19176 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

or corrosion damage, which could result in

the elevator and/or rudder separating from

the airplane with consequent loss of airplane

control, accomplish the following:

(a) Within the next 100 hours time-inservice after the effective date of this AD,

inspect the elevator and rudder attachment

brackets for cracks and/or corrosion in

accordance with Pilatus Service Bulletin No.

55–002, dated November 7, 1997.

(b) If cracked or corrosion-damaged parts

are found during the inspection required by

paragraph (a) of this AD, prior to further

flight, repair or replace any cracked or

corrosion-damaged parts, as specified in and

in accordance with Pilatus Service Bulletin

No. 55–002, dated November 7, 1997.

(c) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

(d) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an equivalent level of safety may be

approved by the Manager, Small Airplane

Directorate, 1201 Walnut, suite 900, Kansas

City, Missouri 64106. The request shall be

forwarded through an appropriate FAA

Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Small Airplane Directorate.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Small Airplane

Directorate.

(e) Questions or technical information

related to Pilatus Service Bulletin No. 55–

002, dated November 7, 1997, should be

directed to Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., Customer

Liaison Manager, CH–6371 Stans,

Switzerland; telephone: +41 41 619 6509;

facsimile: +41 41 610 3351. This service

information may be examined at the FAA,

Central Region, Office of the Regional

Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street,

Kansas City, Missouri.

(f) The inspection, repair, and replacement

required by this AD shall be done in

accordance with Pilatus Service Bulletin No.

55–002, dated November 7, 1997. This

incorporation by reference was approved by

the Director of the Federal Register in

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR

part 51. Copies may be obtained from Pilatus

Aircraft Ltd., Customer Liaison Manager,

CH–6371 Stans, Switzerland. Copies may be

inspected at the FAA, Central Region, Office

of the Regional Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E.

12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri, or at the

Office of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington,

DC.

(g) This amendment becomes effective on

May 31, 998.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April

8, 1998.

Marvin R. Nuss,

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 98–10058 Filed 4–16–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 97–CE–74–AD; Amendment 39–

10469; AD 98–08–20]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; AlliedSignal

Aerospace Bendix/King Model KSA

470 Autopilot Servo Actuators, Part

Numbers 065–0076–10 Through 065–

0076–15

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that

applies to certain AlliedSignal

Aerospace Bendix/King Model KSA 470

autopilot servo actuators, part numbers

065–0076–10 through 065–0076–15,

that are installed on aircraft. This AD

requires replacing the autopilot servo

actuator with a modified actuator. This

is the result of two reports of the

affected autopilot servo actuators

containing loose roll pins within the

servo housing. Loose roll pins could fall

out, become lodged in the output shaft

clutch mechanism, and prevent this

mechanism from disengaging. The

actions specified by this AD are

intended to prevent such an occurrence,

which could result in increased effort by

the pilot to control the aircraft and

possible loss of control of the affected

flight control axis.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 2, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Service information

identified in this AD may be obtained

from AlliedSignal Aerospace,

Commercial Avionics Systems, 400 N.

Rogers Road, Olathe, Kansas 66062–

1212. This information may also be

examined at the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Central Region,

Office of the Regional Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 97–CE–74

AD, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street,

Kansas City, Missouri 64106.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Joel Ligon, Aerospace Engineer, Wichita

Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 1801

Airport Road, Mid-Continent Airport,

Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone: (316)

946–4138; facsimile: (316) 946–4407.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Events Leading to the Issuance of This

AD

A proposal to amend part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) to include an AD that would

apply to certain AlliedSignal Aerospace

Bendix/King Model KSA 470 autopilot

servo actuators, part numbers 065–

0076–10 through 065–0076–15, that are

installed on aircraft was published in

the Federal Register as a notice of

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on

December 19, 1997 (62 FR 66565). The

NPRM proposed to require replacing the

autopilot servo actuator with a modified

actuator. Accomplishment of the

proposed action as specified in the

NPRM would be in accordance with

Bendix/King Service Bulletin No. SB

KSA 470–3, dated May 1997.

The NPRM was the result of two

reports of the affected autopilot servo

actuators containing loose roll pins

within the servo housing. Loose roll

pins could fall out, become lodged in

the output shaft clutch mechanism, and

prevent this mechanism from

disengaging.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the one

comment received. No comments were

received on the FAA’s determination of

the cost to the public.

Comment Disposition

The commenter states that the

reference to the Raytheon 350 series

aircraft in the proposal is incorrect. The

commenter explains that the Raytheon

350 series is actually a Raytheon 300

series aircraft. The commenter requests

that the FAA reference these aircraft

accordingly.

The FAA concurs that these aircraft

should be referenced as Raytheon 300

series instead of Raytheon 350 series.

Since the Raytheon 300 series is already

referenced in the AD, the FAA will

remove all reference to the Raytheon

350 series in the final rule.

The FAA’s Determination

After careful review of all available

information related to the subject

presented above, the FAA has

determined that air safety and the

public interest require the adoption of

the rule as proposed except for the

change referenced above and minor

editorial corrections. The FAA has

determined that this change and the

minor corrections will not change the

meaning of the AD and will not add any

additional burden upon the public than

was already proposed.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 500 of the

affected servo actuators could be

installed on aircraft in the U.S. registry.

