6634 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2006–26490; Directorate 

Identifier 2006–CE–075–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Alpha 

Aviation Design Limited (Type 

Certificate No. A48EU Previously Held 

by APEX Aircraft and AVIONS PIERRE 

ROBIN) Model R2160 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM); 

reopening of the comment period. 

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier 

NPRM for the products listed above. 

This proposed AD results from 

mandatory continuing airworthiness 

information (MCAI) originated by an 

aviation authority of another country to 

identify and correct an unsafe condition 

on an aviation product. The MCAI 

describes the unsafe condition as: 

To prevent failure of the wing structure 

and assembly components due to undetected 

fatigue and corrosion * * * 

The proposed AD would require actions 

that are intended to address the unsafe 

condition described in the MCAI. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by March 6, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• 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. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket 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 AD 

docket contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(telephone (800) 647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karl 

Schletzbaum, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, 

Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, 

Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 

telephone: (816) 329–4146; fax: (816) 

329–4090. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2006–26490; Directorate Identifier 

2006–CE–075–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD because 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 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

We proposed to amend 14 CFR part 

39 with an earlier NPRM for the 

specified products, which was 

published in the Federal Register on 

October 11, 2007 (72 FR 57896). That 

earlier NPRM proposed to require 

actions intended to address the unsafe 

condition for the products listed above. 

Since that NPRM was issued, public 

comments have resulted in changes to 

the preamble and body of the proposed 

AD. The changes to the body of the 

proposed AD add a burden that 

necessitates a supplemental NPRM and 

re-opening of the comment period. 

Relevant Service Information 

AVIONS PIERRE ROBIN (recent type 

certificate responsibility was with APEX 

Aircraft and current responsibility is 

with Alpha Aviation Design Limited) 

has issued Mandatory Service Bulletin 

No. 123, revision 3, dated December 23, 

1999. 

The actions described in this service 

information are intended to correct the 

unsafe condition identified in the 

MCAI. 

Comments 

We have considered the following 

comments received on the earlier 

NPRM. 

Comment Issue No. 1: The AD Action 

Reflects Current FAA Registry Numbers 

of Affected Aircraft 

Mr. Richard Martindale states that 

there are 9 airplanes of the affected 

model on the U.S. registry. However, he 

states that 1 of these 9 airplanes was 

destroyed in an accident. He also 

believes that 1 airplane has been 

exported to Central America. Mr. 

Martindale concludes that only 7 

airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected 

by the proposed AD. He recommends 

that we revise the estimated number of 

airplanes affected to 7 or 8 airplanes. 

Since the U.S. registry includes 9 

airplanes, we will identify this as the 

affected number of aircraft in the Cost 

of Compliance section. 

Comment Issue No. 2: Remove 

Reference to Avions Pierre Robin 

Service Bulletin No. 123, Revision 2 

Mr. Martindale states that the MCAI 

references Robin Aviation Service 

Bulletin No. 123, revision 3, dated 

December 23, 1999, and that this service 

bulletin refers to actions in Avions 

Pierre Robin Service Bulletin No. 123, 

revision 2, dated November 14, 1995, 

which has been superseded and is 

unavailable. He recommends that the 

AD action rely only on Robin Aviation 

Service Bulletin No. 123, revision 3, 

dated December 23, 1999. 

We agree with the commenter and 

will remove reference to Avions Pierre 

Robin Service Bulletin No. 123, revision 

2, dated November 14, 1995, for repair 

of any defects. 

The reference will remain in certain 

areas of the Actions and Compliance 

section because previous 

accomplishment of certain actions in 

revision 2 determines what actions in 

revision 3 actions should be done. 

Evidence of revision 2 accomplishment 

should be determinable from the records 

of the affected airplanes. 

Comment Issue No. 3: Clarify Inspection 

Requirements for This Proposed AD and 

the Requirements of AD 99–10–01 

Mr. Martindale requests that we 

clarify the inspection requirements of 

this proposed AD with the requirements 

of AD 99–10–01. He also states that the 

750-hour repetitive inspection is 

missing from the proposed AD. 

We agree that there is a need to clarify 

the inspection requirements of this 

proposed AD with the requirements of 

AD 99–10–01. The FAA will explain 

that the 3,500-hour inspection is 3,500 


rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2008 / Proposed Rules 6635 

hours time-in-service (TIS) of new bolts, 

and thereafter, repetitively inspect every 

750 hours. We will add a periodic 750 

hours TIS inspection to paragraph (f)(2) 

of the proposed AD. 

Comment Issue No. 4: Revise the Labor 

Rate 

Mr. Martindale states that labor rates 

in the southern California area are $100 

per work-hour or more and not the 

estimated $80 per work-hour used in the 

NPRM. He also notes that the majority 

of currently registered aircraft are 

located in California; thus, the estimated 

cost of compliance is understated. Mr. 

Martindale recommends that we use a 

rate of at least $100 per work-hour. 

We are not allowed to accept this 

recommendation. The U.S. Office of 

Personnel Management (OPM) 

established the average labor rates based 

on an average of the national rate. The 

rate of $80 per work-hour is the current 

rate provided by OPM and is the rate the 

FAA must use for all AD actions. 

We are not changing the cost of 

compliance as a result of this comment. 

Comment Issue No. 5: Costs of 

Compliance Are Understated 

Mr. Martindale states that the costs of 

compliance do not consider other 

factors that drive up the costs to do the 

proposed AD actions. He recommends 

that we revise the estimated cost of 

compliance to include not only parts 

and labor costs but to also include the 

estimated cost of procuring or 

fabricating ground support equipment 

that enable the required work to be 

performed in a safe manner. The AD 

should also address in the estimated 

cost of compliance the financial risk to 

operators due to the unavailability of 

required ground support equipment 

and/or to the unavailability of 

mechanics with sufficient experience on 

the affected aircraft model to perform 

the required tasks. 

The FAA estimates the cost of the AD 

action based on approximate workhours and cost of parts. We have no way 

of determining the cost an individual 

operator would incur in obtaining 

proper tooling. 

We are not changing the cost of 

compliance as a result of this comment. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of the Proposed AD 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of another 

country, and is approved for operation 

in the United States. Pursuant to our 

bilateral agreement with this State of 

Design Authority, they have notified us 

of the unsafe condition described in the 

MCAI and service information 

referenced above. We are proposing this 

AD because we evaluated all 

information and determined the unsafe 

condition exists and is likely to exist or 

develop on other products of the same 

type design. 

Certain changes described above 

expand the scope of the earlier NPRM. 

As a result, we have determined that it 

is necessary to reopen the comment 

period to provide additional 

opportunity for the public to comment 

on the proposed AD. 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the MCAI or Service Information 

We have reviewed the MCAI and 

related service information and, in 

general, agree with their substance. But 

we might have found it necessary to use 

different words from those in the MCAI 

to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. 

operators and is enforceable. In making 

these changes, we do not intend to differ 

substantively from the information 

provided in the MCAI and related 

service information. 

We might also have proposed 

different actions in this AD from those 

in the MCAI in order to follow FAA 

policies. Any such differences are 

highlighted in a Note within the 

proposed AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

will affect 9 products of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it will take about 

15 work-hours per product to comply 

with basic requirements of this 

proposed AD. The average labor rate is 

$80 per work-hour. Required parts will 

cost about $1,326 per product. 

Based on these figures, we estimate 

the cost of this proposed AD to the U.S. 

operators to be $22,734 or $2,526 per 

product. 

We have no way to determine what 

aircraft will need replacement parts that 

may be required based on the results of 

any inspection. 

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 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 this 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. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD and placed it in the 

AD docket. 

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 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: 

Alpha Aviation Design Limited (Type 

Certificate No. A48EU previously held 

by Apex Aircraft and AVIONS PIERRE 

ROBIN): Docket No. FAA–2006–26490; 

Directorate Identifier 2006–CE–075–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by March 6, 

2008. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 


rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
6636 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Model R2160 

airplanes, serial numbers 001 through 378, 

certificated in any category. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association of America 

(ATA) Code: 57: Wings. 

Reason 

(e) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states: 

To prevent failure of the wing structure 

and assembly components due to undetected 

fatigue and corrosion * * * 

The MCAI requires that you inspect the wing 

structure and fuselage attachment and repair 

any defects that you find. 

Actions and Compliance 

(f) Unless already done, do the following 

actions: 

(1) Disassemble the wings from the 

fuselage and inspect the wing structure and 

assembly components using instruction No. 1 

in Robin Aviation Service Bulletin No. 123, 

revision 3, dated December 23, 1999. If any 

defects are found, repair following Robin 

Aviation Service Bulletin No. 123, revision 3, 

dated December 23, 1999. Use the following 

compliance times for the inspection: 

(i) For airplanes with less than 4,000 hours 

time-in-service (TIS): When the airplane 

reaches a total of 3,500 hours TIS or within 

the next 100 hours TIS after the effective date 

of this AD, whichever occurs later, and 

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 750 hours 

TIS. 

(ii) For airplanes with 4,000 hours TIS or 

more that have not complied with the special 

instruction in paragraph E of Avions Pierre 

Robin Service Bulletin No. 123, revision 2, 

dated November 14, 1995: Within the next 

100 hours TIS after the effective date of this 

AD and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 

750 hours TIS. 

(iii) For airplanes with 4,000 hours TIS or 

more that have complied with the special 

instruction in paragraph E of Avions Pierre 

Robin Service Bulletin No. 123, revision 2, 

dated November 14, 1995: Within the next 

750 hours TIS after the effective date of this 

AD and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 

750 hours TIS. 

(2) When the airplane reaches a total of 

3,500 hours TIS with original wing-tofuselage bolts installed or 3,500 hours TIS of 

an airplane since new bolts have been 

installed or within the next 100 hours TIS 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs later, do a non-destructive inspection 

of the wing-to-fuselage retaining bolts and 

replace any bolts that do not pass this 

inspection following instruction No. 2 in 

Robin Aviation Service Bulletin No. 123, 

revision 3, dated December 23, 1999. 

Thereafter, repetitively inspect wing-tofuselage retaining bolts and replace any bolts 

that do not pass this inspection every 750 

hours TIS following instruction No. 2 in 

Robin Aviation Service Bulletin No. 123, 

revision 3, dated December 23, 1999. 

Note 1: The requirement for a 3,500-hour 

inspection is a time since new or time since 

installation (that is, the TIS of new bolts). 

(3) Within the next 50 hours TIS after reassembling the wing and thereafter at 

intervals not to exceed 100 hours TIS, inspect 

the wing-to-fuselage retaining bolts for 

correct torque settings following instruction 

No. 3 in Robin Aviation Service Bulletin No. 

123, revision 3, dated December 23, 1999. 

The required torque value is 22 ft-lb with nut 

part number 95.24.39.010. Tighten to 16 ftlb (pre-loading) and then torque from 16 to 

22 ft-lb. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: No 

differences. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(g) 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: Karl Schletzbaum, Aerospace 

Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 

901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 

64106; telephone: (816) 329–4146; 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 

(h) Refer to MCAI Civil Aviation Authority 

AD DCA/R2000/28, dated September 28, 

2006, and Robin Aviation Mandatory Service 

Bulletin No. 123, revision 3, dated December 

23, 1999, for related information. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on January 

30, 2008. 

John Colomy, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E8–2047 Filed 2–4–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–0136; Directorate 

Identifier 2007–CE–104–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Pacific 

Aerospace Limited Model 750XL 

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 the 

products listed above. This proposed 

AD results from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

originated by an aviation authority of 

another country to identify and correct 

an unsafe condition on an aviation 

product. The MCAI describes the unsafe 

condition as 1⁄8-inch rivets installed in 

place of the correct 5⁄32-inch rivets that 

secure the horizontal tail surface load 

transfer angles to the rearmost fuselage 

frame at Station 384.62 (Corrected from 

369.62 per notification from the Civil 

Aviation Authority of New Zealand). 

The proposed AD would require actions 

that are intended to address the unsafe 

condition described in the MCAI. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by March 6, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• 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. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket 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 AD 

docket contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 


rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS