70042 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(j) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, International 

Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 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 International Branch, send it to ATTN: 

Mike Borfitz, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057– 

3356; telephone (425) 227–2677; fax (425) 

227–1149. Information may be emailed to: 

9-ANM-116-AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. 

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. The AMOC 

approval letter must specifically reference 

this AD. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

Related Information 

(k) Refer to MCAI Israeli Airworthiness 

Directives 27–10–11–03, dated December 6, 

2010, and 27–10–12–29, dated January 4, 

2011; and Gulfstream Service Bulletins 150– 

27–123 and 200–27–374, both Revision 1, 

both dated January 27, 2011; for related 

information. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(l) You must use Gulfstream Service 

Bulletin 150–27–123, Revision 1, dated 

January 27, 2011; or Gulfstream Service 

Bulletin 200–27–374, Revision 1, dated 

January 27, 2011; as applicable; to do the 

actions required by this AD, unless the AD 

specifies otherwise. 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference of 

this service information under 5 U.S.C. 

552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Gulfstream Aerospace 

Corporation, P.O. Box 2206, Mail Station 

D–25, Savannah, Georgia 31402–2206; 

telephone (800) 810–4853; fax (912) 965– 

3520; email pubs@gulfstream.com; Internet 

http://www.gulfstream.com/ 

product_support/technical_pubs/pubs/ 

index.htm. 

(3) You may review copies of the service 

information at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

(425) 227–1221. 

(4) You may also review copies of the 

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/ 

code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 

20, 2011. 

Kalene C. Yanamura, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–28572 Filed 11–9–11; 8:45 a.m.] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–0971; Directorate 

Identifier 2011–CE–030–AD; Amendment 

39–16862; AD 2011–23–11] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Pacific 

Aerospace Limited Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for Pacific 

Aerospace Limited Model FU24 

Airplanes. This AD results from 

mandatory continuing airworthiness 

information (MCAI) issued by an 

aviation authority of another country to 

identify and correct an unsafe condition 

on an aviation product. The MCAI 

describes the unsafe condition as: 

Investigation of a recent Cresco 08–600 

accident identified a risk of the hopper lid 

interfering with the opening of the canopy in 

the event of an emergency landing. The pilot 

was prevented from opening the canopy by 

the hopper lid in the fully forward open 

position. This AD is issued due to the fact 

that the hopper lid installation on the 

accident aircraft was an unapproved 

modification and the Fletcher FU24 hopper 

installation is a similar design to the Cresco 

08–600. 

We are issuing this AD to require 

actions to correct the unsafe condition 

on these products. 

DATES: This AD is effective December 

15, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in person at 

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: Karl 

Schletzbaum, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, 

Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, 

Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 

telephone: (816) 329–4146; fax: (816) 

329–4090; email: 

karl.schletzbaum@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to include an AD that would 

apply to the specified products. That 

NPRM was published in the Federal 

Register on September 8, 2011 (76 FR 

55614). That NPRM proposed to correct 

an unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The MCAI states: 

Investigation of a recent Cresco 08–600 

accident identified a risk of the hopper lid 

interfering with the opening of the canopy in 

the event of an emergency landing. The pilot 

was prevented from opening the canopy by 

the hopper lid in the fully forward open 

position. This AD is issued due to the fact 

that the hopper lid installation on the 

accident aircraft was an unapproved 

modification and the Fletcher FU24 hopper 

installation is a similar design to the Cresco 

08–600. 

The MCAI requires reviewing the 

aircraft records, doing a conformity 

inspection for an approved design 

hopper lid installation, and removing 

the hopper lid installation, if not an 

approved design. You may obtain 

further information by examining the 

MCAI in the AD docket. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

received no comments on the NPRM (76 

FR 55614, September 8, 2011) or on the 

determination of the cost to the public. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the available data and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting the AD 

as proposed. 

