76040 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 241 / Monday, December 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on 

November 22, 2013. 

Earl Lawrence, 

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–29682 Filed 12–13–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0724; Directorate 

Identifier 99–CE–013–AD; Amendment 39– 

17691; AD 99–26–19 R1] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Piper 

Aircraft, Inc. Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are revising Airworthiness 

Directive (AD) 99–26–19 that applies to 

certain The New Piper Aircraft, Inc. 

Model J–2 airplanes equipped with 

wing lift struts. AD 99–26–19 required 

repetitively inspecting the wing lift 

struts for dents and corrosion; 

repetitively inspecting the wing lift strut 

forks for cracks; replacing any dented or 

corroded wing lift strut; replacing any 

cracked wing lift strut fork; and 

repetitively replacing the wing lift strut 

forks at specified times for certain 

airplanes. AD 99–26–19 also required 

incorporating a ‘‘NO STEP’’ placard on 

the wing lift strut. Since we issued AD 

99–26–19, we were informed that 

paragraph (c) had been misinterpreted 

and caused confusion. This AD clarifies 

the intent of the language in paragraph 

(c) of AD 99–26–19 and retains all other 

requirements of AD 99–26–19. We are 

issuing this AD to correct the unsafe 

condition on these products. 

DATES: This AD is effective January 21, 

2014. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in this AD 

as of February 14, 2000 (64 FR 72524, 

December 28, 1999). 

ADDRESSES: 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. 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 by searching for 

and locating it in Docket No. FAA– 

2013–0724; 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 AD, the regulatory 

evaluation, any comments received, and 

other information. The address for the 

Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is 

Document Management Facility, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590. 

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: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to revise AD 99–26–19, 

Amendment 39–11479 (64 FR 72524, 

December 28, 1999), (‘‘AD 99–26–19’’). 

AD 99–26–19 applied to the specified 

products. The NPRM published in the 

Federal Register on August 13, 2013 (78 

FR 49221). The NPRM proposed to 

retain all requirements of AD 99–26–19 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULESER16DE13.000</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 241 / Monday, December 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 76041 

and clarify our intent of required actions 

if the seal on a sealed wing lift strut is 

ever improperly broken. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

received no comments on the NPRM or 

on the determination of the cost to the 

public. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the relevant data and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting this AD 

as proposed except for minor editorial 

changes. We have determined that these 

minor changes: 

• Are consistent with the intent that 

was proposed in the NPRM (78 FR 

49221, August 13, 2013) for correcting 

the unsafe condition; and 

• Do not add any additional burden 

upon the public than was already 

proposed in the NPRM (78 FR 49221, 

August 13, 2013). 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD affects 91 

airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We estimate the following costs to 

comply with this AD. However, the only 

difference in the costs presented below 

and the costs associated with AD 99– 

26–19 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. $61,880 per inspection 

cycle. 

Installation placard ............ 1 work-hour × $85 = $85 .. $30 .................................... $115 .................................. $10,465. 

We estimate the following costs to do 

any necessary replacements that will be 

required based on the results of the 

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 

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 AD will 

not have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD will 

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 this AD: 

(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), 

(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. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 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) 

99–26–19, Amendment 39–11479 (64 

FR 72524, December 28, 1999), and 

adding the following new AD: 

99–26–19 R1 Piper Aircraft, Inc.: 

Amendment 39–17691; Docket No. 

FAA–2013–0724; Directorate Identifier 

99–CE–013–AD. 

(a) Effective Date 

This AD is effective January 21, 2014. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD revises AD 99–26–19, 

Amendment 39–11479 (64 FR 72524, 

December 28, 1999). AD 99–01–05, 

Amendment 39–10972 (63 FR 72132, 

December 31, 1998), which superseded AD 

93–10–06, Amendment 39–8586 (58 FR 

29965, May 25, 1993), also relates to the 

subject of this AD. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
76042 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 241 / Monday, December 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Piper Aircraft, Inc. 

Model J–2 airplanes, serial numbers 500 

through 1975, that are: 

(1) equipped with wing lift struts; and 

(2) certificated in any category. 

(d) Subject 

Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America 

Code 57, Wings. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

(1) The subject of this AD was originally 

prompted by reports of corrosion damage 

found on the wing lift struts. We are revising 

AD 99–26–19, Amendment 39–11479 (64 FR 

72524, December 28, 1999), because of 

reports that paragraph (c) had been 

misinterpreted and caused confusion. This 

AD removes the language in paragraph (c) of 

AD 99–26–19, which caused the confusion. 

(2) 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 improperly broken. If the 

seal is improperly 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. This AD retains all the actions 

required in AD 99–26–19 and this AD does 

not require any actions over that already 

required in AD 99–26–19. This AD does not 

add any additional burden to the owners/

operators of the affected airplanes. 

