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

3356 

Vol. 78, No. 11 

Wednesday, January 16, 2013 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0023; Directorate 

Identifier 96–CE–072–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Various 

Aircraft Equipped With Wing Lift Struts 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to revise an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD) 

that applies to certain aircraft equipped 

with wing lift struts. The existing AD 

currently requires repetitively 

inspecting the wing lift struts for 

corrosion; repetitively inspecting the 

wing lift strut forks for cracks; replacing 

any corroded wing lift strut; replacing 

any cracked wing lift strut fork; and 

repetitively replacing the wing lift strut 

forks at a specified time for certain 

airplanes. The existing AD also 

currently requires incorporating a ‘‘NO 

STEP’’ placard on the wing lift strut. 

Since we issued that AD, we have been 

informed that paragraph (c) in the 

existing AD is being misinterpreted and 

causing confusion. This proposed AD 

would clarify the intent of the language 

currently in paragraph (c) of the existing 

AD and would retain all other 

requirements of the existing AD. We are 

proposing this AD to correct the unsafe 

condition on these products. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by March 4, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, 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: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Piper 

Aircraft, Inc., Customer Services, 2926 

Piper Drive, Vero Beach, Florida 32960; 

telephone: (772) 567–4361; Internet: 

www.piper.com. Copies of the 

instructions to the F. Atlee Dodge 

supplemental type certificate (STC) and 

information about the Jensen Aircraft 

STCs may be obtained from F. Atlee 

Dodge, Aircraft Services, LLC., 6672 

Wes Way, Anchorage, Alaska 99518– 

0409, Internet: www.fadodge.com. 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 

(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gregory ‘‘Keith’’ Noles, Aerospace 

Engineer, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft 

Certification Office, 1701 Columbia 

Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337; 

phone: (404) 474–5551; fax: (404) 474– 

5606; email: gregory.noles@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–2013–0023; Directorate Identifier 

96–CE–072–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:// 

www.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 December 22, 1998, we issued AD 

99–01–05, amendment 39–10972 (63 FR 

72132, December 31, 1998), for all The 

New Piper Aircraft, Inc. (currently Piper 

Aircraft, Inc.) airplane models equipped 

with wing lift struts. That AD 

superseded AD 93–10–06, amendment 

39–8586 (58 FR 29965, May 25, 1993), 

and requires repetitively inspecting the 

wing lift struts for corrosion; 

repetitively inspecting the wing lift strut 

forks for cracks; replacing any corroded 

and/or dented wing lift strut; replacing 

any cracked wing lift strut fork; and 

repetitively replacing the wing lift strut 

forks at a specified time for certain 

airplanes. That AD also requires 

incorporating a ‘‘NO STEP’’ placard on 

the wing lift strut and provides the 

option of installing certain sealed wing 

lift struts that include the lift strut forks 

as terminating action for repetitive 

inspection and replacement 

requirements. 

AD 93–10–06, amendment 39–8586 

(58 FR 29965, May 25, 1993), resulted 

from reports of corrosion damage found 

on the wing lift struts and cracking 

found on the wing lift strut forks. AD 

99–01–05, amendment 39–10972 (63 FR 

72132, December 31, 1998), resulted 

from a need to clarify certain 

requirements of AD 93–10–06, 

eliminated the lift strut fork repetitive 

inspection requirement for the Piper 

PA–25 series airplanes, incorporated 

airplane models inadvertently omitted 

from the applicability, and required 

installing a placard on the lift strut. 

We issued both ADs to detect and 

correct corrosion and cracking on the 

front and rear wing lift struts and forks, 

which could cause the wing lift strut to 

fail. This failure could result in the wing 

separating from the airplane. 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2013 / Proposed Rules 3357 

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued 

Since we issued AD 99–01–05, 

amendment 39–39–10972 (63 FR 72132, 

December 31, 1998), we have been 

informed that the language in paragraph 

(c) is being misinterpreted and causing 

confusion. Paragraph (c) of the existing 

AD currently states, ‘‘If holes are drilled 

in wing lift strut assemblies installed in 

accordance with (a)(4) or (b)(3) of this 

AD to attach cuffs, door clips, or other 

hardware, inspect the wing lift struts at 

intervals not to exceed 24 calendar 

months using the procedures specified 

in either paragraphs (a)(1) or (a)(2), 

including all subparagraphs, of this 

AD.’’ 

Our intention was to specify that if a 

sealed wing lift strut assembly is 

installed as a replacement part, the 

repetitive inspection requirement is 

terminated only if the seal is never 

broken. We also intended to specify that 

if the seal is broken then that wing lift 

strut becomes subject to continued 

repetitive inspections. 

We did not intend to promote drilling 

holes into or otherwise unsealing a 

sealed strut, nor did we intend to 

preclude a proper maintenance action 

that may temporarily unseal a sealed 

strut if all appropriate issues are 

considered, such as static strength, 

fatigue, material effects, immediate and 

long-term (internal and external) 

corrosion protection, resealing methods, 

etc. Current FAA regulations in 14 CFR 

43.13(b) specify that maintenance 

performed will result in the part’s 

condition to be at least equal to its 

original or properly altered condition. 

There are provisions in this proposed 

AD for approving such actions as an 

alternative method of compliance 

(AMOC). 

Also, some type certificates held by 

Piper at the time AD 99–01–05, 

amendment 39–39–10972 (63 FR 72132, 

December 31, 1998), was issued now 

belong to other owners. We have 

modified the applicability to reflect 

these changes in ownership. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this AD because we 

evaluated all the relevant information 

and determined the unsafe condition 

described previously is likely to exist or 

develop in other products of the same 

type design. 

Proposed AD Requirements 

This proposed AD would retain all 

requirements of AD 99–01–05, 

amendment 39–39–10972 (63 FR 72132, 

December 31, 1998). This proposed AD 

would also clarify our intent of required 

actions if the seal on a sealed wing lift 

strut is ever broken. 

