This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

30093

Vol. 66, No. 108

Tuesday, June 5, 2001

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2001–CE–20–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Raytheon

Aircraft Company Beech Models 1900,

1900C, and 1900D Airplanes

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 certain

Raytheon Aircraft Company (Raytheon)

Beech Models 1900, 1900C, and 1900D

airplanes. The proposed AD would

require you to inspect all four flap

flexible shaft assemblies for the correct

diagonal wrap and the correct

installation. The proposed AD would

also require you to replace any flap

flexible shaft assembly that has an

incorrect diagonal wrap or incorrect

installation. The proposed AD is the

result of several occurrences of flap

extension/retraction failures on the

affected airplanes due to the inner

flexible shaft ends separating or

disengaging. The actions specified by

the proposed Ad are intended to prevent

these flap extension/retraction failures

due to incorrectly configured flap

flexible shaft assemblies. Such failure

could result in an asymmetric flap

condition during flight if the flap safety

switch fails to function properly.

DATES: The Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA) must receive any

comments on this rule on or before

August 3, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to FAA, Central Region, Office

of the Regional Counsel, Attention:

Rules Docket No. 2001–CE–20–AD, 901

Locust, Room 506, 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

Raytheon Aircraft Company, P.O. Box

85, Wichita, Kansas 67201–0085;

telephone: (800) 429–5372 or (316) 676–

3140. This information also may be

examined at the Rules Docket at the

address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul

DeVore, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,

Wichita Aircraft Certification Office,

1801 Airport Road, Mid-Continent

Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209;

telephone: (316) 946–4142; facsimile:

(316) 946–4407.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

How do I comment on the proposed

AD? The FAA invites comments on this

proposed rule. You may submit

whatever written data, views, or

arguments you choose. You need to

include the rule’s docket number and

submit your comments in triplicate to

the address specified under the caption

ADDRESSES. The FAA will consider all

comments received on or before the

closing date. We may amend the

proposed rule in light of comments

received. Factual information that

supports your ideas and suggestions is

extremely helpful in evaluating the

effectiveness of the proposed AD action

and determining whether we need to

take additional rulemaking action.

Are there any specific portions of the

proposed AD I should pay attention to?

The FAA specifically invites comments

on the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule that might suggest a

need to modify the rule. You may

examine all comments we receive before

and after the closing date of the rule in

the Rules Docket. We will file a report

in the Rules Docket that summarizes

each FAA contact with the public that

concerns the substantive parts of the

proposed AD.

We are re-examining the writing style

we currently use in regulatory

documents, in response to the

Presidential memorandum of June 1,

1998. That memorandum requires

federal agencies to communicate more

clearly with the public. We are

interested in your comments on whether

the style of this document is clear, and

any other suggestions you might have to

improve the clarity of FAA

communications that affect you. You

can get more information about the

Presidential memorandum and the plain

language initiative at http://

www.plainlanguage.gov.

How can I be sure FAA received my

comment? If you want us to

acknowledge the receipt of your

comments, you must include a selfaddressed, stamped postcard. On the

postcard, write ‘‘Comments to Docket

No. 2001–CE–20–AD.’’ We will date

stamp and mail the postcard back to

you.

Discussion

What events have caused this AD?

The FAA has received reports of flap

extension/retraction system failures on

Raytheon Model 1900D airplanes. The

failures occurred when the inner

flexible shaft ends separated or

disengaged. One of these failures

resulted in an asymmetric flap

condition when the flap safety switch

failed to function properly.

The flap flexible shafts are designed

to carry more torque in one direction

than the other. If installed on the wrong

side of the airplane, the excessive torque

load leads to these failures. Raytheon

informed FAA that the flap flexible

shafts may have been installed on the

wrong side of the airplane on certain

Beech Models 1900, 1900C, and 1900D

airplanes.

What are the consequences if the

condition is not corrected? Flap

extension/retraction failures caused by

incorrectly configured flap flexible shaft

assemblies could result in loss of flap

function or an asymmetric flap

condition during flight if the flap safety

switch fails to function properly.

Relevant Service Information

Is there service information that

applies to this subject? Raytheon has

issued Mandatory Service Bulletin SB

27–3397, Issued: January, 2001.

What are the provisions of this service

bulletin? The service bulletin inclues

procedures for:

—Inspecting the inner flexible (drive)

shaft of all four flap flexible shaft

assemblies for the correct diagonal

wrap and the correct installation; and

—Replacing any flap flexible shaft

assembly that has an incorrect

diagonal wrap or incorrect

installation.

30094 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 5, 2001 / Proposed Rules

The FAA’s Determination and an

Explanation of the Provisions of the

Proposed AD

What has FAA decided? After

examining the circumstances and

reviewing all available information

related to the incidents described above,

including the referenced service

bulletin, we have determined that:

—The unsafe condition referenced in

this document exists or could develop

on other Raytheon Beech Models

1900, 1900C, and 1900D airplanes of

the same type design;

—The actions specified in the

previously-referenced service

information should be accomplished

on the affected airplanes; and

—AD action should be taken in order to

correct this unsafe condition.

What would the proposed AD require?

This proposed AD would require you to

incorporate the actions in the

previously-referenced service bulletin.

Cost Impact

How many airplanes would the

proposed AD impact? We estimate that

the proposed AD would affect 205

airplanes in the U.S. registry.

What would be the cost impact of the

proposed AD on owners/operators of the

affected airplanes? We estimate the

following costs to accomplish the

proposed inspection:

Labor cost Parts cost Total cost per airplane Total cost on

U.S. operators

2 workhours × $60 per hour = $120 ............... No parts required for the inspection .............. $120 per airplane ................... $24,600.

We estimate the following costs to accomplish 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 such

replacements.

Labor cost Parts cost Cost per flap shaft

8 workhours per flap shaft × $60 per hour =

$480.

$232 per flap shaft ........................................... $712 per flap shaft (total of four per airplane).

The manufacturer will provide

warranty credit for labor and parts to the

extent noted under the Warranty Credit

section of Raytheon Mandatory Service

Bulletin SB 27–3397, Issued: January,

2001.

Regulatory Impact

Would this proposed AD impact

various entities? The regulations

proposed herein 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. Therefore, it is

determined that this proposed rule

would not have federalism implications

under Executive Order 13132.

Would this proposed AD involve a

significant rule or regulatory action? 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, under the authority

delegated to me by the Administrator,

the Federal Aviation Administration

proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations 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. FAA amends § 39.13 by adding a

new airworthiness directive (AD) to

read as follows:

Raytheon Aircraft Company: Docket No.

2001–CE–20–AD.

(a) What airplanes are affected by this AD?

This AD affects the following model and

serial number airplanes that are certified in

any category:

Model Serial No.

Beech Model 1900 .............................................. UA–2 and UA–3.

Beech Model 1900C ........................................... UB–1 through UB–74 and UC–1 through UC–174.

Beech Model 1900C (C–12J) ............................. UD–1 through UD–6.

Beech Model 1900D ........................................... UE–1 through UE–345; UE–347 through UE–361; UE–364; UN–367; UE–373; and UE–379.

(b) Who must comply with this AD?

Anyone who wishes to operate any of the

above airplane must comply with this AD.

(c) What problem does this AD address?

The actions specified by this AD are intended

to prevent flap extension/retraction failures

due to incorrectly configured flap flexible

shaft assemblies. Such failure could result in

any asymmetric flap condition during flight

if the flap safety switch fails to function

properly.

(d) What actions must I accomplish to

address this problem? To address this

problem, you must accomplish the following:

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 5, 2001 / Proposed Rules 30095

Actions Compliance Procedures

(1) Inspect the inner flexible (drive) shaft of all

four flap flexible shaft assemblies for the correct diagonal wrap and the correct installation.

Within the next 200 hours time-in-service

(TIS) after the effective date of this AD, unless already accomplish.

In accordance with the ACCOMPLISHMENT

INSTRUCTIONS section of Raytheon Aircraft Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 27–

3397, Issued: January 2, 2001.

(2) Replace any flap flexible shaft assembly

found to have an incorrect diagonal wrap or

incorrect installation during the inspection required by paragraph (d)(1) of this AD.

Prior to further flight after the inspection required in paragraph (d)(1) of this AD.In accordance with the ACCOMPLISHMENT

INSTRUCTIONS section of Raytheon Aircraft Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 27–

3397, Issued: January, 2001, and the applicable maintenance manual.

(e) Can I comply with this AD in any other

way? You may use an alternative method of

compliance or adjust the compliance time if:

(1) Your alternative method of compliance

provides an equivalent level of safety; and

(2) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft

Certification Office (ACO), approves your

alternative. Submit your request through an

FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who

may add comments and then send it to the

Manager, Wichita ACO.

Note: This AD applies to each airplane is

identified in paragraph (a) of this AD,

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 (e)

of this AD. The request should include an

assessment of the effect of the modification,

alternation, or repair on the unsafe condition

addressed by this AD; and, if you have not

eliminated the unsafe condition, specific

actions you propose to address it.

(f) Where can I get information about any

already-approved alternative methods of

compliance? Contact Paul DeVore, Aerospace

Engineer, FAA, Wichita Aircraft Certification

Office, 1801 Airport Road Mid-Continent

Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone:

(316) 946–4142; facsimile: (316) 946–4407.

(g) What if I need to fly the airplane to

another location to comply with this AD? The

FAA can issue a special flight permit under

sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and

21.199) to operate your airplane to a location

where you can accomplish the requirements

of this AD.

(h) How do I get copies of the documents

referenced in this AD? You may obtain copies

of the documents referenced in this AD from

Raytheon Aircraft Company, P.O. Box 85,

Wichita, Kansas 67201–0085; telephone (800)

429–5372 or (316) 676–3140. You may

examine these documents at FAA, Central

Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 901

Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri

64106.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on May

25, 2001.

James E. Jackson,

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–14006 Filed 6–4–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–163–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell

Douglas Model DC–9–81, –82, –83, and

–87 Series Airplanes, and Model MD–

88 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

supersedure of an existing airworthiness

directive (AD), applicable to certain

McDonnell Douglas Model DC–9–81,

–82, –83, and –87 series airplanes, and

Model MD–88 airplanes, that currently

requires an inspection to detect damage,

burn marks, or discoloration at certain

electrical plugs and receptacles of the

sidewall lighting in the passenger cabin,

and correction of discrepancies. That

AD also requires modification of the

electrical connectors, which terminates

the inspection requirement. That action

was prompted by reports of failures of

the electrical connectors in the sidewall

fluorescent lighting, which resulted in

smoke or lighting interruption in the

passenger cabin. This action would

expand the applicability of the existing

AD to include additional airplanes. The

actions specified by the proposed AD

are intended to prevent failures of the

electrical connectors, which could

result in poor socket/pin contact,

excessive heat, electrical arcing, and

subsequently, connector burn through

and smoke and/or fire in the passenger

cabin.

DATES: Comments must be received by

July 20, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

163–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, except Federal

holidays. Comments may be submitted

via fax to (425) 227–1232. Comments

may also be sent via the Internet using

the following address: 9-anmnprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments sent

via fax or the Internet must contain

‘‘Docket No. 2000–NM–163–AD’’ in the

subject line and need not be submitted

in triplicate. Comments sent via the

Internet as attached electronic files must

be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for

Windows or ASCII text.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Boeing Commercial Aircraft Group,

Long Beach Division, 3855 Lakewood

Boulevard, Long Beach, California

90846, Attention: Data and Service

Management, Dept. C1–L5A (D800–

0024). This information may be

examined at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at

the the FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Elvin Wheeler, Aerospace Engineer,

Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–

130L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft

Certification Office, 3960 Paramount

Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712;

telephone (562) 627–5344; fax (562)

627–5210.

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 shall

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 action may be changed in light

of the comments received.