## 34956 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 118 / Monday, June 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

(g) For Group 2 Airplanes: Unless already done, do the following actions:

(1) Within the next 10 hours TIS after May 10, 2010 (the effective date retained from AD 2010–10–01):

(i) For all aircraft not incorporating computer numeric control (CNC) machined elevator hinges, inspect and repair the left and right horizontal stabilizer rear pivot attachment installation following instruction

‘‘ 3. Rear Pivot Attachment Inspection, ’’ of Gippsland Aeronautics Mandatory Service Bulletin SB–GA8–2002–02, Issue 5, dated November 13, 2008; or Gippsland Aeronautics Mandatory Service Bulletin SB– GA8–2002–02, Issue 6, dated April 21, 2010; and,

(ii) For all aircraft, inspect the left and right rear attach bolt mating surfaces for damage or an out of square condition and replace the left and right rear attach bolts following instruction ‘‘ 5. Rear Attach Bolt Replacement, ’’ of Gippsland Aeronautics Mandatory Service Bulletin SB–GA8–2002– 02, Issue 5, dated November 13, 2008; or Gippsland Aeronautics Mandatory Service Bulletin SB–GA8–2002–02, Issue 6, dated April 21, 2010. Reworking the mating surfaces by spotfacing is no longer acceptable. If the mating surfaces are damaged, not square, or were previously reworked by spotfacing the surface, before further flight, replace the parts as specified in Gippsland Aeronautics Mandatory Service Bulletin SB–GA8–2002–02, Issue 5, dated November 13, 2008; or Gippsland Aeronautics Mandatory Service Bulletin SB– GA8–2002–02, Issue 6, dated April 21, 2010.

(2) Within the next 10 hours TIS after May 10, 2010 (the effective date retained from AD 2010–10–01) and repetitively thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 hours TIS or 12 months, whichever occurs first, for all aircraft:

(i) Inspect the horizontal stabilizer externally following instruction ‘‘ 2. External Inspection (Lower flange, Stabilizer rear spar), ’’ of Gippsland Aeronautics Mandatory Service Bulletin SB–GA8–2002–02, Issue 5, dated November 13, 2008; or Gippsland Aeronautics Mandatory Service Bulletin SB– GA8–2002–02, Issue 6, dated April 21, 2010; and

(ii) Inspect the horizontal stabilizer internally following instruction ‘‘4. Internal Inspection, ’’ of Gippsland Aeronautics Mandatory Service Bulletin SB–GA8–2002– 02, Issue 5, dated November 13, 2008; or Gippsland Aeronautics Mandatory Service Bulletin SB–GA8–2002–02, Issue 6, dated April 21, 2010.

(3) If during the inspection required by paragraph (g)(2) of this AD any excessive local deflection or movement of the lower skin surrounding the lower pivot attachment, cracking, or working (loose) rivet is found, before further flight, obtain an FAA-approved repair scheme from the manufacturer and incorporate this repair scheme. Due to FAA policy, the repair scheme/modification for crack damage must include an immediate repair of the crack. The repair scheme cannot be by repetitive inspection only. The repair scheme/modification may incorporate repetitive inspections in addition to the repetitive inspections required in paragraph (g)(2) of this AD. Continued operational flight with un-repaired crack damage is not permitted.

FAA AD Differences

Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/ or service information as follows:

(1) ‘‘Requirement: 1. Daily Inspection (Stabilizer attach bolt) ’’ of the service information requires a daily inspection of the stabilizer attach bolt. The daily inspection is not a requirement of this AD. Instead of the daily inspection, we require you to perform, within 10 hours TIS, ‘‘Requirement 3. Rear Pivot Attachment Inspection’’ and

‘‘Requirement 5. Rear Attachment Bolt Replacement’’ of the service information. Compliance with requirement 3. and 5. is a terminating action for the daily inspection, and we are requiring these within 10 hours TIS after the effective date of AD 2009–05– 01 for Group 1 airplanes and AD 2010–10– 01 for Group 2 airplanes.

(2) ‘‘Requirement: 2. External Inspection (Lower flange, Stabilizer rear spar) ’’ of the service information does not specify any action if excessive local deflection or movement of lower skin, cracking, or working (loose) rivet is found. We requireobtaining and incorporating an FAAapproved repair scheme from the manufacturer before further flight.