Paragraph Designation Changes to the 

Existing AD 

Since AD 99–01–05, amendment 39– 

39–10972 (63 FR 72132, December 31, 

1998), was issued, the AD format has 

been revised, and certain paragraphs 

have been rearranged. As a result, the 

corresponding paragraph identifiers 

have changed in this proposed AD, as 

listed in the following table: 

TABLE 1—REVISED PARAGRAPH

IDENTIFIERS

Requirement in AD 

99–01–05 

Corresponding 

requirement in this 

proposed AD 

paragraph (a) paragraph (h) 

paragraph (a)(1) paragraph (i)(1) 

paragraph (a)(1)(i) paragraph (i)(1)(i) 

paragraph (a)(1)(ii) paragraph (i)(1)(ii) 

paragraph (a)(2) paragraph (i)(2) 

TABLE 1—REVISED PARAGRAPH

IDENTIFIERS—Continued 

Requirement in AD 

99–01–05 

Corresponding 

requirement in this 

proposed AD 

paragraph (a)(2)(i) paragraph (i)(2)(i) 

paragraph (a)(2)(ii) paragraph (i)(2)(ii) 

paragraph (a)(3) paragraph (j)(1) 

paragraph (a)(4) paragraph (j)(2) 

paragraph (a)(5) paragraph (j)(3) 

paragraph (b) paragraph (k) 

paragraph (b)(1) paragraph (l) 

paragraph (b)(1)(i) paragraph (l)(1) 

paragraph 

(b)(1)(ii)(B) & 

(b)(1)(iv) 

paragraph (l)(2) 

paragraph 

(b)(1)(ii)(C) & 

(b)(1)(iv) 

paragraph (l)(3) 

paragraph 

(b)(1)(ii)(A) & 

(b)(1)(iv) 

paragraph (l)(4) 

paragraph (b)(1)(iii), 

(b)(2), (b)(1)(iv) 

paragraph (m)(1) 

paragraph (b)(3) thru 

(b)(3)(ii) 

paragraph (m)(2) 

paragraph (b)(4) thru 

(b)(4)(vi) 

paragraph (m)(3) thru 

(m)(3)(vi) 

paragraph (b)(5) thru 

(b)(5)(ii) 

paragraph (m)(4) 

paragraph (c) removed 

paragraph (d) paragraph (n)(1) 

paragraph (d)(1) paragraph (n)(2) 

paragraph (d)(2) paragraph (n)(3) 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 22,000 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We estimate the following costs to 

comply with this proposed AD. 

However, the only difference in the 

costs presented below and the costs 

associated with AD 99–01–05, 

amendment 39–39–10972 (63 FR 72132, 

December 31, 1998), is the change in the 

labor rate from $65 per hour to $85 per 

hour: 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. 

operators 

Inspection of the wing lift struts and 

wing lift strut forks.

8 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

$680 per inspection cycle.

Not applicable ........... $680 per inspection 

cycle..

$14,960,000 per inspection cycle. 

Installation placard .......................... 1 work-hour × $85 = $85 ............... $30 ............................ $115 .......................... $2,530,000 

We estimate the following costs to do 

any necessary replacements that would 

be required based on the results of the 

proposed inspection. We have no way of 

determining the number of aircraft that 

might need these replacements: 

ON-CONDITION COSTS

Action Labor cost per wing lift strut 

Parts cost 

per wing lift 

strut 

Cost per 

product per 

wing lift 

strut 

Replacement of the wing lift strut and/or wing lift strut forks ..... 4 work-hours × $85 per hour = $340 .................... $440 $780 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 
3358 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

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 identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We have 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 that the 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), 

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska, and 

(4) 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. 

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 airworthiness directive (AD) 

99–01–05, amendment 39–10972 (63 FR 

72132, December 31, 1998), and adding 

the following new AD: 

Various Aircraft: Docket No. FAA–2013– 

0023; Directorate Identifier 96–CE–072– 

AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

The FAA must receive comments on this 

AD action by March 4, 2013. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD revises AD 99–01–05, amendment 

39–39–10972 (63 FR 72132, December 31, 

1998), which superseded AD 93–10–06, 

amendment 39–8586 (58 FR 29965, May 25, 

1993). AD 99–26–19, amendment 39–11479 

(64 FR 72524, December 28, 1999), also 

relates to the subject of this AD. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to the following aircraft 

that are: 

(1) equipped with wing lift struts; and 

(2) certificated in any category. 

Type certificate holder Aircraft model Serial numbers 

FS 2000 Corp ..................................................... L–14 ................................................................. All 

FS 2001 Corp ..................................................... J5A (Army L–4F), J5A–80, J5B (Army L–4G), 

J5C, AE–1, and HE–1.

All. 

FS 2002 Corporation .......................................... PA–14 .............................................................. 14–1 through 14–523. 

FS 2003 Corporation .......................................... PA–12 and PA–12S ......................................... 12–1 through 12–4036. 

LAVIA ARGENTINA S.A. (LAVIASA) ................. PA–25, PA–25–235, and PA–25–260 ............. 25–1 through 25–8156024. 

Piper Aircraft, Inc ................................................ TG–8 (Army TG–8, Navy XLNP–1) ................. All. 

Piper Aircraft, Inc ................................................ E–2 and F–2 .................................................... All. 

Piper Aircraft, Inc ................................................ J3C–40, J3C–50, J3C–50S, (Army L–4, L– 

4B,L–4H, and L–4J), J3C–65 (Navy NE–1 

and NE–2), J3C–65S, J3F–50, J3F–50S, 

J3F–60, J3F–60S, J3F–65 (Army L–4D), 

J3F–65S, J3L, J3L–S, J3L–65 (Army L– 

4C), and J3L–65S.

All. 

Piper Aircraft, Inc ................................................ J4, J4A, J4A–S, and J4E (Army L–4E) ........... 4–401 through 4–1649. 

