Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 112 / Monday, June 10, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 29277

neither increase the economic burden

on any operator nor increase the scope

of the AD.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 163 airplanes

of U.S. registry will be affected by this

AD, that it will take approximately 25

work hours per airplane to accomplish

the required actions, and that the

average labor rate is $60 per work hour.

Required parts be supplied by the

manufacturer at no cost to the operators.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the AD on U.S. operators is estimated

to be $244,500, or $1,500 per airplane.

The cost impact figure discussed

above is based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the requirements of this AD action, and

that no operator would accomplish

those actions in the future if this AD

were not adopted.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein will

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 final rule does

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)

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 final evaluation has

been prepared for this action and it is

contained in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it may be obtained from the Rules

Docket at the location provided under

the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends 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 the following new airworthiness

directive:

96–12–16 Beech Aircraft Corporation.

(Formerly deHavilland; Hawker

Siddeley; British Aerospace, plc;

Raytheon Corporate Jets, Inc.):

Amendment 39–9659. Docket 95–NM–

122–AD.

Applicability: Model BAe 125 series 800A

airplanes (including military variants C–29A

and U–125); and Model Hawker 800

airplanes, excluding airplanes having

constructor’s numbers 258079 and 258213;

certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

otherwise 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 (d) 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: Beech (Raytheon) Model BAe 125

series 800B airplanes are similar in design to

the airplanes that are subject to the

requirements of this AD and, therefore, also

may be subject to the unsafe condition

addressed by this AD. However, as of the

effective date of this AD, those models are

not type certificated for operations in the

United States. Airworthiness authorities of

countries in which the Model BAe 125 series

800B airplanes are approved for operation

should consider adopting corrective action,

applicable to those models, that is similar to

the corrective action required by this AD.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent restricted control of the

ailerons, which could reduce the pilot’s

ability to initiate roll control during critical

phases of flight, accomplish the following:

(a) For all airplanes, except Model BAe 125

series 800A airplane having constructor’s

number 258186: Within 6 months after the

effective date of this AD, modify (including

functional test) the airframe structure in the

lower area of the fuselage aft of the wing rear

spar, in accordance with Hawker Service

Bulletin SB.53–82–3566G, Revision 3,

December 14, 1995.

(b) For airplanes identified in paragraph (a)

of this AD on which Hawker Modification

253566G has been installed prior to the

effective date of this AD, in accordance with

Hawker Service Bulletin SB.53–82–3566G,

dated March 1, 1995, Revision 1, dated

March 14, 1995, or Revision 2, dated May 3,

1995: Within 30 days after the effective date

of this AD, perform a functional test to

determine if a bolt fouls the flap control

system, in accordance with paragraph

2.A.(18) of the Accomplishment Instructions

of Hawker Service Bulletin SB.53–82–3566G,

Revision 3, dated December 14, 1995. If any

foul is detected, prior to further flight, repair

in accordance with a method approved by

the Manager, Standardization Branch, ANM–

113, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA.

(c) For Model BAe 125 series 800A

airplane having constructor’s number

258186: Within 6 months after the effective

date of this AD, modify the airframe structure

in the lower area of the fuselage aft of the

wing rear spar, in accordance with Hawker

Service Bulletin SB.53–85–3566D, dated

March 10, 1995, or Revision 1, dated May 23,

1995.

(d) 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,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113.

Operators shall submit their requests through

an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Standardization

Branch, ANM–113.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Standardization Branch,

ANM–113.

(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) For certain airplanes, the modification

and functional test shall be done in

accordance with Hawker Service Bulletin

SB.53–82–3566G, Revision 3, dated

December 14, 1995. For certain other

airplanes, the modification and functional

test shall be done in accordance with Hawker

Service Bulletin SB.53–85–3566D, dated

March 10, 1995, or Hawker Service Bulletin

SB.53–85–3566D, Revision 1, dated May 23,

1995. This incorporation by reference was

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)

and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained

from Raytheon Aircraft Co., Manger Service

Engineering, Hawker Customer Support

Department, P.O. Box 85, Wichita, Kansas

67201–0085. Copies may be inspected at the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at

the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North

Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington,

DC.

(g) This amendment becomes effective on

July 15, 1996.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 31,

1996.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–14229 Filed 6–7–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U
29278 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 112 / Monday, June 10, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–164–AD; Amendment

39–9662; AD 96–12–19]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker

Model F28 Mark 0100 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain Fokker Model F28

Mark 0100 series airplanes, that requires

installation of reinforcement plates

under each hook latch fitting on the

frame of each large cargo door. For some

airplanes, this amendment requires

inspections to detect cracking in the

area around each hook latch fitting, and

repair, if necessary. This amendment is

prompted by the results of stress

analyses and destructive tests which

revealed that fatigue-related cracking

may develop in the vicinity of the hook

latch fittings on the frame of the large

cargo doors. The actions specified by

this AD are intended to prevent reduced

structural integrity of the frames of the

cargo door due to fatigue cracking,

which may lead to the cargo door(s)

opening while the airplane is in flight.

DATES: Effective July 15, 1996. The

incorporation by reference of certain

publications listed in the regulations is

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register as of July 15, 1996.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Fokker Aircraft USA, Inc., 1199

North Fairfax Street, Alexandria,

Virginia 22314. This information may be

examined at the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the Office of the

Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ruth Harder, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–1721; fax (206) 227–1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to

include an airworthiness directive (AD)

that is applicable to certain Fokker

Model F28 Mark 0100 series airplanes

was published in the Federal Register

on January 19, 1996 (61 FR 1294). That

action proposed to require installation

of reinforcement plates under each hook

latch fitting on the frame of each large

cargo door. For some airplanes, the

action proposed to require inspections

to detect cracking in the area around

each hook latch fitting, and repair, if

necessary.

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received.

Support for the Proposal

Two commenters support the

proposed rule.

Request to Extend Proposed

Compliance Time for Installation

One commenter requests that

paragraph (a) of the rule be revised to

extend the compliance time for

accomplishing the installation. The

commenter requests that the proposed

compliance threshold of 11,000 flight

cycles be extended to 16,000 flight

cycles, and that the proposed ‘‘grace

period’’ of 500 flight cycles (after the

effective date of the AD) be extended to

2,200 flight cycles. This commenter, a

U.S. operator, requests this extension so

that its remaining fleet of affected

airplanes can be modified during a

regularly scheduled ‘‘Q’’ check (which

occurs at approximately 16,000 flight

cycles), and so that this operator can

avoid special scheduling of airplanes,

which would entail considerable

expense over that estimated by the

FAA’s cost impact analysis. This

commenter considers the extension

justified because:

1. No cracks have been found on any

of the airplanes that it has modified so

far, which have accumulated an average

of 13,755 total flight cycles; and

2. The proposed compliance

threshold was based on only test data

and not on in-service experience.

The FAA does not concur with the

commenter’s request to extend the

compliance threshold. The proposed

compliance time was developed not

only in consideration of the urgency of

the safety implications, but in

consideration of normal maintenance

schedules for timely accomplishment of

the modification, and the

recommendations of both the airplane

manufacturer and the Netherlands

airworthiness authority. The FAA

determined that 11,000 flight cycles is

the maximum acceptable threshold for

accomplishing the installation without

the need for additional inspections. Any

cracking that may develop in the subject

area during the period up to the

accumulation of 11,000 total flight

cycles on the airplane can be fully

repaired with the accomplishment of

the installation described in Fokker

Service Bulletin SBF100–52–050,

Revision 1. However, if cracks are not

detected and repaired by the 11,000-

flight cycle threshold, they could grow

to lengths such that the installation

would not be sufficient to ensure the

long-term structural integrity of the area

associated with the cargo door frame,

and may even necessitate the

replacement of the complete door frame.

In addition, if the compliance

threshold were extended beyond the

11,000-flight cycle threshold to 16,000

flight cycles as requested by the

commenter, the FAA would find it

necessary to require operators to

conduct inspections (to detect cracking)

during the extended period. Each

inspection of the area would take

approximately 4.5 hours to accomplish,

which is the same amount of time

required to accomplish the installation

itself. Therefore, delaying the threshold

for the installation to 16,000 flight

cycles by performing necessary

repetitive inspections in the meantime

would not reduce operators’ workload

or costs.

However, the FAA does concur with

the commenter’s request to extend the

‘‘grace period.’’ The FAA has

determined that the proposed ‘‘grace

period’’ of 500 flight cycles may be

extended to 1,200 flight cycles, without

the need for repetitive inspections

beyond the inspection specified in

paragraph (b) of the final rule. The FAA

bases this determination not only on the

safety implications associated with the

unsafe condition, but on recent inservice data and inspection results.

Accordingly, the FAA has revised

paragraph (a) of the final rule to specify

a ‘‘grace period’’ of 1,200 flight cycles.

Conclusion

After careful review of the available

data, including the comments noted

above, the FAA has determined that air

safety and the public interest require the

adoption of the rule with the changes

previously described. The FAA has

determined that these changes will

neither increase the economic burden

on any operator nor increase the scope

of the AD.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 100 airplanes

of U.S. registry will be affected by this

AD, that it will take approximately 4.5

work hours per airplane to accomplish

the required installation, and that the

average labor rate is $60 per work hour.

Required parts will cost approximately

$10,000 per airplane. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of the AD on
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 112 / Monday, June 10, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 29279

U.S. operators is estimated to be

$1,027,000, or $10,270 per airplane.

The FAA estimates that it would take

approximately 4.5 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the required

inspection (that is required for certain

airplanes), and that the average labor

rate is $60 per work hour. Based on

these figures, the cost impact of the

required inspection on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $270 per airplane.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the requirements of this AD action, and

that no operator would accomplish

those actions in the future if this AD

were not adopted. However, the FAA

has been advised that the required

installation already has been

accomplished on at least 8 affected

airplanes; therefore, the future cost

impact of this AD is reduced by at least

$82,160.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein will

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 final rule does

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)

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 final evaluation has

been prepared for this action and it is

contained in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it may be obtained from the Rules

Docket at the location provided under

the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends 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 the following new airworthiness

directive:

96–12–19 Fokker: Amendment 39–9662.

Docket 95–NM–164–AD.

Applicability: Model F28 Mark 0100 series

airplanes; as listed in Fokker Service Bulletin

SBF100–52–050, Revision 1, dated

September 14, 1994; 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 (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 as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent reduced structural integrity of

the frame of the large cargo door, which may

lead to the cargo door(s) opening while the

airplane is in flight, accomplish the

following:

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 11,000 total

flight cycles, or within 1,200 flight cycles

after the effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs later, install two reinforcement plates

under each hook latch fitting on the frame of

each large cargo door, in accordance with the

Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker

Service Bulletin SBF100–52–050, Revision 1,

dated September 14, 1994.

(b) For airplanes that have accumulated

11,000 or more total flight cycles at the time

of compliance with paragraph (a) of this AD:

Concurrent with the accomplishment of the

requirements of paragraph (a) of this AD,

perform an inspection to detect cracking in

the area around each hook latch fitting on the

frame of each large cargo door, in accordance

with a method approved by the Manager,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate.

(1) If no cracking is detected, no further

action is required by this paragraph.

(2) If any cracking is detected, prior to

completing the requirements of paragraph (a)

of this AD, repair in accordance with a

method approved by the Manager,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113.

(c) 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,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113.

Operators shall submit their requests through

an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Standardization

Branch, ANM–113.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Standardization Branch,

ANM–113.

(d) 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.

(e) The installation shall be done in

accordance with Fokker Service Bulletin

SBF100–52–050, Revision 1, dated

September 14, 1994. This incorporation by

reference was approved by the Director of the

Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C.

552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be

obtained from Fokker Aircraft USA, Inc.,

1199 North Fairfax Street, Alexandria,

Virginia 22314. Copies may be inspected at

the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the Office of the Federal

Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite

700, Washington, DC.

(f) This amendment becomes effective on

July 15, 1996.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 3,

1996.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–14382 Filed 6–7–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–10–AD; Amendment

39–9663; AD 96–12–20]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Lockheed

Model 382, 382B, 382E, 382F, and 382G

Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes

an existing airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain Lockheed Model

382, 382B, 382E, 382F, and 382G series

airplanes, that currently requires visual

inspections to detect loose, missing, or

deformed fasteners in the upper truss

mounts of certain engines, inspections

to detect cracking in the associated

tangs, and replacement of damaged

parts. This amendment adds a

requirement for repetitive ultrasonic

inspections to detect cracking of the

upper tangs and replacement of cracked

parts. This amendment also provides for

an optional terminating action for the