(3) 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 

AD 99–26–19 

Since AD 99–26–19, Amendment 39– 

11479 (64 FR 72524, December 28, 1999), 

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 

99–26–19 

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 (b) paragraph (k) 

paragraph (b)(1) 

through (b)(1)(ii) 

paragraph (l) 

paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(A) paragraph (l)(1) 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (F) OF THIS

AD—REVISED PARAGRAPH IDENTIFIERS—Continued 

Requirement in AD 

99–26–19 

Corresponding 

requirement 

in this AD 

paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(B) 

and (b)(1)(iv) 

paragraph (l)(2) 

paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(C) 

and (b)(1)(iv) 

paragraph (l)(3) 

paragraph (b)(1)(iii) 

and (b)(2) 

paragraph (m)(1) 

paragraph (b)(3) 

through (b)(3)(ii) 

paragraph (m)(2) 

Paragraph (c) Removed 

paragraph (d) paragraph (n)(1) 

paragraph (d)(1) paragraph (n)(1)(i) 

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

N/A Paragraph (n)(2) 

(g) Compliance 

Unless already done (compliance with AD 

99–26–19, Amendment 39–11479 (64 FR 

72524, December 28, 1999)), do the following 

actions within the compliance times 

specified in paragraphs (h) through (n) of this 

AD, including all subparagraphs. Properly 

unsealing and resealing a sealed wing lift 

strut is still considered a terminating action 

for the repetitive inspection requirements of 

this AD as long as all appropriate regulations 

and 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. Any maintenance actions that 

unseal a sealed wing lift strut should be 

coordinated with the Atlanta Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO) through the local 

airworthiness authority (e.g., Flight 

Standards District Office). There are 

provisions in paragraph (o) of this AD for 

approving such actions as an alternative 

method of compliance (AMOC). 

(h) Remove Wing Lift Struts 

At whichever of the compliance times 

specified in paragraphs (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this 

AD that occurs later, remove the wing lift 

struts following Piper Service Bulletin (SB) 

No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990. Before 

further flight after the removal, do the actions 

in one of the following paragraphs (i)(1), 

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

subparagraphs. 

(1) Within 1 calendar month after February 

14, 2000 (the effective date retained from AD 

99–26–19, Amendment 39–11479 (64 FR 

72524, December 28, 1999)); or 

(2) 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). 

(i) Inspect Wing Lift Struts 

Before further flight after the removal 

required in paragraph (h) of this AD, inspect 

each wing lift strut following paragraph (i)(1) 

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

subparagraphs, or do the wing lift strut 

replacement following one of the options in 

paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD. 

(1) Inspect each wing lift strut for corrosion 

and perceptible dents following Piper SB No. 

528D, dated October 19, 1990. 

(i) If no corrosion is 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 following Piper SB No. 528D, dated 

October 19, 1990. 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 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) or (j)(2) 

of this AD. Do the replacement following the 

procedures specified in those paragraphs, as 

applicable. 

(2) 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 the 

‘‘Military Standard for Nondestructive 

Testing Personnel Qualification and 

Certification’’ (MIL–STD–410E), which can 

be found on the Internet at http://

aerospacedefense.thomasnet.com/Asset/MILSTD-410.pdf. 

(i) If no 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 following 

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

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 corrosion is found on any wing lift 

strut during the inspection required in 

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) or (j)(2) 

of this AD. Do the replacement following the 

procedures specified in those paragraphs, as 

applicable. 

(j) Wing Lift Strut Replacement Options 

Before further flight after the removal 

required in paragraph (h) of this AD, replace 

the wing lift struts following one of the 

options in paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD, 

or inspect each wing lift strut following 

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

all subparagraphs. 

(1) Install original equipment manufacturer 

(OEM) part number wing lift struts (or FAAVerDate Mar<15>2010 13:31 Dec 13, 2013 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16DER1.SGM 16DER1

pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 241 / Monday, December 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 76043 

approved equivalent part numbers) that have 

been inspected following the procedures in 

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

including all subparagraphs, and are found to 

be airworthy. Do the installations following 

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

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 (or FAA-approved equivalent part 

numbers) (these sealed wing lift strut 

assemblies also include the wing lift strut 

forks) following Piper SB No. 528D, dated 

October 19, 1990. Installing one of these new 

sealed wing lift strut assemblies terminates 

the repetitive inspection requirements in 

paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this AD, and the 

wing lift strut fork removal, inspection, and 

replacement requirements in paragraphs (k) 

and (l) of this AD, including all 

subparagraphs, for that wing lift strut 

assembly. 

