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

70555 

Vol. 70, No. 224 

Tuesday, November 22, 2005 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

(DOT) 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2005–21175; Directorate 

Identifier 2005–CE–24–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Raytheon 

Aircraft Company Models 58P and 

58TC Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a 

new airworthiness directive (AD) for 

certain Raytheon Aircraft Company 

(Raytheon) Models 58P and 58TC 

airplanes used as a lead airplane by the 

United States Forest Service. This 

proposed AD would require you to 

insert a new supplement into the 

Limitations Section of the Pilot’s 

Operating Handbook and Airplane 

Flight Manual (POH/AFM) that 

establishes new limits for the structural 

life of the airframe (wing, fuselage, 

empennage, or associated structure); 

and dispose of the life-limited airframe 

following 14 CFR 43.10 when the limit 

of the structural life of the airframe is 

reached. This proposed AD results from 

Raytheon issuing a POH/AFM 

supplement that establishes the 

structural life limit of 4,500 hours timein-service (TIS) for the airframe (wing, 

fuselage, empennage, and associated 

structure) for any Models 58P and 58TC 

airplanes used as a lead airplane by the 

United States Forest Service; and FAA’s 

determination that the structural life 

limit is necessary. We are issuing this 

proposed AD to prevent cumulative 

fatigue damage and fatigue cracking 

damage that would sufficiently reduce 

residual strength of the airframe and 

result in failure. Failure of the airframe 

(wing, fuselage, empennage, or 

associated structure) could lead to loss 

of control of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive any comments 

on this proposed AD by January 23, 

2006. 

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following to 

submit comments on this proposed AD: 

• DOT Docket Web site: Go to 

http://dms.dot.gov and follow the 

instructions for sending your comments 

electronically. 

• Government-wide rulemaking Web 

site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov 

and follow the instructions for sending 

your comments electronically. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility; 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, 

Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590– 

0001. 

• Fax: 1–202–493–2251. 

• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on 

the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

To get the service information 

identified in this proposed AD, contact 

Raytheon Aircraft Company, P.O. Box 

85, Wichita, Kansas 67201–0085; 

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

3140. 

To view the comments to this 

proposed AD, go to http://dms.dot.gov. 

The docket number is FAA–2005– 

21175; Directorate Identifier 2005–CE– 

24–AD. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steven E. Potter, Aerospace Engineer, 

Wichita Aircraft Certification Office 

(ACO), FAA, 1801 Airport Road, 

Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone: (316) 

946–4124; facsimile: (316) 946–4107. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

How do I comment on this proposed 

AD? We invite you to submit any 

written relevant data, views, or 

arguments regarding this proposal. Send 

your comments to an address listed 

under ADDRESSES. Include the docket 

number, ‘‘FAA–2005–21175; Directorate 

Identifier 2005–CE–24–AD’’ at the 

beginning of your comments. We will 

post all comments we receive, without 

change, to http://dms.dot.gov, including 

any personal information you provide. 

We will also post a report summarizing 

each substantive verbal contact with 

FAA personnel concerning this 

proposed rulemaking. Using the search 

function of our docket Web site, anyone 

can find and read the comments 

received into any of our dockets, 

including the name of the individual 

who sent the comment (or signed the 

comment on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). This is 

docket number FAA–2005–21175; 

Directorate Identifier 2005–CE–24–AD. 

You may review the DOT’s complete 

Privacy Act Statement in the Federal 

Register published on April 11, 2000 

(65 FR 19477–78) or you may visit 

http://dms.dot.gov. 

Are there any specific portions of this 

proposed AD I should pay attention to? 

We specifically invite comments on the 

overall regulatory, economic, 

environmental, and energy aspects of 

this proposed AD. If you contact us 

through a nonwritten communication 

and that contact relates to a substantive 

part of this proposed AD, we will 

summarize the contact and place the 

summary in the docket. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD in light of those comments 

and contacts. 

Docket Information 

Where can I go to view the docket 

information? You may view the AD 

docket that contains the proposal, any 

comments received, and any final 

disposition in person at the DMS Docket 

Offices between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. 

(eastern time), Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The Docket 

Office (telephone 1–800–647–5227) is 

located on the plaza level of the 

Department of Transportation NASSIF 

Building at the street address stated in 

ADDRESSES. You may also view the AD 

docket on the Internet at http:// 

dms.dot.gov. The comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

the DMS receives them. 

Discussion 

What events have caused this 

proposed AD? The type certificate of the 

Models 58P and 58TC airplanes 

establishes (in the Limitations Section 

of the FAA Approved Airplane Flight 

Manual) a structural life limit of 10,000 

hours time-in-service (TIS). This life 

limit was established by using the 

standard and expected usage for normal 

twin-engine usage envelopes and 

industry standard approaches for fatigue 

testing and analysis, structural fatigue 

analysis reports, ground structural 

70556 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 224 / Tuesday, November 22, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

fatigue test reports, and flight test 

fatigue spectrum monitoring reports. 

The United States Forest Service 

(USFS) bought the 21 airplanes 

identified in this NPRM for use as lead 

airplanes for the forest firefighting 

mission. Operation in the lead airplane 

firefighting mission is a more severe 

usage than the normal usage of twinengine aircraft. 

In October 2004, the USFS informed 

FAA that it was to dispose of these 

airplanes through the General Services 

Administration (GSA). 

In January 2005, Raytheon issued a 

supplement for the Limitations Section 

of the Pilot’s Operating Handbook and 

Airplane Flight Manual (POH/AFM) 

that reduces the original type 

certification structural fatigue life limit 

to 4,500 hours TIS. The latest revisions 

of the analytical reports by Raytheon 

and USFS are dated July 1984. 

The FAA has determined that if flight 

operations continue beyond 4,500 hours 

TIS, then the cumulative fatigue damage 

on these airplanes will reach a point at 

which fatigue cracking might occur. 

This damage will reduce residual 

strength and deplete all useful service 

life. 

Operation of these airplanes in a 

severe fatigue-loading spectrum 

accelerates the cumulative fatigue 

damage. This higher fatigue damage 

accumulation rate experienced by the 

USFS (operation in the lead airplane 

firefighting mission) is higher than 

normal usage and results in a shorter 

life limit. The severity of the usage by 

the USFS reduced the structural life 

limit. 

The Service Difficulty Reports (SDR) 

database indicates some wing skin 

cracking, pressure bulkhead cracking, 

and cracking in both the vertical and 

horizontal stabilizers. A significant 

number of these cracking occurrences 

were on the subject airplanes. We 

believe that the SDR database does not 

reflect all such occurrences on the 

subject airplanes. 

What is the potential impact if FAA 

took no action? Cumulative fatigue 

damage causing fatigue cracking damage 

would sufficiently reduce the residual 

strength of the airframe. Failure of the 

airframe (wing, fuselage, empennage, or 

associated structure) could lead to 

failure with a consequent loss of control 

of the airplane. 

Is there service information that 

applies to this subject? Raytheon has 

issued Beechcraft Model 58P/58PA and 

Model 58TC/58TCA Pilot’s Operating 

Handbook and FAA Approved Airplane 

Flight Manual (POH/AFM) Supplement, 

part number (P/N) 102–590000–67, 

issued January 2005. 

This supplement affects Models 58P 

and 58TC airplanes used as a lead 

airplane by the USFS with these serial 

numbers: TJ–177, TJ–178, TJ–180, TJ–

211, TJ–213, TJ–247, TJ–284, TJ–285, 

TJ–289, TJ–290, TJ–314, TJ–322, TJ–367, 

TJ–368, TJ–370, TJ–371, TJ–425, TJ–426, 

TJ–433, TJ–442, and TK–33. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This Proposed AD 

What has FAA decided? We have 

evaluated all pertinent information and 

identified an unsafe condition that is 

likely to exist or develop on other 

products of this same type design. For 

this reason, we are proposing AD action. 