Piper Aircraft, Inc ................................................ PA–11 and PA–11S ......................................... 11–1 through 11–1678. 

Piper Aircraft, Inc ................................................ PA–15 .............................................................. 15–1 through 15–388. 

Piper Aircraft, Inc ................................................ PA–16 and PA–16S ......................................... 16–1 through 16–736. 

Piper Aircraft, Inc ................................................ PA–17 .............................................................. 17–1 through 17–215. 

Piper Aircraft, Inc ................................................ PA–18, PA–18S, PA–18 ‘‘105’’ (Special), PA– 

18S ‘‘105’’ (Special), PA–18A, PA–18 ‘‘125’’ 

(Army L–21A), PA–18S ‘‘125’’, PA–18AS 

‘‘125’’, PA–18 ‘‘135’’ (Army L–21B), PA– 

18A ‘‘135’’, PA–18S ‘‘135’’, PA–18AS 

‘‘135’’, PA–18 ‘‘150’’, PA–18A ‘‘150’’, PA– 

18S ‘‘150’’, PA–18AS ‘‘150’’, PA–18A (Restricted), PA–18A ‘‘135’’ (Restricted), and 

PA–18A ‘‘150’’ (Restricted).

18–1 through 18–8309025, 18900 through 

1809032, and 1809034 through 1809040. 

Piper Aircraft, Inc ................................................ PA–19 (Army L–18C), and PA–19S ................ 19–1, 19–2, and 19–3. 

Piper Aircraft, Inc ................................................ PA–20, PA–20S, PA–20 ‘‘115’’, PA–20S 

‘‘115’’, PA–20 ‘‘135’’, and PA–20S ‘‘135’’.

20–1 through 20–1121. 

Piper Aircraft, Inc. ............................................... PA–22, PA–22–108, PA–22–135, PA–22S– 

135, PA–22–150, PA–22S–150, PA–22– 

160, and PA–22S–160.

22–1 through 22–9848. 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2013 / Proposed Rules 3359 

Note to paragraph (c) of this AD: There are 

airplanes commonly known as a ‘‘Clipped 

Wing Cub’’, which modify the airplane 

primarily by removing approximately 40 

inches of the inboard portion of each wing. 

Such airplanes originally were and still are 

covered under this AD. 

(d) Subject 

Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/ 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America 

Code 57, Wings. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

The subject of this AD was originally 

prompted by reports of corrosion damage 

found on the wing lift struts. The AD is being 

revised because of reports that paragraph (c) 

in the existing AD is being misinterpreted 

and causing confusion. This AD clarifies the 

intent of the language currently in paragraph 

(c) of AD 99–01–05, amendment 39–39– 

10972 (63 FR 72132, December 31, 1998), 

which is being removed by this AD. Our 

intention was to specify that if a sealed wing 

lift strut assembly is installed as a 

replacement part, the repetitive inspection 

requirement is terminated only if the seal 

remains intact. This AD retains all the 

actions currently required in AD 99–01–05. 

There are no new requirements in this AD 

and it does not add any additional burden to 

the owners/operators of the affected 

airplanes. We are issuing this AD to detect 

and correct corrosion and cracking on the 

front and rear wing lift struts and forks, 

which could cause the wing lift strut to fail. 

This failure could result in the wing 

separating from the airplane. 

(f) Paragraph Designation Changes to 

Existing AD 

Since AD 99–01–05, amendment 39–39– 

10972 (63 FR 72132, December 31, 1998), 

was issued, the AD format has been revised, 

and certain paragraphs have been rearranged. 

As a result, the corresponding paragraph 

identifiers have changed in this AD, as listed 

in the following table: 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (f) OF THIS

AD—REVISED PARAGRAPH IDENTIFIERS

Requirement in AD 

99–01–05 

Corresponding 

requirement in this 

AD 

paragraph (a) paragraph (h) 

paragraph (a)(1) paragraph (i)(1) 

paragraph (a)(1)(i) paragraph (i)(1)(i) 

paragraph (a)(1)(ii) paragraph (i)(1)(ii) 

paragraph (a)(2) paragraph (i)(2) 

paragraph (a)(2)(i) paragraph (i)(2)(i) 

paragraph (a)(2)(ii) paragraph (i)(2)(ii) 

paragraph (a)(3) paragraph (j)(1) 

paragraph (a)(4) paragraph (j)(2) 

paragraph (a)(5) paragraph (j)(3) 

paragraph (b) paragraph (k) 

paragraph (b)(1) paragraph (l) 

paragraph (b)(1)(i) paragraph (l)(1) 

paragraph 

(b)(1)(ii)(B) & 

(b)(1)(iv) 

paragraph (l)(2) 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (f) OF THIS

AD—REVISED PARAGRAPH IDENTIFIERS—Continued 

Requirement in AD 

99–01–05 

Corresponding 

requirement in this 

AD 

paragraph 

(b)(1)(ii)(C) & 

(b)(1)(iv) 

paragraph (l)(3) 

paragraph 

(b)(1)(ii)(A) & 

(b)(1)(iv) 

paragraph (l)(4) 

paragraph (b)(1)(iii), 

(b)(2), (b)(1)(iv) 

paragraph (m)(1) 

paragraph (b)(3) thru 

(b)(3)(ii) 

paragraph (m)(2) 

paragraph (b)(4) thru 

(b)(4)(vi) 

paragraph (m)(3) thru 

(m)(3)(vi) 

paragraph (b)(5) thru 

(b)(5)(ii) 

paragraph (m)(4) 

Paragraph (c) Removed 

paragraph (d) paragraph (n)(1) 

paragraph (d)(1) paragraph (n)(2) 

paragraph (d)(2) paragraph (n)(3) 

(g) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done (compliance with AD 99–01–05, 

amendment 39–10972 (63 FR 72132, 

December 31, 1998)). 

Note 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD: This 

AD does not require any actions over that 

already required by AD 99–01–05, 

amendment 39–10972 (63 FR 72132, 

December 31, 1998). This AD clarifies the 

FAA’s intention that if a sealed wing lift strut 

assembly is installed as a replacement part, 

the repetitive inspection requirement is 

terminated only if the seal is never broken. 

Also, if the seal is broken, then that wing lift 

strut becomes subject to continued repetitive 

inspections. We did not intend to promote 

drilling holes into or otherwise unsealing a 

sealed strut, nor did we intend to preclude 

a proper maintenance action that may 

temporarily unseal a sealed strut if all 

appropriate issues are considered, such as 

static strength, fatigue, material effects, 

immediate and long-term (internal and 

external) corrosion protection, resealing 

methods, etc. 

(h) Remove Wing Lift Struts 

Within 1 calendar month after February 8, 

1999 (the effective date retained from AD 99– 

01–05, amendment 39–10972 (63 FR 72132, 

December 31, 1998)), or within 24 calendar 

months after the last inspection done in 

accordance with AD 93–10–06, amendment 

39–8586 (58 FR 29965, May 25, 1993) (which 

was superseded by AD 99–01–05), whichever 

occurs later, remove the wing lift struts 

following Piper Aircraft Corporation 

Mandatory Service Bulletin (Piper MSB) No. 

528D, dated October 19, 1990, or Piper MSB 

No. 910A, dated October 10 1989, as 

applicable. Before further flight after the 

removal, do one of the actions in either 

paragraph (i)(1), (i)(2), (j)(1), (j)(2), or (j)(3) of 

this AD, including all subparagraphs. 

(i) Inspect Wing Lift Struts 

(1) Before further flight after the removal 

required in paragraph (h) of this AD, inspect 

each wing lift strut for corrosion and 

perceptible dents following Piper MSB No. 

528D, dated October 19, 1990, or Piper MSB 

No. 910A, dated October 10 1989, as 

applicable. 

(i) If no corrosion is externally visible and 

no perceptible dents are found on any wing 

lift strut during the inspection required in 

paragraph (i)(1) of this AD, before further 

flight, apply corrosion inhibitor to each wing 

lift strut. Apply the corrosion inhibitor 

following Piper MSB No. 528D, dated 

October 19, 1990, or Piper MSB No. 910A, 

dated October 10 1989, as applicable. 

Repetitively thereafter inspect each wing lift 

strut at intervals not to exceed 24 calendar 

months following the procedures in 

paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, including 

all subparagraphs. 

(ii) If external corrosion or perceptible 

dents are found on any wing lift strut during 

the inspection required in paragraph (i)(1) of 

this AD or during any repetitive inspection 

required in paragraph (i)(1)(i) of this AD, 

before further flight, replace the affected 

wing lift strut with one of the replacement 

options specified in paragraph (j)(1), (j)(2), or 

(j)(3) of this AD. Do the replacement 

following the procedures specified in those 

paragraphs, as applicable. 

(2) Before further flight after the removal 

required in paragraph (h) of this AD, inspect 

each wing lift strut for corrosion following 

the procedures in the Appendix to this AD. 

This inspection must be done by a Level 2 

or Level 3 inspector certified using the 

guidelines established by the American 

Society for Non-destructive Testing, or MIL– 

STD–410. 

(i) If no external corrosion is found on any 

wing lift strut during the inspection required 

in paragraph (i)(2) of this AD and all 

requirements in the Appendix to this AD are 

met, before further flight, apply corrosion 

inhibitor to each wing lift strut. Apply the 

corrosion inhibitor following Piper MSB No. 

528D, dated October 19, 1990, or Piper MSB 

No. 910A, dated October 10, 1989, as 

applicable. Repetitively thereafter inspect 

each wing lift strut at intervals not to exceed 

24 calendar months following the procedures 

in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, 

including all subparagraphs. 

(ii) If external corrosion is found on any 

wing lift strut during the inspection required 

paragraph (i)(2) of this AD or during any 

repetitive inspection required in paragraph 

(i)(2)(i) of this AD, or if any requirement in 

the Appendix of this AD is not met, before 

further flight after any inspection in which 

corrosion is found or the Appendix 

requirements are not met, replace the affected 

wing lift strut with one of the replacement 

options specified in paragraph (j)(1), (j)(2), or 

(j)(3) of this AD. Do the replacement 

following the procedures specified in those 

paragraphs, as applicable. 

(j) Wing Lift Strut Replacement Options 

(1) Install original equipment manufacturer 

(OEM) part number wing lift struts (or FAAapproved equivalent part numbers) that have 

been inspected following the procedures in 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 
3360 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

either paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, 

including all subparagraphs, and are found to 

be airworthy. Do the installations following 

Piper MSB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990, 

or Piper MSB No. 910A, dated October 10, 

1989, as applicable. Repetitively thereafter 

inspect the newly installed wing lift struts at 

intervals not to exceed 24 calendar months 

following the procedures in either paragraph 

(i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, including all 

subparagraphs. 

(2) Install new sealed wing lift strut 

assemblies (these sealed wing lift strut 

assemblies also include the wing lift strut 

forks) following Piper MSB No. 528D, dated 

October 19, 1990, and Piper MSB No. 910A, 

dated October 10, 1989, as applicable. 

Installing one of these new sealed wing lift 

strut assemblies terminates the repetitive 

inspection requirements in paragraphs (i) and 

(l) of this AD, including all sub paragraphs, 

for that wing lift strut assembly. 

(3) Install F. Atlee Dodge wing lift strut 

assemblies following F. Atlee Dodge Aircraft 

Services, Inc. Installation Instructions No. 

3233–I for Modified Piper Wing Lift Struts 

Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) 

SA4635NM, dated February 1, 1991. 

Repetitively thereafter inspect the newly 

installed wing lift struts at intervals not to 

exceed 60 calendar months following the 

procedures in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this 

AD, including all subparagraphs. 

(k) Remove Wing Lift Strut Forks 

For all affected airplane models, except for 

Models PA–25, PA–25–235, and PA–25–260 

airplanes, within the next 100 hours time-inservice (TIS) after February 8, 1999 (the 

effective date retained from AD 99–01–05, 

amendment 39–10972 (63 FR 72132, 

December 31, 1998)) or within 500 hours TIS 

after the last inspection done in accordance 

with AD 93–10–06, amendment 39–8586 (58 

FR 29965, May 25, 1993) (which was 

superseded by AD 99–01–05), whichever 

occurs later, remove the wing lift strut forks 

(unless already replaced in accordance with 

paragraph (j)(2) of this AD). Do the removal 

following Piper MSB No. 528D, dated 

October 19, 1990, or Piper MSB No. 910A, 

dated October 10, 1989, as applicable. Before 

further flight after the removal, do one of the 

actions in either paragraph (l) or (m) of this 

AD, including all subparagraphs. 

(l) Inspect and Replace Wing Lift Strut Forks 

Before further flight after the removal 

required in paragraph (k) of this AD, inspect 

the wing lift strut forks for cracks using 

magnetic particle procedures, such as those 

contained in FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 

43.13–1B, Chapter 5, which can be found at 

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance

_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/

99C827DB9BAAC81B86256B4

500596C4E?Open

Document&Highlight=43.13-1b. Repetitively 

thereafter inspect at intervals not to exceed 

500 hours TIS until the replacement time 

requirement specified in paragraph (l)(2) or 

(l)(3) of this AD is reached provided no 

cracks are found. 

(1) If cracks are found during any 

inspection required in paragraph (l) of this 

AD or during any repetitive inspection 

required in paragraph (l)(2) or (l)(3) of this 

AD, before further flight, replace the affected 

wing lift strut forks with one of the 

replacement options specified in paragraph 

(m)(1), (m)(2), (m)(3), or (m)(4) of this AD. Do 

the replacement following the procedures 

specified in those paragraphs, as applicable. 

(2) If no cracks are found during the initial 

inspection required in paragraph (l) of this 

AD and the airplane is currently equipped 

with floats or has been equipped with floats 

at any time during the previous 2,000 hours 

TIS since the wing lift strut forks were 

installed, at or before accumulating 1,000 

hours TIS on the wing lift strut forks replace 

the wing lift strut forks with one of the 

replacement options specified in paragraph 

(m)(1), (m)(2), (m)(3), or (m)(4) of this AD. Do 

the replacement following the procedures 

specified in those paragraphs, as applicable. 

Repetitively thereafter inspect the newly 

installed wing lift strut forks at intervals not 

to exceed 500 hours TIS following the 

procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this 

AD, including all subparagraphs. 

(3) If no cracks are found during the initial 

inspection required in paragraph (l) of this 

AD and the airplane has never been 

equipped with floats during the previous 

2,000 hours TIS since the wing lift strut forks 

were installed, at or before accumulating 

2,000 hours TIS on the wing lift strut forks, 

replace the wing lift strut forks with one of 

the replacement options specified in 

paragraph (m)(1), (m)(2), (m)(3), or (m)(4) of 

this AD. Do the replacement following the 

procedures specified in those paragraphs, as 

applicable. Repetitively thereafter inspect the 

newly installed wing lift strut forks at 

intervals not to exceed 500 hours TIS 

following the procedures specified in 

paragraph (l) of this AD, including all 

subparagraphs. 

(m) Wing Lift Strut Fork Replacement 

Options 

(1) Install new OEM part number wing lift 

strut forks of the same part numbers of the 

existing part (or FAA-approved equivalent 

part numbers) that were manufactured with 

rolled threads. Lift strut forks manufactured 

with machine (cut) threads are not to be 

used. Do the installations following Piper 

MSB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990, or 

Piper MSB No. 910A, dated October 10, 1989, 

as applicable. Repetitively thereafter inspect 

the newly installed wing lift strut forks at 

intervals not to exceed 500 hours TIS 

following the procedures specified in 

paragraph (l)(1) of this AD, including all 

subparagraphs. 

(2) Install new sealed wing lift strut 

assemblies (these sealed wing lift strut 

assemblies also include the wing lift strut 

forks) following Piper MSB No. 528D, dated 

October 19, 1990, and Piper MSB No. 910A, 

dated October 10, 1989, as applicable. This 

installation may have already been done 

through the option specified in paragraph 

(j)(2) of this AD. Installing one of these new 

sealed wing lift strut assemblies terminates 

the repetitive inspection requirement in 

paragraphs (i) and (l) of this AD, including 

all sub paragraphs, for that wing lift strut 

assembly. Installing one of these new sealed 

wing lift strut assemblies terminates the 

repetitive replacement requirement in 

paragraph (1) of this AD, including all sub 

paragraphs, for that wing lift strut. 

(3) For the airplanes specified below, 

install Jensen Aircraft wing lift strut fork 

assemblies specified below in the applicable 

STC following Jensen Aircraft Installation 

Instructions for Modified Lift Strut Fitting. 

Installing one of these wing lift strut fork 

assemblies terminates the repetitive 

inspection requirement of this AD only for 

that wing lift strut fork. Repetitively inspect 

each wing lift strut as specified in paragraph 

(i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, including all 

subparagraphs. 

(i) For Models PA–12 and PA–12S 

airplanes: STC SA1583NM; 

(ii) For Model PA–14 airplanes: STC 

SA1584NM; 

(iii) For Models PA–16 and PA–16S 

airplanes: STC SA1590NM; 

(iv) For Models PA–18, PA–18S, PA–18 

‘‘105’’ (Special), PA–18S ‘‘105’’ (Special), 

PA–18A, PA–18 ‘‘125’’ (Army L–21A), PA– 

18S ‘‘125’’, PA–18AS ‘‘125’’, PA–18 ‘‘135’’ 

(Army L–21B), PA–18A ‘‘135’’, PA–18S 

‘‘135’’, PA–18AS ‘‘135’’, PA–18 ‘‘150’’, PA– 

18A ‘‘150’’, PA–18S ‘‘150’’, PA–18AS ‘‘150’’, 

PA–18A (Restricted), PA–18A ‘‘135’’ 

(Restricted), and PA–18A ‘‘150’’ (Restricted) 

airplanes: STC SA1585NM; 

(v) For Models PA–20, PA–20S, PA–20 

‘‘115’’, PA–20S ‘‘115’’, PA–20 ‘‘135’’, and 

PA–20S ‘‘135’’ airplanes: STC SA1586NM; 

and 

(vi) For Model PA–22 airplanes: STC 

SA1587NM. 

(4) Install F. Atlee Dodge wing lift strut 

assemblies following F. Atlee Dodge 

Installation Instructions No. 3233–I for 

Modified Piper Wing Lift Struts (STC 

SA4635NM), dated February 1, 1991. This 

installation may have already been done in 

accordance paragraph (j)(3) of this AD. 

Installing these wing lift strut assemblies 

terminate the repetitive inspection 

requirements of this AD for the wing lift strut 

fork only. Repetitively inspect the wing lift 

struts as specified in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) 

of this AD, including all subparagraphs. 

(n) Install Placard 

(1) Within 1 calendar month after February 

8, 1999 (the effective date retained from AD 

99–01–05, amendment 39–10972 (63 FR 

72132, December 31, 1998)), or within 24 

calendar months after the last inspection 

required by AD 93–10–06 (58 FR 29965, May 

25, 1993) (which was superseded by AD 99– 

01–05), whichever occurs later, and before 

further flight after any replacement of a wing 

lift strut assembly required by this AD, do 

one of the following: 

(i) Install ‘‘NO STEP’’ decal, Piper 

(P/N) 80944–02, on each wing lift strut 

approximately 6 inches from the bottom of 

the wing lift strut in a way that the letters can 

be read when entering and exiting the 

airplane; or 

(ii) Paint the words ‘‘NO STEP’’ 

approximately 6 inches from the bottom of 

the wing lift struts in a way that the letters 

can be read when entering and exiting the 

airplane. Use a minimum of 1-inch letters 

using a color that contrasts with the color of 

the airplane. 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2013 / Proposed Rules 3361 

(2) The ‘‘NO STEP’’ markings required by 

paragraph (n)(1)(i) or (n)(1)(ii) of this AD 

must remain in place for the life of the 

airplane. 

(o) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Atlanta Aircraft 

Certification Office, (ACO), FAA, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested using the procedures found in 14 

CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, 

send your request to your principal inspector 

or local Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the manager of the ACO, send it to the 

attention of the person identified in the 

Related Information section of this AD. 

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 

of the local flight standards district office/ 

certificate holding district office. 

(3) AMOCs approved for AD 93–10–06, 

amendment 39–8586 (58 FR 29965, May 25, 

1993) and AD 99–01–05, amendment 39–39– 

10972 (63 FR 72132, December 31, 1998) are 

approved as AMOCs for this AD. 

(p) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Gregory K. Noles, Aerospace 

Engineer, FAA, Atlanta ACO, 1701 Columbia 

Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337; phone: 

(404) 474–5551; fax: (404) 474–5606; email: 

gregory.noles@faa.gov. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Piper Aircraft, Inc., 

Customer Services, 2926 Piper Drive, Vero 

Beach, Florida 32960; telephone: (772) 567– 

4361; Internet: www.piper.com. Copies of the 

instructions to the F. Atlee Dodge 

supplemental type certificate (STC) and 

information about the Jensen Aircraft STCs 

may be obtained from F. Atlee Dodge, 

Aircraft Services, LLC., 6672 Wes Way, 

Anchorage, Alaska 99518–0409, Internet: 

www.fadodge.com. 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. 

APPENDIX TO DOCKET NO. FAA– 

2013–0023 

Procedures and Requirements for Ultrasonic 

Inspection of Piper Wing Lift Struts 

Equipment Requirements 

1. A portable ultrasonic thickness gauge or 

flaw detector with echo-to-echo digital 

thickness readout capable of reading to 

0.001-inch and an A-trace waveform display 

will be needed to do this inspection. 

2. An ultrasonic probe with the following 

specifications will be needed to accomplish 

this inspection: 10 MHz (or higher), 0.283- 

inch (or smaller) diameter dual element or 

delay line transducer designed for thickness 

gauging. The transducer and ultrasonic 

system shall be capable of accurately 

measuring the thickness of AISI 4340 steel 

down to 0.020-inch. An accuracy of +/¥ 

0.002-inch throughout a 0.020-inch to 0.050- 

inch thickness range while calibrating shall 

be the criteria for acceptance. 

3. Either a precision machined step wedge 

made of 4340 steel (or similar steel with 

equivalent sound velocity) or at least three 

shim samples of same material will be 

needed to accomplish this inspection. One 

thickness of the step wedge or shim shall be 

less than or equal to 0.020-inch, one shall be 

greater than or equal to 0.050-inch, and at 

least one other step or shim shall be between 

these two values. 

4. Glycerin, light oil, or similar non-water 

based ultrasonic couplants are recommended 

in the setup and inspection procedures. 

Water-based couplants, containing 

appropriate corrosion inhibitors, may be 

utilized, provided they are removed from 

both the reference standards and the test item 

after the inspection procedure is completed 

and adequate corrosion prevention steps are 

then taken to protect these items. 

• Note: Couplant is defined as ‘‘a 

substance used between the face of the 

transducer and test surface to improve 

transmission of ultrasonic energy across the 

transducer/strut interface.’’ 

• Note: If surface roughness due to paint 

loss or corrosion is present, the surface 

should be sanded or polished smooth before 

testing to assure a consistent and smooth 

surface for making contact with the 

transducer. Care shall be taken to remove a 

minimal amount of structural material. Paint 

repairs may be necessary after the inspection 

to prevent further corrosion damage from 

occurring. Removal of surface irregularities 

will enhance the accuracy of the inspection 

technique. 

Instrument Setup 

1. Set up the ultrasonic equipment for 

thickness measurements as specified in the 

instrument’s user’s manual. Because of the 

variety of equipment available to perform 

ultrasonic thickness measurements, some 

modification to this general setup procedure 

may be necessary. However, the tolerance 

requirement of step 13 and the record 

keeping requirement of step 14, must be 

satisfied. 

2. If battery power will be employed, check 

to see that the battery has been properly 

charged. The testing will take approximately 

two hours. Screen brightness and contrast 

should be set to match environmental 

conditions. 

3. Verify that the instrument is set for the 

type of transducer being used, i.e. single or 

dual element, and that the frequency setting 

is compatible with the transducer. 

4. If a removable delay line is used, remove 

it and place a drop of couplant between the 

transducer face and the delay line to assure 

good transmission of ultrasonic energy. 

Reassemble the delay line transducer and 

continue. 

5. Program a velocity of 0.231-inch/ 

microsecond into the ultrasonic unit unless 

an alternative instrument calibration 

procedure is used to set the sound velocity. 

6. Obtain a step wedge or steel shims per 

item 3 of the EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS. 

Place the probe on the thickest sample using 

couplant. Rotate the transducer slightly back 

and forth to ‘‘ring’’ the transducer to the 

sample. Adjust the delay and range settings 

to arrive at an A-trace signal display with the 

first backwall echo from the steel near the left 

side of the screen and the second backwall 

echo near the right of the screen. Note that 

when a single element transducer is used, the 

initial pulse and the delay line/steel interface 

will be off of the screen to the left. Adjust the 

gain to place the amplitude of the first 

backwall signal at approximately 80% screen 

height on the A-trace. 

7. ‘‘Ring’’ the transducer on the thinnest 

step or shim using couplant. Select positive 

half-wave rectified, negative half-wave 

rectified, or filtered signal display to obtain 

the cleanest signal. Adjust the pulse voltage, 

pulse width, and damping to obtain the best 

signal resolution. These settings can vary 

from one transducer to another and are also 

user dependent. 

8. Enable the thickness gate, and adjust the 

gate so that it starts at the first backwall echo 

and ends at the second backwall echo. 

(Measuring between the first and second 

backwall echoes will produce a measurement 

of the steel thickness that is not affected by 

the paint layer on the strut). If instability of 

the gate trigger occurs, adjust the gain, gate 

level, and/or damping to stabilize the 

thickness reading. 

9. Check the digital display reading and if 

it does not agree with the known thickness 

of the thinnest thickness, follow your 

instrument’s calibration recommendations to 

produce the correct thickness reading. When 

a single element transducer is used this will 

usually involve adjusting the fine delay 

setting. 

10. Place the transducer on the thickest 

step of shim using couplant. Adjust the 

thickness gate width so that the gate is 

triggered by the second backwall reflection of 

the thick section. If the digital display does 

not agree with the thickest thickness, follow 

your instruments calibration 

recommendations to produce the correct 

thickness reading. A slight adjustment in the 

velocity may be necessary to get both the 

thinnest and the thickest reading correct. 

Document the changed velocity value. 

11. Place couplant on an area of the lift 

strut which is thought to be free of corrosion 

and ‘‘ring’’ the transducer to surface. Minor 

adjustments to the signal and gate settings 

may be required to account for coupling 

improvements resulting from the paint layer. 

The thickness gate level should be set just 

high enough so as not to be triggered by 

irrelevant signal noise. An area on the upper 

surface of the lift strut above the inspection 

area would be a good location to complete 

this step and should produce a thickness 

reading between 0.034-inch and 0.041-inch. 

12. Repeat steps 8, 9, 10, and 11 until both 

thick and thin shim measurements are within 

tolerance and the lift strut measurement is 

reasonable and steady. 

13. Verify that the thickness value shown 

in the digital display is within +/¥ 0.002- 

inch of the correct value for each of the three 

or more steps of the setup wedge or shims. 

Make no further adjustments to the 

instrument settings. 

14. Record the ultrasonic versus actual 

thickness of all wedge steps or steel shims 

available as a record of setup. 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 
3362 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

Inspection Procedure 

1. Clean the lower 18 inches of the wing 

lift struts using a cleaner that will remove all 

dirt and grease. Dirt and grease will adversely 

affect the accuracy of the inspection 

technique. Light sanding or polishing may 

also be required to reduce surface roughness 

as noted in the EQUIPMENT 

REQUIREMENTS section. 

2. Using a flexible ruler, draw a 1/4-inch 

grid on the surface of the first 11 inches from 

the lower end of the strut as shown in Piper 

Service Bulletin No. 528D or 910A, as 

applicable. This can be done using a soft (#2) 

pencil and should be done on both faces of 

the strut. As an alternative to drawing a 

complete grid, make two rows of marks 

spaced every 1/4-inch across the width of the 

strut. One row of marks should be about 11 

inches from the lower end of the strut, and 

the second row should be several inches 

away where the strut starts to narrow. Lay the 

flexible ruler between respective tick marks 

of the two rows and use tape or a rubber band 

to keep the ruler in place. See Figure 1. 

3. Apply a generous amount of couplant 

inside each of the square areas or along the 

edge of the ruler. Re-application of couplant 

may be necessary. 

4. Place the transducer inside the first 

square area of the drawn grid or at the first 

1/4-inch mark on the ruler and ‘‘ring’’ the 

transducer to the strut. When using a dual 

element transducer, be very careful to record 

the thickness value with the axis of the 

transducer elements perpendicular to any 

curvature in the strut. If this is not done, loss 

of signal or inaccurate readings can result. 