(k) Remove Wing Lift Strut Forks 

Within the next 100 hours time-in-service 

(TIS) after February 14, 2000 (the effective 

date retained from AD 99–26–19, 

Amendment 39–11479 (64 FR 72524, 

December 28, 1999)) 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), 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 SB No. 528D, dated October 

19, 1990. Before further flight after the 

removal, do the actions in one of the 

following paragraphs (l) or (m) of this AD, 

including all subparagraphs. 

(l) Inspect Wing Lift Strut Forks 

Before further flight after the removal 

required in paragraph (k) of this AD, inspect 

the wing lift strut forks following paragraph 

(l) of this AD, including all subparagraphs, or 

do the wing lift strut fork replacement 

following one of the options in paragraph 

(m)(1) or (m)(2) 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 in the Internet 

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

Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/

99c827db9baac81b86256b4500596c4e/

$FILE/Chapter%2005.pdf. 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 fork with one of the 

replacement options specified in paragraph 

(m)(1) or (m)(2) 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) or (m)(2) 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) or (m)(2) 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 

Before further flight after the removal 

required in paragraph (k) of this AD, replace 

the wing lift strut forks following one of the 

options in paragraph (m)(1) or (m)(2) of this 

AD, or inspect the wing lift strut forks 

following paragraph (1) of this AD, including 

all subparagraphs 

(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. Wing lift strut forks 

manufactured with machine (cut) threads are 

not to be used. Do the installations following 

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

Repetitively thereafter inspect and replace 

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. 

(2) Install new sealed wing lift strut 

assemblies (or FAA-approved equivalent part 

numbers) (these sealed wing lift strut 

assemblies also include the wing lift strut 

forks) following Piper SB No. 528D, dated 

October 19, 1990. 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 requirements in paragraphs (i)(1) 

and (i)(2) of this AD, and the wing lift strut 

fork removal, inspection, and replacement 

requirements in paragraphs (k) and (l) of this 

AD, including all subparagraphs, for that 

wing lift strut assembly. 

(n) Install Placard 

(1) Within 1 calendar month after February 

14, 2000 (the effective date retained from AD 

99–26–19, Amendment 39–11479 (64 FR 

72524, December 28, 1999), or within 24 

calendar months after the last inspection 

required by AD 93–10–06, Amendment 39– 

8586 (58 FR 29965, May 25, 1993), whichever 

occurs later, and before further flight after 

any replacement of a wing lift strut assembly 

required by this AD, do the actions in one of 

the following paragraphs (n)(1)(i) or (n)(1)(ii) 

of this AD: 

(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 strut 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. 

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

paragraph (n)(1)(i) and (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 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 99–26–19, Amendment 39– 

11479 (64 FR 72524, December 28, 1999) are 

approved as AMOCs for this AD. 

(p) Related Information 

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. 

(q) Material Incorporated by Reference 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

(IBR) of the service information listed in this 

paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. 

(2) You must use this service information 

as applicable to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(3) The following service information was 

approved for IBR on February 14, 2000 (64 

FR 72524, December 28, 1999). 

(i) Piper Service Bulletin No. 528D, dated 

October 19, 1990. 

(ii) Reserved. 

(4) For Piper Aircraft, Inc. service 

information identified in this AD, contact 

Piper Aircraft, Inc., Customer Services, 2926 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
76044 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 241 / Monday, December 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

Piper Drive, Vero Beach, Florida 32960; 

telephone: (772) 567–4361; Internet: 

www.piper.com. 

(5) You may view this service information 

at FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 

Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For 

information on the availability of this 

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

(6) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

202–741–6030, or go to: http://

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Appendix to AD 99–26–19 R1 

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 do 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 do 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. 

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 

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

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

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. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 241 / Monday, December 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 76045 

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 SB No. 528D, dated 

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

dated October 10, 1989. 

10. Record the lift strut inspection in the 

aircraft log book. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on 

November 22, 2013. 

Earl Lawrence, 

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–29679 Filed 12–13–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0879; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NE–30–AD; Amendment 39– 

17694; AD 2013–24–17] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; General 

Electric Company Turbofan Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for General 

Electric Company (GE) GE90–110B1 and 

GE90–115B turbofan engines with 

certain high pressure compressor (HPC) 

rotor stage 2–5 spools installed. This AD 

requires removing these spools from 

service at times determined by a 

drawdown plan. This AD was prompted 

by reports of cracks in HPC rotor stage 

2–5 spool aft spacer arms. We are 

issuing this AD to prevent failure of a 

critical life-limited rotating engine part, 

which could result in an uncontained 

engine failure and damage to the 

airplane. 

DATES: This AD is effective December 

31, 2013. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in this AD 

as of December 31, 2013. 

We must receive comments on this 

AD by January 30, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULESER16DE13.001</GPH>