18524 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 82 / Friday, April 26, 1996 / Proposed Rules

(d) Perform a fluorescent penetrant

inspection of blades for cracks in accordance

with Hartzell Propeller Inc. Service Bulletin

136H, dated March 12, 1993, prior to

installing a serviceable hub.

(e) Perform magnetic particle inspection of

blade clamps for cracks in accordance with

Hartzell Service Manual 202A, Revision 3,

dated June 1995, pages 201 to 215, prior to

installing a serviceable hub.

(f) If cracks are found in either the blade

or the blade clamps, prior to further flight

replace with serviceable blade or blade

clamps.

(g) Reassemble the propeller in accordance

with Hartzell Propeller Inc. Service Manual

118F, Revision 2, dated May 1992, pages 57

through 96, for 3- and 4-bladed hub models,

and Service Manual 132A, Revision 2, dated

June 1992, pages VII–1 to –46, for 5-blade

hub models.

(h) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager, Chicago

Aircraft Certification Office. The request

should be forwarded through an appropriate

FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who

may add comments and then send it to the

Manager, Chicago Aircraft Certification

Office.

Note: Information concerning the existence

of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this airworthiness directive,

if any, may be obtained from the Chicago

Aircraft Certification Office.

(i) 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 aircraft to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on

April 16, 1996.

Jay J. Pardee,

Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–10060 Filed 4–25–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 94–CE–22–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Fairchild

Aircraft SA26, SA226, and SA227

Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of

proposed rulemaking (NPRM);

Reopening of the comment period.

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

revise an earlier proposed airworthiness

directive (AD), which would have

superseded AD 93–19–06. That AD

currently requires repetitively

inspecting acrylic cabin and cockpit

side windows for cracks on certain

Fairchild Aircraft SA26, SA226, and

SA227 series airplanes, and, if cracks

are found that exceed certain

limitations, replacing that window. The

previous document included the

following: the proposed requirement of

modifying certain cockpit side

windows; more fully-defined crack

limitations; and more clear repetitive

inspection intervals for the affected

airplanes over those included in AD 93–

19–06. Comments received regarding

the NPRM have prompted the Federal

Aviation Administration to change the

proposal and allow the public a further

opportunity to participate in the

rulemaking process. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to prevent acrylic cabin or

cockpit side window failures, which, if

not detected and corrected, could result

in airframe damage and decompression

injuries.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before June 24, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Central Region,

Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 94–CE–22–

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

Fairchild Aircraft, P.O. Box 790490, San

Antonio, Texas 78279–0490; telephone

(210) 824–9421. This information also

may be examined at the Rules Docket at

the address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Hung Viet Nguyen, Aerospace

Engineer, FAA, Airplane Certification

Office, 2601 Meacham Boulevard, Fort

Worth, Texas 76193–0150; telephone

(817) 222–5155; facsimile (817) 222–

5960.

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. 94–CE–22–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of Supplemental NPRM

Any person may obtain a copy of this

supplemental NPRM by submitting a

request to the FAA, Central Region,

Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 94–CE–22–

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

Kansas City, Missouri 64106.

Discussion

A proposal to amend part 39 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

part 39) to include an AD that would

apply to certain Fairchild Aircraft SA26,

SA226, and SA227 series airplanes was

published in the Federal Register on

February 21, 1995 (60 FR 9649). The

action proposed to supersede AD 93–

19–06 with a new AD that would

maintain the requirement of repetitively

inspecting acrylic cabin and cockpit

side windows for cracks, and replacing

any window where cracks are found

that exceed certain limitations. That

NPRM proposed to require modifying

windows that do not have inner

window panes installed.

Accomplishment of the modification

proposed in the NPRM would be in

accordance with the following service

bulletins (SB), as applicable:

Page No. Date

Fairchild SB 26–56–10–045, which incorporates the following pages and revision levels:

3, 4, 5, and 9 ......................................................................................................................................................... Revised: December 1, 1994.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 82 / Friday, April 26, 1996 / Proposed Rules 18525

Page No. Date

1, 2, 6, 7, 8, and 10 through 14 ............................................................................................................................ Issued: August 11, 1994.

Fairchild SB 226–56–005, which incorporates the following pages and revision levels:

3 through 7, and 9 ................................................................................................................................................. Revised: December 1, 1994.

1, 2, and 8 .............................................................................................................................................................. Revised: August 11, 1994.

10 through 16 ......................................................................................................................................................... Issued: July 31, 1991.

and Fairchild SB 227–56–005, which incorporates the following pages and revision levels:

3 through 7, and 9 ................................................................................................................................................. Revised: December 1, 1994.

1, 2, and 8 .............................................................................................................................................................. Revised: August 11, 1994.

10 through 16 ......................................................................................................................................................... Issued: July 31, 1991.

Accomplishment of the repetitive

inspections proposed in the NPRM

would be in accordance with the

following SB’s, as applicable:

Fairchild SB 26–56–20–042, Issued:

November 28, 1988; Revised:

February 7, 1991.

Fairchild SB 226–56–001, Issued:

February 2, 1983; Revised: November

26, 1991.

Fairchild SB 227–56–001, Issued:

February 2, 1983; Revised: November

26, 1991.

Fairchild SB 226–56–002, Issued: March

3, 1983; Revised: May 29, 1992.

Fairchild SB 227–56–002, Issued:

January 5, 1984; Revised: May 29,

1992, and April 1, 1993.

Fairchild SB 226–56–003, Issued:

September 13, 1984; Revised:

November 2, 1989.

Fairchild SB 227–56–003, Issued:

September 13, 1984; Revised:

November 2, 1989.

Fairchild SB 26–56–10–038, Issued:

October 8, 1984; Revised: February 7,

1991.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. After

reviewing all the comments received on

the NPRM, the FAA is revising the

proposal to eliminate the proposed

dual-pane cockpit side window

modification, and is proposing

repetitive single-pane cockpit side

window replacements (every 5,000

hours time-in-service). The repetitive

inspections would remain as originally

proposed. Due consideration has been

given to the comments that follow.

Fifteen comments were received in

reference to the dual-pane cockpit side

window modification. These comments

present the view that the compliance

times for the modification are

unrealistic, that there is no justification

for the FAA to mandate the dual-pane

modification, and that a new improved

cockpit side window defogging system

should be developed instead of the

modification. Since the FAA has revised

the NPRM to include repetitive singlepane cockpit side window replacements

instead of the dual-pane cockpit side

window modification, these comments

no longer apply to the rule as now

proposed.

Seven commenters state that the FAA

miscalculated the economic impact of

the AD upon the operators, specifically

that the 14 hours proposed to

accomplish the modification is closer to

50 workhours for each side or 100

workhours per airplane. The FAA

concurs that it miscalculated the

economic impact and agrees that the

proposed modification would take

approximately 100 workhours per

airplane (50 workhours each side).

However, since the proposal is being

revised to incorporate a life limit on the

single-pane windows and since

mandatory dual-pane modification is no

longer proposed, the economic portion

to the preamble of this proposal has

been adjusted to reflect the single-pane

installation costs instead of the double

pane modification costs.

After examining the circumstances

and reviewing all available information

related to the subject described above

including the comments received, the

FAA has determined that the NPRM

should be revised and that AD action

should still be taken to prevent acrylic

cabin or cockpit side window failures,

which, if not detected and corrected,

could result in airframe damage and

decompression injuries.

Since this revision of the NPRM to

add a life limit for the single-pane

cockpit side windows proposes actions

that go beyond the scope of what was

already proposed, the FAA is reopening

the comment period to allow the public

additional time to comment on this

proposed action.

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop in other Fairchild Aircraft

SA26, SA226, and SA227 series

airplanes of the same type design, the

proposed AD would supersede AD 93–

19–06 with a new AD that would

maintain the requirement of repetitively

inspecting the cabin and cockpit side

windows, and would add a life limit for

the single-pane cockpit side windows.

Accomplishment of the single-pane

window installation would be in

accordance with the applicable

maintenance manual. The proposed

inspections would continue to be

accomplished in accordance with the

service bulletins previously referenced.

The compliance time for the proposed

AD is presented in both hours time-inservice (TIS) and calendar time. The

referenced acrylic cabin and cockpit

side windows are affected whether the

airplane is in flight or on the ground. In

addition, the utilization rates of the

affected airplanes vary among operators.

For example, operators in unscheduled

service utilize their airplanes an average

of approximately 200 to 300 hours TIS

annually, while those in commuter

service (scheduled) utilize their

airplanes an average of approximately

2,000 hours TIS annually. Based on this

wide utilization rate variance and the

fact that these windows are affected

when the airplane is in flight and on the

ground, the FAA has determined that

the compliance time for the proposed

rule should be in hours TIS and

calendar time.

The FAA estimates that 633 airplanes

in the U.S. registry would be affected by

the proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 28 workhours per

airplane (14 workhours per window) to

accomplish the proposed life limit

installation and that the average labor

rate is approximately $60 an hour. Parts

cost approximately $2,200 per airplane

($1,100 per window). Based on these

figures, the total cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $2,456,040. AD 93–19–

06 currently requires the same

inspections as the proposed AD for all

of the affected airplanes. Therefore, the

cost impact of the proposed inspections

(3 workhours × $60 × 633 airplanes =

$113,940) for operators of all affected

airplanes is the same as AD 93–19–06.

The figure does not take into account

the cost of repetitive inspections. The

FAA has no way of determining how

many repetitive inspections each

owner/operator may incur over the life

of the airplane.
18526 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 82 / Friday, April 26, 1996 / Proposed Rules

In addition, Fairchild Aircraft has

informed the FAA that approximately

250 of the 633 affected airplanes are

equipped with cockpit side windows

with inner window panes, and therefore

are not subject to the single-pane

window replacements (dual-pane

windows would still be subject to

repetitive inspections). With this in

mind, the proposed cost impact upon

U.S. operators would be reduced

approximately $970,000 from

$2,456,040 to $1,486,040.

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

removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)

93–19–06, Amendment 39–8705 (58 FR

51771, October 5, 1993), and by adding

a new AD to read as follows:

Fairchild Aircraft: Docket No. 94–CE–22–

AD. Supersedes AD 93–19–06,

Amendment 39–8705.

Applicability: Models SA26–T, SA26–AT,

SA226–T, SA226–T(B), SA226–AT, SA226–

TC, SA227–AT, SA227–AC, SA227–BC, and

SA227–TT airplanes (all serial numbers for

all models), certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

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

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 (f) 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.

Note 2: The applicability of this AD takes

precedence over that specified in the service

information.

Compliance: Required as indicated in the

body of the AD, unless already

accomplished.

To prevent acrylic cabin or cockpit side

window failures, which, if not detected and

corrected, could result in airframe damage

and decompression injuries, accomplish the

following:

Note 3: The paragraph structure of this AD

is as follows:

Level 1: (a), (b), (c), etc.

Level 2: (1), (2), (3), etc.

Level 3: (i), (ii), (iii), etc.

Level 4: (A), (B), (C), etc.

Level 2, Level 3, and Level 4 structures are

designations of the Level 1 paragraph they

immediately follow.

(a) Upon the accumulation of 5,000 hours

time-in-service (TIS) or within the next 1,000

hours TIS after the effective date of this AD,

whichever occurs later, and thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 5,000 hours TIS,

replace each single-pane cockpit side

window with a new window of like design

in accordance with the applicable

maintenance manual.

(1) Accomplish the inspection specified in

paragraph (b) of this AD between 10 to 20

hours TIS after replacing each window to

ensure that no damage has occurred after

installation; and

(2) If cracks are found, utilize the chart in

paragraph (b) of this AD to determine the

applicable action necessary.

(b) Visually inspect all acrylic single-pane

cockpit side windows for cracks in

accordance with the service information

presented in paragraph (d)(2) of this AD, as

applicable. Accomplish the initial

inspection, and applicable reinspection or

replacement as specified in the following

chart:

Condition Initial action Repetitive action

Upon the effectiveness of this AD Inspect at 150 hours TIS after the

effective date of the AD.

Reinspect at intervals not to exceed 1,000 hours TIS or 12 calender

months, whichever occurs first, provided no cracks are found. Use

applicable condition column entry to determine compliance times if

cracks are found.

If cracks are found where the sum

total of all cracks is less than 4.3

inches in combined length, but

where a crack meets or exceeds

.30 inches as specified in the

Crack Limitations section of the

service information referenced in

paragraph (d)(2) of this AD.

Accomplish one of the following: ... Accomplish the corresponding repetitive action:

1. Prior to further flight, replace the

window with a new window of

like design in accordance with

the applicable maintenance

manual or.

1. Reinspect initially between 10 and 20 hours TIS after replacing the

window to ensure that no damage has occurred after installation,

and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,000 hours TIS or 12 calendar months, whichever occurs first, provided no cracks are found.

Use applicable condition column entry to determine compliance

times if cracks are found or
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 82 / Friday, April 26, 1996 / Proposed Rules 18527

Condition Initial action Repetitive action

2. Prior to further flight, fabricate a

placard with the following words

in letters at least 0.10-inch in

height and install this placard

within the pilot’s clear view close

to the pressurization controls:

‘‘AIRPLANE MUST BE OPERATED UNPRESSURIZED’’, and

prior to further flight, insert a

copy of this AD into Limitations

Section of the FAA-approved

Airplane Flight Manual (AFM).

2. Repeat the inspection specified in paragraph (b) of this AD at intervals not to exceed 25 hours TIS or 30 calendar days, and whichever occurs first, provided the sum total of all cracks does the not

exceed 4.3 inches in combined length. Replace the window and

continue the actions necessary under the ‘‘With cracks found where

the sum total of all cracks meets or exceeds 4.3 inches in combined length’’ condition column.

If cracks are ound where the sum

total of all cracks meets or exceeds 4.3 inches in combined

length.

Prior to further flight, replace the

window with a new window of

like design in accordance with

applicable maintenance manual.

Reinspect initially between 10 and 20 hours TIS after replacing the

window to ensure that no damage has occurred after installation,

and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,000 hours TIS or 12 calendar months, whichever occurs first, provided no cracks are found.

Use applicable condition column entry to determine compliance

times if cracks are found.

With cracks found that are less

than .30 inches (as specified in

the applicable service information referenced in paragraph

(d)(2) of this AD) provided the

sum total of all cracks does not

exceed 4.3 inches in combined

length.

Reinspect within 25 hours TIS or

30 calendar days, whichever occurs first.

Continue this reinspection at intervals not to exceed 25 hours TIS or

30 calendar days, whichever occurs first, provided no crack is

found that is .30 inches or greater or the combined length of all

cracks exceeds 4.3 inches in combined length. Use applicable condition column entry to determine compliance times if any of these

crack limits are met.

With no cracks found after one of

the inspections required by this

AD.

Reinspect within 1,000 hours TIS

and 12 calendar months after

the last inspection, whichever

occurs first.

Reinspect at intervals not to exceed 1,000 hours TIS or 12 calendar

months, whichever occurs first, provided no cracks are found. Use

applicable condition column entry to determine compliance times if

cracks are found.

(c) Visually inspect all acrylic cabin and

dual-pane cockpit side windows for cracks in

accordance with the service information

specified in paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2) of

this AD. Accomplish the initial inspection

and applicable reinspection or replacement

as specified in the following chart:

Condition Initial action Repetitive action

Upon the effectiveness of this AD Inspect at 150 hours TIS after the

effective date of the AD, unless

already accomplished within the

last 1,000 hours TIS or 12 calendar months, which would put

airplane in compliance with superseded AD 93–19–06. Use

the results of the previous inspection under AD 93–19–06 to

determine repetitive interval.

Reinspect at intervals not to exceed 1,000 hours TIS or 12 calender

months, whichever occurs first, provided no cracks are found. Use

applicable condition column entry to determine compliance times if

cracks are found.

For airplanes taking ‘‘unless already accomplished’’ credit for the initial inspection, use the results of the previous inspection under AD

93–19–06 to determine the repetitive action.

If cracks are found where the sum

total of all cracks is less than 4.3

inches in combined length, but

where a crack meets or exceeds

.30 inches as specified in the

Crack Limitations section of the

service information referenced in

paragraph (d)(2) of this AD.

Accomplish one of the following: ... Accomplish the corresponding repetitive action:

1. Prior to further flight, replace the

window with a new window of

like design in accordance with

the applicable maintenance

manual or.

1. Reinspect initially between 10 and 20 hours TIS after replacing the

window to ensure that no damage has occurred after installation,

and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,000 hours TIS or 12 calendar months, whichever occurs first, provided no cracks are found.

Use applicable condition column entry to determine compliance

times if cracks are found or
18528 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 82 / Friday, April 26, 1996 / Proposed Rules

Condition Initial action Repetitive action

2. Prior to further flight, fabricate a

placard with the following words

in letters at least 0.10-inch in

height and install this placard

within the pilot’s clear view close

to the pressurization controls:

‘‘AIRPLANE MUST BE OPERATED UNPRESSURIZED’’, and

prior to further flight, insert a

copy of this AD into the Limitations Section of the FAA-approved Airplane Flight Manual

(AFM).

2. Repeat the inspection specified in paragraph (b) of this AD at intervals not to exceed 25 hours TIS or 30 calendar days, whichever occurs first, provided the sum total of all cracks does not exceed 4.3

inches in combined length. Replace the window and continue the

actions necessary under the ‘‘With cracks found where the sum

total of all cracks meets or exceeds 4.3 inches in combined length’’

condition column.

If cracks are found where the sum

total of all cracks meets or exceeds 4.3 inches in combined

length.

Prior to further flight, replace the

window with a new window of

like design in accordance with

the applicable maintenance

manual.

Reinspect initially between 10 and 20 hours TIS after replacing the

window to ensure that no damage has occurred after installation,

and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,000 hours TIS or 12 calendar months, whichever occurs first, provided no cracks are found.

Use applicable condition column entry to determine compliance

times if cracks are found.

With cracks found that are less

than .30 inches (as specified in

the applicable service information referenced in paragraph

(d)(2) of this AD) provided the

sum total of all cracks does not

exceed 4.3 inches in combined

length.

Reinspect within 25 hours TIS or

30 calendar days, whichever occurs first.

Continue this reinspection at intervals not to exceed 25 hours TIS or

30 calendar days, whichever occurs first, provided no crack is

found that is .30 inches or greater or the combined length of all

cracks exceeds 4.3 inches in combined length. Use applicable condition column entry to determine compliance times if any of these

crack limits are met.

With no cracks found after one of

the inspections required by this

AD.

Reinspect within 1,000 hours TIS

and 12 calendar months after

the last inspection, whichever

occurs first.

Reinspect at intervals not to exceed 1,000 hours TIS or 12 calendar

months, whichever occurs first, provided no cracks are found. Use

applicable condition column entry to determine compliance times if

cracks are found.

(d) The following specifies the service

bulletins that contain the procedures to

accomplish the required inspections:

Models Service bulletins

(1) For acrylic cabin windows:

SA26–T and SA26–AT ......................................... 26–56–20–042, Issued: November 28, 1988, Revised: February 7, 1991.

SA226–T and SA226–T(B) ................................... 226–56–001, Issued: February 2, 1983, Revised: November 26, 1991.

SA226–AT and SA226–TC ................................... 226–56–002, Issued: March 3, 1983, Revised: May 29, 1992.

SA227–AT, SA227–AC, and SA227–BC ............. 227–56–002, Issued: January 5, 1984, Revised: May 29, 1992, and April 1, 1993.

SA227–TT ............................................................. 227–56–001, Issued: February 2, 1983, Revised: November 26, 1991.

(2) For acrylic cockpit side windows:

SA26–T and SA26–AT ......................................... 26–56–10–038, Issued: October 8, 1984, Revised: February 7, 1991.

SA226–T, SA226–T(B), SA226–AT, and SA226–

TC.

226–56–003, Issued: September 13, 1984, Revised: November 2, 1989.

SA227–AT, SA227–AC, SA227–BC, and SA227–

TT.

227–56–003, Issued: September 13, 1984, Revised: November 2, 1989.

Note 4: The repetitive inspections required

by this AD are also referenced in the FAAapproved Fairchild Airframe Airworthiness

Limitations Manual, ST–UN–M001.

(e) 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.

(f) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the initial or repetitive

compliance times that provides an equivalent

level of safety may be approved by the

Manager, Airplane Certification Office

(ACO), FAA, 2601 Meacham Boulevard, Fort

Worth, Texas 76193–0150. The request shall

be forwarded through an appropriate FAA

Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Fort Worth ACO.

Note 5: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Fort Worth ACO.

Note 6: Alternative methods of compliance

approved in accordance with AD 93–19–06

(superseded by this action) are not

considered approved as alternative methods

of compliance with this AD.

(g) All persons affected by this directive

may obtain copies of the document referred

to herein upon request to Fairchild Aircraft,

P.O. Box 790490, San Antonio, Texas 78279–

0490; or may examine this document at the

FAA, Central Region, Office of the Assistant

Chief Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th

Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106.

(h) This amendment supersedes AD 93–

19–06, Amendment 39–8705.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April

19, 1996.

Henry A. Armstrong,

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–10308 Filed 4–25–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P