This replacement will take

approximately 2 workhours per aircraft

to accomplish, at an average labor rate
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 19177

of approximately $60 an hour. Servo

actuators with Mod 3 incorporated cost

$2,350. Based on these figures, the total

cost impact of this AD on U.S. operators

is estimated to be $1,235,000, or $2,470

per aircraft. These figures are based on

the presumption that no owner/operator

of the affected aircraft has accomplished

this replacement.

AlliedSignal has informed the FAA

that costs of the required labor and

modification of the servo actuators on

affected aircraft may be recovered under

an AlliedSignal conditional warranty

program. Information regarding

warranty claims associated with this

action can be obtained directly from

AlliedSignal at the address included in

the ADDRESSES section of this AD.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein will

not have substantial direct effects on the

States, on the relationship between the

national government and the States, or

on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government. Therefore, in

accordance with Executive Order 12612,

it is determined that this final rule does

not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation

of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this action (1) is not a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a

‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3)

will not have a significant economic

impact, positive or negative, on a

substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A copy of the final

evaluation prepared for this action is

contained in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it may be obtained by contacting the

Rules Docket at the location provided

under the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding a new airworthiness directive

(AD) to read as follows:

98–08–20 AlliedSignal Aerospace:

Amendment 39–10469; Docket No. 97–

CE–74–AD.

Applicability: Bendix/King Model KSA 470

Autopilot Servo Actuators; part numbers

065–0076–10 through 065–0076–15; serial

numbers 0001 through 3081; that are

installed on, but not limited to, the following

aircraft, certificated in any category:

Note 1: This subject is addressed in

AlliedSignal Bendix/King Service Bulletin

No. SB KSA 470–3, dated May 1997. This

service bulletin references serial number

3082. Regardless of this reference, serial

number 3082 is not affected by this AD.

Aircraft FD/AP system KSA 470 part

No. Location

Raytheon 400 Series ....................................................................................................................... KFC 400 ........... 065–0076–11

065–0076–15

Yaw Axis.

Roll Axis.

Raytheon 200 Series ....................................................................................................................... KFC 400 ........... 065–0076–11 Yaw Axis.

Raytheon 300 Series ....................................................................................................................... KFC 400 ........... 065–0076–15 Yaw Axis.

Dassault Falcon 20 ......................................................................................................................... KFC 400 ........... 065–0076–15

065–0076–15

Pitch Axis.

Roll Axis.

Fairchild C26A/C26B ....................................................................................................................... KFC400 ............ 065–0076–11 Yaw Axis.

Fairchild SA227–AC/AT/BC/CC/DC KFC400 ............ 065–0076–15 Roll Axis.

Learjet 31A ...................................................................................................................................... KFC 3100 ......... 065–0076–12

065–0076–14

065–0076–15

Pitch Axis.

Yaw Axis.

Roll Axis.

Lockheed S–2 Tracker .................................................................................................................... KFC 325 ........... 065–0076–10 Special.

Piper 400LS and PA–42–1000 ....................................................................................................... KFC 400 ........... 065–0076–15 Yaw Axis.

Note 2: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision that has one of the affected

actuators installed, regardless of whether it

has been modified, altered, or repaired in the

area subject to the requirements of this AD.

For airplanes that have been modified,

altered, or repaired so that the performance

of the requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (d) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required within the next 100

hours time-in-service after the effective date

of this AD, unless already accomplished.

To prevent the servo actuator roll pins

from becoming loose; falling out; becoming

lodged in the output shaft clutch mechanism;

and preventing this mechanism from

disengaging, which could result in increased

effort by the pilot to control the aircraft and

possible loss of control of the affected flight

control axis, accomplish the following:

(a) Replace the autopilot servo actuator

with an actuator that incorporates Mod 3 in

accordance with the applicable maintenance

manual. This modification changes the size

of the servo actuator roll pin holes to assure

that the pins do not become loose and fall

out.

(b) As of the effective date of this AD, no

person may install, on aircraft, one of the

affected servo actuators that does not

incorporate Mod 3.

(c) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

(d) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance times that

provides an equivalent level of safety may be

approved by the Manager, Wichita Aircraft

Certification Office (ACO), 1801 Airport

Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport,

Wichita, Kansas 67209. The request shall be

forwarded through an appropriate FAA

Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Wichita ACO.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Wichita ACO.

(e) All persons affected by this directive

may obtain copies of the documents referred

to herein upon request to AlliedSignal

Aerospace, Technical Publications,

Department 65–70, P.O. Box 52170, Phoenix,

Arizona 85072–2170; or may examine these

documents at the FAA, Central Region, Office
19178 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 74 / Friday, April 17, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

of the Regional Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E.

12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106.

(f) This amendment becomes effective on

June 2, 1998.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April

8, 1998.