(3) The MCAI does not state if further flight with known cracks is allowed. FAA policy is to not allow further flight with known cracks in critical structure. We require that if any cracks are found when accomplishing the inspection required in paragraphs (f)(2) and (g)(2) of this AD, you must repair the cracks before further flight.

(4) The service information does not state that parts with spotfaced nut and bolt mating surfaces require replacement. However, the service information no longer allows reworking of the mating surfaces by spotfacing. We require that if any nut and bolt surfaces were previously reworked by spotfacing, you must replace the parts.

Other FAA AD Provisions

(h) 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: Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–4059; fax: (816) 329– 4090. 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, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056.

Related Information

(i) Refer to MCAI Civil Aviation Safety Authority AD No. AD/GA8/5, Amdt 4, dated May 11, 2010; Gippsland Aeronautics Mandatory Service Bulletin SB–GA8–2002– 02, Issue 5, dated November 13, 2008; and Gippsland Aeronautics Mandatory Service Bulletin SB–GA8–2002–02, Issue 6, dated April 21, 2010, for related information.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on June 14, 2010. Sandra J. Campbell, Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 2010–14986 Filed 6–18–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**



### DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2010–0632; Directorate Identifier 2010–CE–025–AD]** 

**RIN 2120–AA64**



### Airworthiness Directives; Robert E. **Rust, Jr. Model DeHavilland DH.C1 Chipmunk 21, DH.C1 Chipmunk 22,**  **and DH.C1 Chipmunk 22A Airplanes**

**AGENCY** 

### : Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

**ACTION** 

### : Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

**SUMMARY** 

### : We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Robert E. Rust, Jr. Model DeHavilland DH.C1 Chipmunk 21, DH.C1 Chipmunk 22, and DH.C1 Chipmunk 22A airplanes. This proposed AD would require a one-time inspection of the flap operating system for an unauthorized latch plate design installation. This proposed AD results from a report of a latch plate failing in service that was not made in accordance with the applicable de Havilland drawing. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct unauthorized latch plate design installation, which could result in an un-commanded retraction of the flaps. This failure could lead to a stall during a landing approach.

**DATES** 

### : We must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 5, 2010.


## 34957 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 118 / Monday, June 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

**ADDRESSES** 

### : Use one of the following addresses to comment on this proposed AD:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

• Fax: (202) 493–2251.

• Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact de Havilland Support Limited, Duxford Airfield, Cambridgeshire, CB22 4QR, England, phone: +44 (0) 1223 830090; fax: +44 (0) 1223 830085; e-mail: info@dhsupport.com; Internet: http:// www.dhsupport.com/.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT** 

### : Carey O’Kelley, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337; telephone: (404) 474–5543; fax: (404) 474–5606.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION** 

### : Comments Invited We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the

**ADDRESSES** 

### section. Include the docket number, ‘‘FAA–2010–0632; Directorate Identifier 2010–CE–025–AD ’’ at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD in light of those comments.

We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive concerning this proposed AD.

Discussion

We have received a report of a latch plate supplied under part number (P/N) C1–CF–1489 failing in service on a Model DeHavilland DH.C1 Chipmunk 21, DH.C1 Chipmunk 22, or DH.C1 Chipmunk 22A airplane. The part in question was not manufactured to the de Havilland drawing for P/N C1–CF– 1489. The unapproved latch plate was made of a shaft that was pressed into a plate, rather than being machined from bar material as one piece. The shaft and plate on the unapproved part can become separated or bent, resulting in rapid wear and failure of the part.

This condition, if not corrected, could result in an un-commanded retraction of the flaps. This failure could lead to a stall during a landing approach.

Relevant Service Information

We have reviewed de Havilland Support Limited Technical News Sheet (TNS) CT(C1) No 208 Issue 1, dated January 3, 2009. The service information describes procedures for inspecting the flap operating system latch plate for an unapproved part installation. FAA’s Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design. This proposed AD would require a one-time inspection of the flap operating system for an unauthorized latch plate design installation. Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 64 airplanes in the U.S. registry.

