847 or 1862, all suffixes.

(b) Who must comply with this AD?

Anyone who wishes to operate any of the

above airplanes must comply with this AD.

(c) What problem does this AD address?

The actions specified by this AD are intended

to detect and correct cracks in the MLG

radius rods. Such cracks could result in MLG

failure during takeoff, landing, or taxi

operations, with consequent loss of airplane

control.

(d) What actions must I accomplish to

address this problem? To address this

problem, you must accomplish the following:

Action Compliance time Procedures

(1) Check the maintenance records to determine whether one of the affected MLG radius

rods is installed.

Within the next 200 hours time-in-service

(TIS) after the effective date of this AD, unless already accomplished.

As specified in British Aerospace Mandatory

Service Bulletin 32–JA 991140, Issued:

April 14, 2000.

(2) If, by checking the maintenance records,

you can positively show that one of the affected MLG radius rods is not installed, then

the inspection and possible replacement requirements of this AD do not apply. Make an

entry into the aircraft records that shows

compliance with this portion of the AD, in accordance with section 43.9 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 43.9).

Prior to further flight after checking the maintenance records.Not Applicable.

(3) If, by checking the maintenance records,

you find that one of the affected MLG radius

rods is installed or you cannot positively

show that one of the affected MLG radius

rods is not installed, inspect any affected

MLG radius rod for cracks.

Prior to further flight after checking the maintenance records, unless already accomplished.In accordance with the procedures in APPH

Ltd. Service Bulletin 1847–32–07, dated

February 2000; or APPH Ltd. Service Bulletin 1862–32–07, dated February 2000, as

applicable.

(4) If any MLG radius rod is found cracked, replace it with FAA-approved MLG radius rod

that is crack free.

Prior to further flight after the inspection ......... In accordance with the procedures in the applicable maintenance manual.

(5) Do not install, on any affected airplane, a

part number 1847 or 1862 MLG radius rod

(all suffixes), unless it has been inspected

and is found to be free of cracks.

As of the effective date of this AD ................... Not Applicable.

(6) The owner/operator holding at least a private pilot certificate as authorized by section

43.7 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14

CFR 43.7) may accomplish the actions required in paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2) of this

AD.

Not applicable .................................................. Not Applicable.

Note 1: British Aerospace Mandatory

Service Bulletin 32–JA 991140, Issued: April

14, 2000; APPH Ltd. Service Bulletin 1847–

32–07, dated February 2000; and APPH Ltd.

Service Bulletin 1862–32–07, dated February

2000, specify reporting the results of the

inspections to British Aerospace Regional

Aircraft. The FAA highly recommends that

each owner/operator submit this information.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 213 / Thursday, November 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules 65803

British Aerospace and the British Civil

Airworthiness Authority (CAA) will use this

information to determine whether further

action is necessary. The FAA will evaluate

the information from the British CAA and

may initiate further rulemaking action.

(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 2: 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 Mr. S.M. Nagarajan,

Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane

Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas

City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–

4145; 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

British Aerospace Regional Aircraft,

Prestwick International Airport, Ayrshire,

KA9 2RW, Scotland. You may examine these

documents at FAA, Central Region, Office of

the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506,

Kansas City, Missouri 64106.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in British AD 002–04–2000, not dated.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on

October 27, 2000.

James E. Jackson,

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–28095 Filed 11–1–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–CE–10–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Raytheon

Aircraft Company Beech Model 1900D

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

Raytheon Aircraft Company (Raytheon)

Beech Model 1900D airplanes that are

equipped with a KLN–90B Global

Positioning System (GPS) incorporated

in accordance with AlliedSignal

Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)

SA00245WI–D. The proposed AD would

require rewiring the KLN–90B GPS to

eliminate the possibility of inconsistent

NAV ‘‘FLAG’’ displays. The proposed

AD is the result of an instance where the

copilot’s NAV ‘‘FLAG’’ display was

based on the pilot’s NAV source

validity. The actions specified by the

proposed AD are intended to assure that

the copilot’s NAV ‘‘FLAG’’ displays are

based on the copilot’s selected NAV

source. Inconsistent NAV ‘‘FLAG’’

displays could cause the copilot to make

decisions based on using an invalid GPS

source without knowing it was invalid.

DATES: The Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA) must receive any

comments on this rule on or before

December 29, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to FAA, Central Region, Office

of the Regional Counsel, Attention:

Rules Docket No. 2000–CE–10–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 the

Raytheon Aircraft Company, PO Box 85,

Wichita, Kansas 67201–0085; telephone:

(800) 625–7043 or (316) 676–4556. This

information also may be examined at

the Rules Docket at the address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Todd Dixon, Aerospace Engineer,

Wichita Aircraft Certification Office,

FAA, 1801 Airport Road, Mid-Continent

Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209;

telephone: (316) 946–4152; facsimile:

(316) 946–4407.

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 selfaddressed, stamped postcard. On the

postcard, write ‘‘Comments to Docket

No. 2000–CE–10–AD.’’ We will date

stamp and mail the postcard back to

you.

Discussion

What events have caused this AD?

The FAA has received a report of

inconsistent NAV ‘‘FLAG’’ displays on

the KLN–90B Global Positioning System

(GPS) that was installed on a Raytheon

Model Beech 1900D airplane. This

system is installed in accordance with