31372 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 110 /Tuesday, June 9, 1998 / Proposed Rules

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required within the next 3

calendar months after the effective date of

this AD, unless already accomplished.

To prevent damage to the components of

the generator system, which could result in

generator system failure during critical

phases of flight, accomplish the following:

(a) Inspect the generator system for the

installation of a 70A generator in accordance

with the Inspection section of Pilatus BrittenNorman (PBN) Service Bulletin (SB) No. BN–

2/SB.229, dated October 17, 1996.

(b) If a 70A generator is installed,

accomplish the following, as applicable:

(1) For Models BN–2, BN–2A, BN–2A–2,

BN–2A–3, BN–2A–6, BN–2A–8, BN–2A–9,

BN–2A–20, BN–2A–21, BN–2A–26, BN–2A–

27, BN–2B–20, BN–2B–21, BN–2B–26, and

BN–2B–27 airplanes, prior to further flight,

either:

(i) Replace the 70A generator with a 50A

generator in accordance with the

Replacement section of PBN SB No. BN–2/

SB.229, dated October 17, 1996; or

(ii) Incorporate PBN Modification NB/M/

1148 (a 70A generator system) in accordance

with the appropriate Pilatus Britten-Norman

maintenance manual; and, incorporate PBN

Modification NB/M/1571 (installation of

improved generator diodes) in accordance

with PBN SB No. BN–2/228, Issue 2, dated

January 17, 1996.

Note 2: Incorporating PBN Modification

NB/M/1571 is the same action required by

AD 98–04–17, Amendment 39–10329.

(2) For Models BN–2A MK.III, BN–2A

MK.111–2, and BN–2A MK.111–3 airplanes,

prior to further flight, replace the 70A

generator with a 50A generator in accordance

with the Replacement section of PBN SB No.

BN–2/SB.229, dated October 17, 1996.

(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 3: 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 PBN Service Bulletin No. BN–2/

SB.229, dated October 17, 1996, or Pilatus

Britten-Norman Service Bulletin No. BN–2/

SB.228, dated January 17, 1996, should be

directed to Pilatus Britten-Norman, Ltd.,

Bembridge, Isle of Wight, United Kingdom,

PO35 5PR. 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 64106.

Note 4: The subject of this AD is addressed

in British AD 007–10–96, not dated.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on June 1,

1998.

Ronald K. Rathgeber,

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 98–15203 Filed 6–8–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 98–CE–49–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; S.N. Centrair

101 Series Sailplanes.

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

adopt a new airworthiness directive

(AD) that would apply to all S.N.

Centrair (Centrair) 101 series sailplanes.

The proposed AD would require

replacing the airbrake control circuit

with one of improved design. The

proposed AD is the result of mandatory

continuing airworthiness information

(MCAI) issued by the airworthiness

authority for France. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to prevent loss of the airbrake

control system, which could result in an

inadvertent forced landing.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before July 17, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Central Region,

Office of the Regional Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 98–CE–49–

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

Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Comments

may be inspected at this location

between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday, holidays excepted.

Service information that applies to the

proposed AD may be obtained from S.N.

Centrair, Aerodrome, 36300 Le Blanc,

France; telephone: 02.54.37.07.96;

facsimile: 02.54.37.48.64. This

information also may be examined at

the Rules Docket at the address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Mike Kiesov, Project Officer, Sailplanes/

Gliders, FAA, Small Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification

Service, 1201 Walnut, suite 900, Kansas

City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816)

426–6934; facsimile: (816) 426–2169.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications

should identify the Rules Docket

number and be submitted in triplicate to

the address specified above. All

communications received on or before

the closing date for comments, specified

above, will be considered before taking

action on the proposed rule. The

proposals contained in this notice may

be changed in light of the comments

received.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons. A report that

summarizes each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this

proposal will be filed in the Rules

Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket No. 98–CE–49–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA, Central Region, Office of the

Regional Counsel, Attention: Rules

Docket No. 98–CE–49–AD, Room 1558,

601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri

64106.

Discussion

The Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation

Civile (DGAC), which is the

airworthiness authority for France,

recently notified the FAA that an unsafe

condition may exist on Centrair 101

series sailplanes. The DGAC reports that

the airbrake control system has

malfunctioned on one of these Centrair

101 series sailplanes. Following an

investigation, the DGAC found that the

airbrake control circuit had cracked,

which consequently failed during flight.

This condition, if not corrected, could

result in an inadvertent forced landing.

Relevant Service Information

S.N. Centrair has issued Service

Bulletin (SB) No. 101–16, Revision 2,

dated September 10, 1997, which
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 110 /Tuesday, June 9, 1998 / Proposed Rules 31373

specifies procedures for inspecting the

airbrake control system for cracks, and

if cracks are found, replacing the

airbrake control system with a

reinforced airbrake control system.

Sailplanes equipped with a manual

aileron and airbrake control would

replace the existing airbrake control

system with a reinforced airbrake

control system, part number (P/N)

$YO57D. Sailplanes equipped with an

automatic aileron and airbrake control

system would replace the existing

airbrake control system with a

reinforced airbrake control system, P/N

$Y818E. This service information also

specifies repeating the inspection for

cracks at the annual inspection.

The DGAC classified this service

bulletin as mandatory and issued

French AD 95–261(A)R1, dated

November 20, 1996, in order to assure

the continued airworthiness of these

sailplanes in France.

The FAA’s Determination

This sailplane model is manufactured

in France and is type certificated for

operation in the United States under the

provisions of section 21.29 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.29) and the applicable bilateral

airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to

this bilateral airworthiness agreement,

the DGAC has kept the FAA informed

of the situation described above.

The FAA has examined the findings

of the DGAC; reviewed all available

information, including the service

information referenced above; and

determined that AD action is necessary

for products of this type design that are

certificated for operation in the United

States.

Explanation of the Provisions of the

Proposed AD

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop in other Centrair 101 series

sailplanes of the same type design

registered in the United States, the FAA

is proposing AD action. The proposed

AD would require replacing the existing

airbrake control system.

Accomplishment of the proposed

replacement would be in accordance

with the appropriate Centrair

maintenance manual and FAA Advisory

Circular (AC) 43.13–1A: Acceptable

Methods, Techniques, and Practices—

Aircraft Inspection and Repair.

Proposed Compliance Time

The compliance time of the proposed

AD is in calendar time instead of hours

time-in-service (TIS). The average

monthly usage of the affected sailplanes

ranges throughout the fleet. For

example, one owner may operate the

sailplane 25 hours TIS in one week,

while another operator may operate the

sailplane 25 hours TIS in one year. In

order to ensure that all of the owners/

operators of the affected sailplane have

replaced the airbrake control system

within a reasonable amount of time, the

FAA is proposing a compliance time of

3 calendar months.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 41 sailplanes

in the U.S. registry would be affected by

the proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 4 workhours per

sailplane to accomplish the proposed

action, and that the average labor rate is

approximately $60 an hour. Parts cost

approximately $100 per sailplane. Based

on these figures, the total cost impact of

the proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $13,940, or $340 per

sailplane.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations proposed herein

would 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

proposal would 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) if

promulgated, will not have a significant

economic impact, positive or negative,

on a substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft

regulatory evaluation prepared for this

action has been placed in the Rules

Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by

contacting the Rules Docket at the

location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

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

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding a new airworthiness directive

(AD) to read as follows:

S.N. Centrair: Docket No. 98–CE–49–AD.

Applicability: Models 101, 101A, 101P,

101AP sailplanes, all serial numbers,

certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each sailplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area

subject to the requirements of this AD. For

sailplanes 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 (c) 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 3

calendar months after the effective date of

this AD, unless already accomplished.

To prevent loss of the airbrake control

system, which could result in an inadvertent

forced landing, accomplish the following:

(a) Replace the existing airbrake control

system in accordance with the appropriate

Centrair maintenance manual and FAA

Advisory Circular (AC) 43.13–1A: Acceptable

Methods, Techniques, and Practices-Aircraft

Inspection and Repair, as follows:

(1) For sailplanes equipped with manual

aileron and airbrake control systems, install

Centrair part number (P/N) $YO57D or an

FAA-approved equivalent part number.

(2) For sailplanes equipped with an

automatic aileron and airbrake control

system, install Centrair P/N $Y818E or an

FAA-approved equivalent part number.

(b) 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 sailplane

to a location where the requirements of this

AD can be accomplished.