We estimate the following costs to do the proposed inspection:

Labor cost Parts cost Total cost per airplane Total cost on U.S. operators

3 work-hours × $85 per hour = $255 ............................................. Not Applicable ................................................. .... $255 $16,320



### We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacements that would be required based on the results of the proposed inspection. We have no way of determining the number of airplanes that may need this replacement:

Labor cost Parts cost Total cost per airplane

.5 work-hour × $85 per hour = $42.50 .......................................................................................................... ...... $175 $217.50



### Authority for This Rulemaking

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA’s authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency’s authority.

We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701,

‘‘General requirements. ’’ Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings

We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed regulation:

1. Is not a ‘‘ significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866;

2. Is not a ‘‘ significant rule’’ under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 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.


## 34958 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 118 / Monday, June 21, 2010 / Proposed Rules

We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket that contains the proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information 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 Docket Office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is located at the street address stated 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. The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

**PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES** 

1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

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

**§ 39.13 [Amended]**



### 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new AD: Robert E. Rust, Jr.: Docket No. FAA–2010– 0632; Directorate Identifier 2010–CE– 025–AD.

Comments Due Date

(a) We must receive comments on this airworthiness directive (AD) action by August 5, 2010.

Affected ADs

(b) None.
Applicability

(c) This AD applies to Model DeHavilland DH.C1 Chipmunk 21, DH.C1 Chipmunk 22, and DH.C1 Chipmunk 22A airplanes, all serial numbers, that are certificated in any category. Note: These airplanes are also identified as CHIPMUNK 22A, CHIPMUNK DHC–1T10, CHIPMUNK T.10 MK–22, DH.C1 MK22A, DHC–1, DHC–1 CHIPMUNK, DHC–1 CHIPMUNK 22, DHC–1 SERIES 22, or DHC–
1 T.MK. 10.

Subject

(d) Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 27: Flight Controls.

Unsafe Condition

(e) This AD results from a report of a latch plate supplied under part number C1–CF– 1489 failing in service. The part in question was not manufactured to the applicable de Havilland drawing. The unapproved latch plate was made of a shaft that was pressed into a plate, rather than being machined from bar material as one piece. The shaft and plate on the unapproved part can become separated or bent, resulting in rapid wear and failure of the part. This condition, if not corrected, could result in an un-commanded retraction of the flaps. This failure could lead to a stall during a landing approach.
Compliance

(f) To address this problem, you must do the following, unless already done:

Actions Compliance Procedures

(1) Inspect the flap operating system to identify

the part number (P/N) of the latch plate installed. If latch plate P/N C1–CF–1489 is installed, inspect the latch plate to determine if it is in compliance with the design standard. An unapproved latch plate P/N C1–CF–1489 is made from two pieces pressed together while one that complies with the design standard is machined in one piece from bar material. Within 50 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the effective date of this AD or within 90 daysafter the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first. Follow de Havilland Support Limited Technical News Sheet (TNS) CT(C1) No 208 Issue 1, dated January 3, 2009.

(2) If during the inspection required in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD an unapproved latch plate P/N C1–CF–1489 is found, replace the latch plate with a latch plate that complies with the design standard. The following U.S. standard hardware may be substituted for the hardware specified in the service information: Before further flight after the inspection where the unapproved latch plate P/N C1–CF– 1849 was found. Follow de Havilland Support Limited TNS CT(C1) No 208 Issue 1, dated January 3, 2009.

(i) 1/16′′ diameter cotter pin that is P/N

MS24665–153 (or equivalent) in place of split pin P/N SP90/C and; (ii) Washer that is P/N MS15795–806B (or

equivalent) in place of washer P/N SP13/B.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

(g) The Manager, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to Attn: Carey O’Kelley, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia
30337; telephone: (404) 474–5543; fax: (404) 474–5606. 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.

Related Information

(h) To get copies of the service information referenced in this AD, contact de Havilland Support Limited, Duxford Airfield, Cambridgeshire, CB22 4QR, England, phone: +44 (0) 1223 830090; fax: +44 (0) 1223 830085; e-mail: info@dhsupport.com; Internet: http://www.dhsupport.com/. To view the AD docket, go to U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12– 140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, or on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on June
14, 2010. Sandra J. Campbell, Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–14989 Filed 6–18–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**