Marvin R. Nuss,

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 98–10053 Filed 4–16–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–CE–71–AD; Amendment 39–

10470; AD 98–08–21]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; SOCATAGroupe AEROSPATIALE Models TB10

and TB200 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) that

applies to certain SOCATA-Groupe

AEROSPATIALE (Socata) Models TB10

and TB200 airplanes. This AD requires

inspecting the wing rear attachment

fittings for cracks, replacing any cracked

fitting, and incorporating wing rear

attachment fitting reinforcement kits.

This AD is the result of mandatory

continued airworthiness information

(MCAI) issued by the airworthiness

authority for France. The actions

specified by this AD are intended to

prevent structural failure of the wing

rear attachment fittings caused by cracks

in this area, which could result in the

wing separating from the airplane if the

airplane is operated with cracked wing

rear attachment fittings over an

extended period of time.

DATES: Effective June 3, 1998.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of June 3,

1998.

ADDRESSES: Service information that

applies to this AD may be obtained from

the SOCATA-Groupe AEROSPATIALE,

Socata Product Support, Aeroport

Tarbes-Ossun-Lourdes, B P 930, 65009

Tarbes Cedex, France; telephone:

62.41.74.26; facsimile: 62.41.74.32; or

the Product Support Manager, SOCATA

Aircraft-Groupe AEROSPATIALE, North

Perry Airport, 7501 Pembroke Road,

Pembroke Pines, Florida 33023;

telephone: (954) 893–1160; facsimile:

(954) 964–4141. This information may

also be examined at the Federal

Aviation Administration (FAA), Central

Region, Office of the Regional Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–CE–71–

AD, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street,

Kansas City, Missouri 64106; or at the

Office of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Karl Schletzbaum, Aerospace Engineer,

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 1201

Walnut Street, suite 900, Kansas City,

Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 426–

6934; facsimile: (816) 426–2169.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Events Leading to the Issuance of This

AD

A proposal to amend part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) to include an AD that would

apply to certain Socata Models TB10

and TB200 airplanes was published in

the Federal Register as a notice of

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on

December 16, 1997 (62 FR 65768). The

NPRM proposed to require inspecting

the wing rear attachment fittings for

cracks, replacing any cracked fitting,

and incorporating wing rear attachment

fitting reinforcement kits.

Accomplishment of the proposed action

as specified in the NPRM would be in

accordance with Socata Service Bulletin

No. SB 10–082–57, Amdt. 1, dated April

1996. Accomplishment of the proposed

reinforcement kits would be in

accordance with the technical

instructions included with each kit.

The NPRM was the result of

mandatory continued airworthiness

information (MCAI) issued by the

airworthiness authority for France.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the four

comments received from one

commenter.

Comment No. 1: Allow for Repetitive

Inspections Instead of Mandatory

Replacement

The commenter suggests that the

proposal incorporate Socata Service

Bulletin SB 10–082–57, Amendment 1,

as written. This service bulletin allows

for repetitive inspections of the wing

rear attachment fitting rather than

replacement.

The FAA does not concur. The FAA’s

policy is to provide corrective action,

when available, that will eliminate the

need for repetitive inspections. The

FAA has determined that long-term

operational safety will be better assured

by design changes that remove the

source of the problem, rather than by

repetitive inspections or other special

procedures. Therefore, since a design

change exists for the wing rear

attachment fittings that eliminates the

need for repetitive inspections, no

changes to the final rule are necessary

as a result of this comment.

Comment No. 2: The FAA Has

Exaggerated the Severity of the Unsafe

Condition

The commenter believes the FAA has

exaggerated the severity of the unsafe

condition with the statement ‘‘* * *

which could result in a wing separating

from the airplane with consequent loss

of control of the airplane.’’ The

commenter states that the Models TB10

and TB200 airplanes, even without the

wing rear attachment fittings, resist the

ultimate flight loads throughout the

flight envelope, and that the wing rear

attachment fittings on these airplanes

resist the ultimate landing loads up to

a weight of 1,092 kilograms.

The FAA partially concurs. The FAA

infers that the commenter does not

believe that the wing rear attachment

fittings are considered primary structure

since the commenter states that the

design of the airplane is such that this

area resists ultimate flight and landing

loads. In this area, the FAA does not

concur, and has determined that the

wing rear attachment fittings are

ultimate flight and landing load bearing

areas and considers the wing rear

attachment fittings primary structure.

The FAA does concur that the

statement of the wing separating from

the airplane with consequent loss of

control of the airplane could be

considered extreme. Wing separation

would only occur after continued

operation over a long period of time.

The FAA will change the above

statement that the commenter believes

is exaggerated to read: ‘‘* * * which

could result in the wing separating from

the airplane if the airplane is operated

with cracked wing rear attachment

fittings over an extended period of

time.’’

Comment No. 3: Incorrect Formula for

Converting Hours Time-in-Service Into

Landings

The commenter states that the AD

contains the wrong formula for

converting hours time-in-service (TIS)

into landings for the conditions of the

proposed AD. The commenter states

that hours TIS should be multiplied by

1.5 to obtain the number of landings,

instead of divided by 1.5 (multiplied by

.67).