5. Take readings inside each square on the 

grid or at 1/4-inch increments along the ruler 

and record the results. When taking a 

thickness reading, rotate the transducer 

slightly back and forth and experiment with 

the angle of contact to produce the lowest 

thickness reading possible. Pay close 

attention to the A-scan display to assure that 

the thickness gate is triggering off of 

maximized backwall echoes. 

• Note: A reading shall not exceed .041 

inch. If a reading exceeds .041-inch, repeat 

steps 13 and 14 of the INSTRUMENT SETUP 

section before proceeding further. 

6. If the A-trace is unsteady or the 

thickness reading is clearly wrong, adjust the 

signal gain and/or gate setting to obtain 

reasonable and steady readings. If any 

instrument setting is adjusted, repeat steps 13 

and 14 of the INSTRUMENT SETUP section 

before proceeding further. 

7. In areas where obstructions are present, 

take a data point as close to the correct area 

as possible. 

• Note: The strut wall contains a 

fabrication bead at approximately 40% of the 

strut chord. The bead may interfere with 

accurate measurements in that specific 

location. 

8. A measurement of 0.024-inch or less 

shall require replacement of the strut prior to 

further flight. 

9. If at any time during testing an area is 

encountered where a valid thickness 

measurement cannot be obtained due to a 

loss of signal strength or quality, the area 

shall be considered suspect. These areas may 

have a remaining wall thickness of less than 

0.020-inch, which is below the range of this 

setup, or they may have small areas of 

localized corrosion or pitting present. The 

latter case will result in a reduction in signal 

strength due to the sound being scattered 

from the rough surface and may result in a 

signal that includes echoes from the pits as 

well as the backwall. The suspect area(s) 

shall be tested with a Maule ‘‘Fabric Tester’’ 

as specified in Piper Service Bulletin No. 

528D or 910A. 

10. Record the lift strut inspection in the 

aircraft log book. 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with EP16JA13.003</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 16, 2013 / Proposed Rules 3363 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on January 

10, 2013. 

John Colomy, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–00807 Filed 1–15–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–1318; Directorate 

Identifier 2012–NM–104–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; the Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

The Boeing Company Model 747–200B, 

747–300, 747–400, 747–400D, 747–400F 

series airplanes, and Model 767 series 

airplanes, powered by General Electric 

(GE) CF6–80C2 engines. This proposed 

AD was prompted by reports of failure 

of the electro-mechanical brake flex 

shaft (short flexshaft) of the thrust 

reverser actuation system (TRAS). This 

proposed AD would require replacing 

the short flexshaft on each engine with 

a new short flexshaft, testing of the 

electro-mechanical brake and center 

drive unit (CDU) cone brake to verify 

the holding torque, and performing 

related investigative and corrective 

actions if necessary. We are proposing 

this AD to prevent an uncommanded inflight thrust reverser deployment and 

consequent loss of control of the 

airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by March 4, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, 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: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data 

& Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, 

MC 2H–65, Seattle, WA 98124–2207; 

telephone 206–544–5000, extension 1; 

fax 206–766–5680; Internet https:// 

www.myboeingfleet.com.You may 

review copies of the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, WA. For information on 

the availability of this material at the 

FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

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 

(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Tung Tran, Aerospace Engineer, 

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 

FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6505; 

fax: 425–917–6590; email: 

Tung.Tran@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposal. Send your comments to 

an address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 

2012–1318; Directorate Identifier 2012– 

NM–104–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:// 

www.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 

We have received multiple reports of 

failure of the short flexshaft of the TRAS 

on Model 747 and 767 airplanes 

powered with GE CF6–80C2 engines. 

The TRAS brake was installed as a third 

lock to prevent an uncommanded thrust 

reverser deployment on Model 747 and 

767 airplanes powered by GE CF6–80C2 

engines. The failed short flexshafts were 

found to have cores that had become 

sheared and unbraided. A new short 

flexshaft design has been developed that 

incorporates a better end fitting 

attachment and a larger core diameter 

with the core wound specifically for use 

on a left and right thrust reverser half to 

increase its resistance to failure. We are 

proposing this AD to prevent an 

uncommanded in-flight thrust reverser 

deployment and consequent loss of 

control of the airplane. 

Other Related Rulemaking 

On August 13, 2003, we issued AD 

2003–16–16, Amendment 39–13269 (68 

FR 51439, August 27, 2003), for Model 

747–400 series airplanes equipped with 

GE Model CF6–80C2 series engines. AD 

2003–16–16 requires repetitive tests of 

the cone brake of the CDU of the thrust 

reversers, and corrective actions if 

necessary; installation of a TRAS lock 

and various related modifications and 

installations. Following installation of 

the TRAS lock, this action also requires 

repetitive functional tests of the TRAS 

lock, and corrective action if necessary. 

On July 18, 2000, we issued AD 2000– 

15–04, Amendment 39–11833 (65 FR 

47252, August 2, 2000), for Model 747– 

200 and –300 series airplanes equipped 

with GE Model CF6–80C2 series engines 

with Power Management Control engine 

controls. AD 2000–15–04 requires 

various inspections and functional tests 

to detect discrepancies of the thrust 

reverser control and indication system, 

and correction of any discrepancy 

found; and installation of a terminating 

modification, and repetitive functional 

tests of that installation, and repair, if 

necessary. 

On April 26, 2000, we issued AD 

2000–09–04, Amendment 39–11712 (65 

FR 25833, May 4, 2000), for Model 767 

series airplanes equipped with GE 

Model CF6–80C2 series engines. AD 

2000–09–04 requires tests, inspections, 

and adjustments of the thrust reverser 

system; and installation of a terminating 

modification, and repetitive follow-on 

actions. 

Relevant Service Information 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–78A2185, dated October 

26, 2010; and Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 767–78A0100, dated October 

26, 2010. This service information 

describes procedures for replacing the 

short flexshaft of each thrust reverser 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with