Differences Between This AD and the 

MCAI or Service Information 

We have reviewed the MCAI and 

related service information and, in 

general, agree with their substance. But 

we might have found it necessary to use 

different words from those in the MCAI 

to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. 

operators and is enforceable. In making 

these changes, we do not intend to differ 

substantively from the information 

provided in the MCAI and related 

service information. 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 70043 

We might also have required different 

actions in this AD from those in the 

MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. 

Any such differences are highlighted in 

a NOTE within the AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD will affect 1 

product of U.S. registry. We also 

estimate that it would take about 1 

work-hours per product to comply with 

the basic requirements of this AD. The 

average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. 

Required parts would cost about $0 per 

product. 

Based on these figures, we estimate 

the cost of the AD on U.S. operators to 

be $85, or $85 per product. 

In addition, we estimate that any 

necessary follow-on actions would take 

about 6 work-hours and require parts 

costing $0, for a cost of $510 per 

product. We have no way of 

determining the number of products 

that may need these actions. 

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 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 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); and 

(3) Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this AD and placed it in the AD Docket. 

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 the NPRM (76 FR 

55614, September 8, 2011), the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(telephone (800) 647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

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 adding 

the following new AD: 

2011–23–11 Pacific Aerospace Limited: 

Amendment 39–16862; Docket No. 

FAA–2011–0971; Directorate Identifier 

2011–CE–030–AD. 

(a) Effective Date 

This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes 

effective December 15, 2011. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Pacific Aerospace 

Limited Models FU24–954 and FU24A–954 

airplanes, all serial numbers, certificated in 

any category. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association of America 

(ATA) Code 52: Doors. 

(e) Reason 

The mandatory continuing airworthiness 

information (MCAI) states: 

Investigation of a recent Cresco 08–600 

accident identified a risk of the hopper lid 

interfering with the opening of the canopy in 

the event of an emergency landing. The pilot 

was prevented from opening the canopy by 

the hopper lid in the fully forward open 

position. This AD is issued due to the fact 

that the hopper lid installation on the 

accident aircraft was an unapproved 

modification and the Fletcher FU24 hopper 

installation is a similar design to the Cresco 

08–600. 

The MCAI requires reviewing the aircraft 

records, doing a conformity inspection for an 

approved design hopper lid installation, and 

removing the hopper lid installation, if not 

an approved design. 

(f) Actions and Compliance 

Unless already done, do the following 

actions within 150 hours time-in-service 

(TIS) after December 15, 2011 (the effective 

date of this AD) or within 12 calendar 

months after December 15, 2011 (the effective 

date of this AD), whichever occurs first: 

(1) Review the aircraft records and 

determine whether a hopper lid modification 

has been recorded. If a hopper lid 

modification has been recorded, determine 

whether the aircraft was certified for release 

to service after completion of the 

modification and whether the applicable 

approved technical data (supplemental type 

certificate (STC) or field approval) is 

referenced. Visually inspect for an 

unapproved hopper lid modification. 

(2) If the hopper lid modification is an 

approved design, do a conformity inspection 

and determine whether the hopper lid 

modification conforms to the applicable 

approved technical data (supplemental type 

certificate (STC) or field approval). 

(3) If the hopper lid modification is not an 

approved design (STC or field approval), 

before further flight, remove the hopper lid 

installation. 

Note 1: The Frontier-Aerospace 

Incorporated Models Fletcher FU–24 and 

Fletcher FU–24A airplanes do not have this 

unsafe condition and are not affected by this 

AD. 

Note 2: The basic hopper installation for 

the Pacific Aerospace Limited Model FU24– 

954 airplane does not include a hopper lid 

due to the canopy sliding partly over the 

hopper inlet. A separate approval must be 

obtained to install a hopper lid. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 3: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: No 

differences. 

(g) Other FAA AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Office, 

FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs 

for this AD, if requested using the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to 

ATTN: Karl Schletzbaum, Aerospace 

Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 

901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 

64106; telephone: (816) 329–4146; fax: (816) 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
70044 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

329–4090; email: karl.schletzbaum@faa.gov. 