(c) 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.
31374 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 110 /Tuesday, June 9, 1998 / Proposed Rules

(d) 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 64106.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French AD 95–261(A)R1, dated November

20, 1996

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on June 1,

1998.

Ronald K. Rathgeber,

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 98–15201 Filed 6–8–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–CE–51–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The New

Piper Aircraft, Inc. (Formerly Piper

Aircraft Corporation) Models PA–28–

140, PA–28–150, PA–28–160, and PA–

28–180 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

revise Airworthiness Directive (AD) 96–

10–01, which currently requires a

complete landing light support

replacement on certain The New Piper

Aircraft, Inc. (Piper) Models PA–28–

140, PA–28–150, PA–28–160, and PA–

28–180 airplanes. Some of the serial

numbers for these airplanes were

incorrectly referenced in the

Applicability section of AD 96–10–01.

The proposed AD maintains the

requirements of AD 96–10–01, and

corrects the serial numbers referenced

in the applicability section. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to prevent the landing light

retainer support seal from being

ingested by the updraft carburetor,

which could result in rough engine

operation or possible engine failure and

loss of control of the airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before July 17, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Central Region,

Office of the Regional Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–CE–51–

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

Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Comments

may be inspected at this location

between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday, holidays excepted.

Service information that applies to the

proposed AD may be obtained from The

New Piper Aircraft, Inc., Attn: Customer

Service, 2926 Piper Dr., Vero Beach,

Florida, 32960. This information also

may be examined at the Rules Docket at

the address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William O. Herderich, Aerospace

Engineer, Atlanta Aircraft Certification

Office, One Crown Center, 1895 Phoenix

Blvd., Suite 450, Atlanta, Georgia 30349;

telephone (770) 703–6069; fax (770)

703–6097.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications

should identify the Rules Docket

number and be submitted in triplicate to

the address specified above. All

communications received on or before

the closing date for comments, specified

above, will be considered before taking

action on the proposed rule. The

proposals contained in this notice may

be changed in light of the comments

received.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons. A report that

summarizes each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this

proposal will be filed in the Rules

Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket No. 95–CE–51–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA, Central Region, Office of the

Regional Counsel, Attention: Rules

Docket No. 95–CE–51–AD, Room 1558,

601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri

64106.

Discussion

AD 96–10–01, Amendment 39–9606

(61 FR 19813, May 3, 1996), currently

requires a complete landing light

support replacement on Piper Models

PA–28–140, PA–28–150, PA–20–160

and PA–28–180 airplanes.

Accomplishment of this action is

required in accordance with Piper

Service Bulletin No. 975, dated

November 2, 1994.

Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rule

The FAA has since realized that it

incorrectly included Models PA–28–

150, 160, and 180 airplanes, serial

numbers 28–1761 through 28–7505259

and 28–E13, in AD 96–10–01. Since

these airplanes have the air intake on

the side of the cowling, they are not

affected by the condition of the landing

light seals.

The FAA’s Determination

After examining the circumstances

and reviewing all available information

related to the incidents described above,

the FAA has determined that AD action

should be taken to prevent the landing

light retainer support seal from being

ingested by the updraft carburetor,

which could result in rough engine

operation or possible engine failure and

loss of control of the airplane.

Explanation of the Provisions of the

Proposed AD

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop in other Piper Models PA–28–

140, PA–28–150, PA–28–160, and PA–

28–180 airplanes of the same type

design, the proposed AD would revise

AD 96–10–01 to require the same

actions, but would change the

applicability of the AD from Models

PA–28–140 airplanes, serial numbers

(S/N) 28–20000 through 28–7725290,

Models PA–28–150, 160, and 180

airplanes, S/N 28–1 through 28–

7505259, and S/N 28–E13 to Models

PA–28–140 airplanes, S/N 28–20000

through 28–7725290, PA–28–150, PA–

28–160, and PA–28–180, serial numbers

28–1 through 28–1760.

The actions of the proposed AD

would still be required in accordance

with Piper SB No. 975, dated November

2, 1994.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 10,100

airplanes in the U.S. registry would be

affected by the proposed AD, that it

would take approximately 2 workhours

per airplane to accomplish the proposed

action, and that the average labor rate is

approximately $60 an hour. Parts cost

approximately $140 per airplane. Based

on these figures, the total cost impact of

the proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $2,626,000. This figure

is based on the assumption that all of

the affected airplanes have old landing