What would this proposed AD 

require? This proposed AD would 

require you to: 

—Insert the Raytheon Aircraft Company 

Beechcraft Model 58P/58PA and 

Model 58TC/58TCA POH/AFM 

Supplement, part number (P/N) 102–

590000–67, issued January 2005, into 

the Limitations Section of the POH/ 

AFM (P/N 102–590000–41 or 106–

590000–5). This limits the structural 

life of the airframe (wing, fuselage, 

empennage, and associated structure) 

to 4,500 hours time-in-service (TIS); 

and 

—Dispose of the life-limited airframe 

(wing, fuselage, empennage, and 

associated structure) following 14 

CFR 43.10 when the limit (4,500 

hours TIS) of the structural life of the 

airframe is reached. 

How does the revision to 14 CFR part 

39 affect this proposed AD? On July 10, 

2002, we published a new version of 14 

CFR part 39 (67 FR 47997, July 22, 

2002), which governs FAA’s AD system. 

This regulation now includes material 

that relates to altered products, special 

flight permits, and alternative methods 

of compliance. This material previously 

was included in each individual AD. 

Since this material is included in 14 

CFR part 39, we will not include it in 

future AD actions. 

Costs of Compliance 

How many airplanes would this 

proposed AD impact? We estimate that 

this proposed AD affects 21 airplanes in 

the U.S. registry. 

What would be the cost impact of this 

proposed AD on owners/operators of the 

affected airplanes? We estimate the 

following costs to incorporate the 

Raytheon Aircraft Company Beechcraft 

Model 58P/58PA and Model 58TC/ 

58TCA POH/AFM Supplement into the 

POH/AFM: 

Labor cost Parts cost Total cost per 

airplane 

Total cost on 

U.S. operators 

1 work hour × $65 per hour = $65 ............................................................ Not applicable .................................. $65 $1,365 

We estimate the cost to dispose of the 

life-limited airframe (wing, fuselage, 

empennage, and associated structure) 

following 14 CFR 43.10 (when the limit 

of the structural life of the airframe is 

reached) to be the cost of each airplane. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

What authority does FAA have for 

issuing this rulemaking action? 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 AD. 

Regulatory Findings 

Would this proposed AD impact 

various entities? 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. 

Would this proposed AD involve a 

significant rule or regulatory action? For 

the reasons discussed above, I certify 

that this proposed AD: 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 224 / Tuesday, November 22, 2005 / Proposed Rules 70557 

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. 

We prepared a summary of the costs 

to comply with this proposed AD (and 

other information as included in the 

Regulatory Evaluation) and placed it in 

the AD Docket. You may get a copy of 

this summary by sending a request to us 

at the address listed under ADDRESSES. 

Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2005–21175; 

Directorate Identifier 2005–CE–24–AD’’

in your request. 

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 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 airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

Raytheon Aircraft Company: Docket No. 

FAA–2005–21175; Directorate Identifier 

2005–CE–24–AD. 

When Is the Last Date I Can Submit 

Comments on This Proposed AD? 

(a) We must receive comments on this 

proposed airworthiness directive (AD) by 

January 23, 2006. 

What Other ADs Are Affected by This 

Action? 

(b) None. 

What Airplanes Are Affected by This AD? 

(c) This AD affects Models 58P and 58TC 

airplanes, with the following serial numbers: 

TJ–177, TJ–178, TJ–180, TJ–211, TJ–213, TJ–

247, TJ–284, TJ–285, TJ–289, TJ–290, TJ–314, 

TJ–322, TJ–367, TJ–368, TJ–370, TJ–371, TJ–

425, TJ–426, TJ–433, TJ–442, and TK–33, that 

are certificated in any category. These 

airplanes were utilized as lead airplanes by 

the United States Forest Service for 

firefighting missions. 

What Is the Unsafe Condition Presented in 

This AD? 

(d) This AD is the result of Raytheon 

issuing a Pilot’s Operating Handbook and 

FAA Approved Airplane Flight Manual 

(POH/AFM) Supplement that establishes the 

structural life of 4,500 hours time-in-service 

(TIS) for the airframe (wing, fuselage, 

empennage, and associated structure), and 

FAA’s determination that the structural life 

is necessary. The actions specified in this AD 

are intended to prevent cumulative fatigue 

damage and fatigue cracking damage that 

would sufficiently reduce residual strength of 

the airframe and result in failure. Failure of 

the airframe (wing, fuselage, empennage, or 

associated structure) could lead to loss of 

control of the airplane. 

What Must I Do To Address This Problem? 

(e) To address this problem, you must do 

the following: 

Actions Compliance Procedures 

(1) Insert the Raytheon Aircraft Company 

Beechcraft Model 58P/58PA and Model 

58TC/58TCA Pilot’s Operating Handbook and 

FAA Approved Airplane Flight Manual (POH/ 

AFM) Supplement, part number (P/N) 102– 

590000–67, issued January 2005, into the 

POH/AFM (P/N 102–590000–41 or 106– 

590000–5). The Limitations Section limits the 

structural life of the airframe (wing, fuselage, 

empennage, and associated structure) to 

4,500 hours time-in-service (TIS).

Upon the accumulation of 4,500 hours TIS on 

the airframe (wing, fuselage, empennage, 

or associated structure) or prior to further 

flight, whichever occurs later, unless already done.

The owner/operator holding at least a private 

pilot certificate as authorized by section 

43.7 of the Federal Aviation Regulations 

(14 CFR 43.7) may modify the POH as 

specified in paragraph (e)(1) of this AD. 

Make an entry into the aircraft records 

showing compliance with this portion of the 

AD following section 43.9 of the Federal 

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 43.9). 

(2) Dispose of the life-limited airframe (wing, fuselage, empennage, and associated structure) following 14 CFR 43.10 when the limit 

of the structural life of the airframe is reached.

Upon the accumulation of 4,500 hours TIS on 

the airframe (wing, fuselage, empennage, 

or associated structure) or prior to further 

flight, whichever occurs later, unless already done.

Follow section 43.10 of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (14 CFR 43.10). 

(3) Do not operate any Models 58P and 58TC 

airplanes (with any serial number noted in 

paragraph (c) of this AD0 upon the accumulation of 4,500 hours TIS on the airframe 

(wing, fuselage, empennage, or associated 

structure).

As of the effective date of this AD ................... Not applicable. 

May I Request an Alternative Method of 

Compliance? 

(f) You may request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD by following the procedures in 14 

CFR 39.19. Unless FAA authorizes otherwise, 

send your request to your principal 

inspector. The principal inspector may add 

comments and will send your request to the 

Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office 

(ACO), FAA. For information on any already 

approved alternative methods of compliance, 

contact Steven E. Potter, Aerospace Engineer, 

Wichita ACO, FAA, 1801 Airport Road, 

Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone: (316) 946–

4124; facsimile: (316) 946–4107. 

May I Get Copies of the Documents 

Referenced in This AD? 

(g) To get copies of the documents 

referenced in this AD, contact Raytheon 

Aircraft Company, P.O. Box 85, Wichita, 

Kansas 67201–0085; telephone: (800) 429–

5372 or (316) 676–3140. To view the AD 

docket, go to the Docket Management 

Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, 

400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, 

Room PL–401, Washington, DC, or on the 

Internet at http://dms.dot.gov. The docket 

number is Docket No. FAA–2005–21175; 

Directorate Identifier 2005–CE–24–AD. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on 

November 16, 2005. 

David R. Showers, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–23055 Filed 11–21–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P