Before using any approved AMOC on any 

airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify 

your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in 

the FAA Flight Standards District Office 

(FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(3) Reporting Requirements: For any 

reporting requirement in this AD, a federal 

agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a 

person is not required to respond to, nor 

shall a person be subject to a penalty for 

failure to comply with a collection of 

information subject to the requirements of 

the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that 

collection of information displays a current 

valid OMB Control Number. The OMB 

Control Number for this information 

collection is 2120–0056. Public reporting for 

this collection of information is estimated to 

be approximately 5 minutes per response, 

including the time for reviewing instructions, 

completing and reviewing the collection of 

information. All responses to this collection 

of information are mandatory. Comments 

concerning the accuracy of this burden and 

suggestions for reducing the burden should 

be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence 

Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn: 

Information Collection Clearance Officer, 

AES–200. 

(h) Related Information 

MCAI Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) AD 

DCA/FU24/180, dated July 28, 2011, for 

related information. 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. 

(i) Material Incorporated by Reference 

None. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on 

November 2, 2011. 

John Colomy, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–29045 Filed 11–9–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–0721; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NM–217–AD; Amendment 

39–16861; AD 2011–23–10] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; ATR–GIE 

Avions de Transport Re ́gional 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

Model ATR42 and ATR72 airplanes. 

This AD results from mandatory 

continuing airworthiness information 

(MCAI) originated by an aviation 

authority of another country to identify 

and correct an unsafe condition on an 

aviation product. The MCAI describes 

the unsafe condition as: 

One ATR operator has experienced inflight elevator travel limitations with unusual 

effort being necessary on pitch axis to control 

the aeroplane, while the ‘‘pitch mistrim’’ 

message appeared on the ADU [advisory 

display unit] display. The elevators seemed 

to be jammed. 

During the post-flight inspection, it was 

discovered that the LH [left-hand] elevator 

lower stop assembly was broken at the level 

of the angles, which may have prevented the 

elevator to respond normally to the flight 

control input. 

This condition, if not detected and 

corrected, could lead to reduced control of 

the aeroplane. 

* * * * * 

We are issuing this AD to require 

actions to correct the unsafe condition 

on these products. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

December 15, 2011. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in this AD 

as of December 15, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in person at the 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Docket Operations, M–30, West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom 

Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 227–1137; fax (425) 227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to include an AD that would 

apply to the specified products. That 

NPRM was published in the Federal 

Register on August 5, 2011 (76 FR 

47520). That NPRM proposed to correct 

an unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The MCAI states: 

One ATR operator has experienced inflight elevator travel limitations with unusual 

effort being necessary on pitch axis to control 

the aeroplane, while the ‘‘pitch mistrim’’ 

message appeared on the ADU display. The 

elevators seemed to be jammed. 

During the post-flight inspection, it was 

discovered that the LH elevator lower stop 

assembly was broken at the level of the 

angles, which may have prevented the 

elevator to respond normally to the flight 

control input. 

This condition, if not detected and 

corrected, could lead to reduced control of 

the aeroplane. 

For the reasons described above, and as a 

precautionary measure, this [EASA] AD 

requires a one-time [general visual and 

detailed] inspection [for damaged angles] of 

the elevator hinge fittings and the reporting 

of all findings. Depending on the results, 

further action may be considered. 

Corrective actions also include 

replacement of damaged angles with 

serviceable parts; and a detailed 

inspection of adjacent areas for damage, 

and repair if necessary. You may obtain 

further information by examining the 

MCAI in the AD docket. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

received no comments on the NPRM (76 

FR 47520), August 5, 2011) or on the 

determination of the cost to the public. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the available data and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting the AD 

as proposed. 

Differences Between This AD and the 

MCAI or Service Information 

We have reviewed the MCAI and 

related service information and, in 

general, agree with their substance. But 

we might have found it necessary to use 

different words from those in the MCAI 

to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. 

operators and is enforceable. In making 

these changes, we do not intend to differ 

substantively from the information 

provided in the MCAI and related 

service information. 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES