Airworthiness Directives; Mitsubishi Heavy Industries MU-2B Series Airplanes, 20915-20919 [E6-6054]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 78 / Monday, April 24, 2006 / Proposed Rules
the balance of petroleum supply and
demand.
(e) Evaluation of offers.
(1) DOE shall evaluate offers using:
(i) The criteria and requirements
stated in the solicitation; and
(ii) The market analysis under
paragraph (d) of this section.
(2) DOE shall require financial
guarantees from contractors.
cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
§ 626.07
Royalty transfer and exchange.
(a) General.
DOE shall conduct royalty transfers
pursuant to an agreement between DOE
and the Department of the Interior for
the transfer of royalty oil.
(b) Acquisition strategy.
(1) DOE and the Department of the
Interior shall select a royalty volume
from specified leases for transfer usually
over six-month periods, beginning April
1 and October 1.
(2) If logistics and crude oil quality
are compatible with SPR receipt
capabilities and requirements
respectively, DOE may take the royalty
oil directly from the Department of the
Interior and place it in SPR storage sites.
Otherwise, DOE may competitively
solicit suppliers to deliver oil of
comparable value to the SPR in
exchange for the receipt of royalty-inkind oil.
(3) If, based on the market analysis
described in paragraph (d) of this
section, DOE determines there is a high
probability that the cost to the
Government can be reduced without
significantly affecting national energy
security goals, DOE may contract for
delivery at a future date in expectation
of lower prices and a higher quantity of
oil in exchange. Conversely, it may
schedule deliveries at an earlier date
under the contract in anticipation of
higher prices at later dates.
(4) Based on the market analysis in
paragraph (d) of this section, DOE may,
after consultation with the Department
of the Interior, suspend the transfer of
royalty oil to DOE if it appears the
added demand for oil will add
significant upward pressure to prices
either regionally or on a world-wide
basis.
(c) Fill requirements determination.
DOE shall develop SPR fill
requirements for each solicitation based
on an assessment of national energy
security goals, the availability of royalty
oil and storage capacity, and need for
specific grades and quantities of crude
oil.
(d) Market analysis.
(1) DOE may use prices on futures
markets, spot markets, recent price
movements, current and projected
shipping rates, forecasts by the DOE
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:27 Apr 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
Energy Information Administration, and
any other analytic tools to determine the
most desirable acquisition profile.
(2) A market analysis supporting a
suspension decision may consider
recent price changes, private inventory
levels, oil acquisition by other
stockpiling entities, the outlook for
world oil production, incipient
disruptions of supply or refining
capability, logistical problems for
moving petroleum products,
macroeconomic factors, and any other
considerations that may be pertinent to
the balance of petroleum supply and
demand.
(e) Evaluation of royalty exchange
offers.
(1) DOE shall evaluate offers using:
(i) The criteria and requirements
stated in the solicitation; and
(ii) The market analysis under
paragraph (d) of this section.
(2) DOE shall require financial
guarantees from contractors prior to
evaluation.
§ 626.08 Deferrals of contractually
scheduled deliveries.
(a) General.
(1) DOE prefers to take deliveries of
petroleum for the SPR at times
scheduled under applicable contracts.
However, in the event the market is
distorted by disruption to supply or
other factors, DOE may defer scheduled
deliveries or request or entertain
deferral requests from contractors.
(2) A contractor seeking to defer
scheduled deliveries of oil to the SPR
may submit a deferral request to DOE.
(b) Deferral criteria. DOE shall only
grant a deferral request for negotiation if
the Government can increase the
volume of oil in the SPR and, if DOE
determines, based on DOE’s deferral
analysis, that at least one of the
following conditions exists:
(1) The Government can reduce the
cost of its oil acquisition per barrel and
increase the volume of oil being
delivered to the SPR by means of the
premium barrels required by the
deferral process.
(2) The Government anticipates
private inventories are approaching a
point where unscheduled outages may
occur.
(3) There is evidence that refineries
are reducing their run rates for lack of
feedstock.
(4) There is an unanticipated
disruption to crude oil supply.
(c) Negotiating terms.
(1) If DOE decides to negotiate a
deferral of deliveries, DOE shall
estimate the market value of the deferral
and establish a strategy for negotiating
with suppliers the minimum percentage
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20915
of the market value to be taken by the
Government.
(2) DOE shall only agree to amend the
contract if the negotiation results in an
agreement to give the Government a fair
and reasonable share of the market
value.
[FR Doc. E6–6102 Filed 4–21–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2006–23578; Directorate
Identifier 2006–CE–01–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Mitsubishi
Heavy Industries MU–2B Series
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM);
Reopening of the comment period.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to revise
an earlier proposed airworthiness
directive (AD) that applies to all
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries MU–2B
series airplanes. The earlier NPRM
would have required you to do the
following: Remove and visually inspect
the wing attach barrel nuts, bolts, and
retainers for cracks, corrosion, and
fractures; replace any cracked, corroded,
or fractured parts; inspect reusable wing
attach barrel nuts and bolts for
deformation and irregularities in the
threads; replace any deformed or
irregular parts; and install new or
reusable parts and torque to the correct
value. The earlier NPRM resulted from
a recent safety evaluation that used a
data-driven approach to evaluate the
design, operation, and maintenance of
the MU–2B series airplanes in order to
determine their safety and define what
steps, if any, are necessary for their safe
operation. This proposed AD would
retain the actions from the earlier
NPRM, add airplanes to the
applicability, revise the serial numbers
of the affected airplanes, and update the
manufacturer’s contact information.
This proposed AD results from the
manufacturer revising the service
information to include two additional
airplane models. Since these actions
impose an additional burden over that
proposed in the NPRM, we are
reopening the comment period to allow
E:\FR\FM\24APP1.SGM
24APP1
20916
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 78 / Monday, April 24, 2006 / Proposed Rules
the public the chance to comment on
these additional actions.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by May 25, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following
addresses to comment on this proposed
AD:
• DOT Docket Web site: Go to
https://dms.dot.gov and follow the
instructions for sending your comments
electronically.
• Government-wide rulemaking Web
site: Go to https://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: (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.
For service information identified in
this proposed AD, contact Mitsubishi
Heavy Industries America, Inc., 4951
Airport Parkway, Suite 800, Addison,
Texas 95001; telephone: (972) 934–
5480; fax: (972) 934–5488, or Turbine
Aircraft Services, Inc., 4550 Jimmy
Doolittle Drive, Addison, Texas 75001;
telephone: (972) 248–3108; facsimile:
(972) 248–3321.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Andrew McAnaul, Aerospace Engineer,
ASW–150 (c/o MIDO–43), 10100
Reunion Place, Suite 650, San Antonio,
Texas 78216; telephone: (210) 308–
3365; facsimile: (210) 308–3370.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments
regarding this proposed airworthiness
directive (AD). Send your comments to
an address listed under the ADDRESSES
section. Include the docket number,
‘‘FAA–2006–23578; Directorate
Identifier 2006–CE–01–AD’’ at the
beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the
overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of
the proposed AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date
and may amend the proposed AD in
light of those comments.
We will post all comments we
receive, without change, to https://
dms.dot.gov, including any personal
information you provide. We will also
post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact we receive
concerning this proposed AD.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:27 Apr 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
Discussion
Recent accidents and the service
history of the Mitsubishi Heavy
Industries (MHI) MU–2B series
airplanes prompted the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) to
conduct an MU–2B Safety Evaluation.
This evaluation used a data-driven
approach to evaluate the design,
operation, and maintenance of MU–2B
series airplanes in order to determine
their safety and define what steps, if
any, are necessary for their safe
operation.
The safety evaluation provided an indepth review and analysis of MU–2B
incidents, accidents, safety data, pilot
training requirements, engine reliability,
and commercial operations. In
conducting this evaluation, the team
employed new analysis tools that
provided a much more detailed root
cause analysis of the MU–2B problems
than was previously possible.
Part of that evaluation was to identify
unsafe conditions that exist or could
develop on the affected type design
airplanes. One of these conditions is the
discovery of the right wing upper
forward and lower forward barrel nuts
found cracked during routine
maintenance on one of the affected
airplanes. The manufacturer conducted
additional investigations of the wing
attach barrel nuts on other affected
airplanes. The result of this
investigation revealed no other cracked
barrel nuts. However, it was discovered
that several airplanes had over-torqued
barrel nuts, which could result in
cracking.
This condition, if not detected and
corrected, could result in failure of the
wing barrel nuts and/or associated wing
attachment hardware. This failure could
lead to in-flight separation of the outer
wing from the center wing section and
result in loss of controlled flight.
We issued a proposal to amend part
39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations
(14 CFR part 39) to include an AD that
would apply to all MHI MU–2B series
airplanes. This proposal was published
in the Federal Register as a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on
January 25, 2006 (71 FR 4072). The
NPRM proposed to require you to do the
following:
• Remove and visually inspect the
wing attach barrel nuts, bolts, and
retainers for cracks, corrosion, and
fractures;
• Replace any cracked, corroded, or
fractured wing attach barrel nuts, bolts,
and retainers with new parts;
• Inspect reusable barrel nuts and
bolts for deformation and irregularities
in the threads;
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• Replace any deformed or irregular
wing attach barrel nuts or bolts with
new parts; and
• Install new or reusable parts and
torque to the correct value.
Comments
The FAA encouraged interested
persons to participate in developing this
amendment. The following presents the
comments received on the proposal and
FAA’s response to each comment:
Comment Issue No. 1: Incorporate
Revised Service Bulletin
The manufacturer revised the MU–2
Service Bulletin referenced as FAA T.C.:
No. 103/57–004, dated August 2, 2004,
to add two airplane models to the
effectivity. The change in the model
effectivity accurately reflects the
airplanes for that service bulletin.
The manufacturer requests the revised
service bulletin, MU–2 Service Bulletin
referenced as FAA T.C.: No. 103/57–
004A, dated March 10, 2006, be
incorporated into the NPRM.
We agree with the commenter and
will incorporate the revised service
bulletin into the supplemental NPRM.
Comment Issue No. 2: Revise the
Manufacturer Contact Information
The manufacturer requests that we
revise the manufacturer contact
information from Mitsubishi Heavy
Industries in Nagoya, Japan, to
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries America,
Inc. in Addison Texas.
We agree with the commenter and
will incorporate the change into the
supplemental NPRM.
Comment Issue No. 3: Revise the Serial
Numbers of the Affected Airplanes
The manufacturer requests that we
revise the serial numbers of the affected
airplanes based on additional
information submitted for clarification.
We agree with the commenter and
will incorporate the change into the
supplemental NPRM.
Comment Issue No. 4
The manufacturer requests that we
revise the proposed requirement in the
NPRM for ‘‘replacing any bolts or barrel
nuts with deformation or irregularities
in the threads’’ to include a ‘‘or that do
not meet the minimum breakaway
torque check.’’
We agree with the commenter and
will incorporate the change into the
supplemental NPRM.
Events That Caused FAA To Issue a
Supplemental NPRM
The manufacturer revised the service
information to include two additional
airplane models.
E:\FR\FM\24APP1.SGM
24APP1
20917
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 78 / Monday, April 24, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Mitsubishi Heavy
Industries, Ltd. MU–2 Service Bulletin
referenced as JCAB T.C.: No. 241, dated
July 14, 2004, and MU–2 Service
Bulletin referenced as FAA T.C.: No.
103/57–004A, dated March 10, 2006.
These service bulletins describe
procedures for:
• Removing and inspecting the wing
attach barrel nuts and retainer for
cracks, corrosion, and fractures;
• Replacing any wing attach barrel
nuts and retainer with cracks, corrosion,
or fractures;
• Inspecting reusable wing attach
barrel nuts and bolts for deformation or
irregularities in the threads;
• Checking the minimum breakaway
torque of the wing attach barrel nuts;
• Replacing any bolts or wing attach
barrel nuts with deformation or
irregularities in the threads or that do
not meet the minimum breakaway
torque check; and
• Reinstalling the wing attach barrel
nuts and hardware to the correct torque
value.
Type certificate
A10SW ..............
A2PC .................
Foreign Airworthiness Authority
Information
The MU–2B series airplane was
initially certificated in 1965 and again
in 1976 under two separate type
certificates (TC) that consist of basically
the same type design. Japan is the State
of Design for TC No. A2PC, and the
United States is the State of Design for
TC No. A10SW. The affected models are
as follows (where models are
duplicated, specific serial numbers are
specified in the individual TCs):
Affected models
MU–2B–25, MU–2B–26, MU–2B–26A, MU–2B–35, MU–2B–36, MU–2B–36A, MU–2B–40, and MU–2B–60.
MU–2B, MU–2B–10, MU–2B–15, MU–2B–20, MU–2B–25, MU–2B–26, MU–2B–30, MU–2B–35, and MU–2B–36.
The Japan Civil Airworthiness Board
(JCAB), which is the airworthiness
authority for Japan, approved
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. MU–
2 Service Bulletin referenced as JCAB
T.C.: No. 241, dated July 14, 2004, and
MU–2 Service Bulletin referenced FAA
T.C.: No. 103/57–004A, dated March 10,
2006, to ensure the continued
airworthiness of these airplanes in
Japan.
FAA’s Determination and Requirements
of the Proposed AD
After examining the circumstances
and reviewing all available information
related to the incidents described above,
we have determined that:
• The unsafe condition referenced in
this document exists or could develop
on other Mitsubishi MU–2B series
airplanes of the same type design that
are on the U.S. registry;
• We should change the NPRM to
incorporate the concerns addressed by
the commenters and incorporate the
revised service information; and
• We should take AD action to correct
this unsafe condition.
The Supplemental NPRM
Adding airplanes to the applicability
section of the NPRM goes beyond the
scope of what was originally proposed
in the NPRM. Therefore, we are
reopening the comment period and
allowing the public the chance to
comment on these additional actions.
This proposed AD would require you
to do the following:
• Remove and visually inspect the
wing attach barrel nuts, bolts, and
retainers for cracks, corrosion, and
fractures;
• Replace any cracked, corroded, or
fractured wing attach barrel nuts, bolts,
and retainers with new parts;
• Inspect reusable wing attach barrel
nuts and bolts for deformation and
irregularities in the threads;
• Check the minimum breakaway
torque of the wing attach barrel nuts;
• Replace any deformed or irregular
wing attach barrel nuts or bolts with
new parts; and
• Install new or reusable parts and
torque to the correct value.
The FAA is committed to updating
the aviation community of expected
costs associated with the MU–2B series
airplane safety evaluation conducted in
2005. As a result of that commitment,
the accumulating expected costs of all
ADs related to the MU–2B series
airplane safety evaluation may be found
in the Final Report section at the
following Web site: https://www.faa.gov/
aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/
small_airplanes/cos/
mu2_foia_reading_library/.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD
affects 399 airplanes in the U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to do
the proposed inspection:
Labor cost
Parts cost
Total cost per
airplane
12 workhours × $80 per hour = $960 ........................................................................
N/A .............
$960
We estimate the following costs to do
any necessary replacements that would
be required based on the results of the
proposed inspection. We have no way of
Total cost on U.S. operators
$960 × 399 = $383,040
determining the number of airplanes
that may need this replacement:
Total cost per
airplane to
replace all 8
wing attach barrel nuts
cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
Labor cost
Parts cost
No additional labor cost. Any necessary replacements will be
done at the time of inspection.
$60 for each barrel nut. There are 8 barrel nuts on each airplane. Possible total cost of: $60 × 8 = $480.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:27 Apr 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\24APP1.SGM
24APP1
$480
20918
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 78 / Monday, April 24, 2006 / Proposed Rules
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 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify that the 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.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket that
contains the proposed AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information on the
Internet at https://dms.dot.gov; or in
person at the Docket Management
Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The Docket Office (telephone
(800) 647–5227) is located at the street
address stated in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.
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 Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13
by adding the following new
airworthiness directive (AD):
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.: Docket
No. FAA–2006–23578; Directorate
Identifier 2006–CE–01–AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The FAA must receive comments on
this AD action by May 25, 2006.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD affects the following
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. airplane
models and serial numbers that are
certificated in any category:
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Safety.
Model
Serial numbers
MU–2B–10 ............................................................................
MU–2B–15 ............................................................................
MU–2B–20 ............................................................................
MU–2B–25 ............................................................................
MU–2B–26 ............................................................................
MU–2B–26A ..........................................................................
MU–2B–30 ............................................................................
MU–2B–35 ............................................................................
MU–2B–36 ............................................................................
MU–2B–36A ..........................................................................
MU–2B–40 ............................................................................
MU–2B–60 ............................................................................
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from a recent safety
evaluation that used a data-driven approach
to evaluate the design, operation, and
maintenance of the MU–2B series airplanes
in order to determine their safety and define
what steps, if any, are necessary for their safe
operation. Part of that evaluation was to
101 through 120 (Except 102, 114, 115, and 118).
114, 115, and 118.
102, and 121 through 238.
239 through 318 (Except 313), and 313SA.
319 through 347 (Except 321), and 349SA.
321SA, 348SA, and 350SA through 394SA (Except 365SA).
502 through 547.
548 through 654 (Except 652), and 652SA.
501, and 655 through 696 (Except 661).
661SA, and 697SA through 730SA (Except 700SA).
365SA.
700SA.
identify unsafe conditions that exist or could
develop on the affected type design
airplanes. The actions specified in this AD
are intended to detect and correct cracks,
corrosion, fractures, and incorrect torque
values in the wing attach barrel nuts, which
could result in failure of the wing attach
barrel nuts and/or associated wing
attachment hardware. This failure could lead
to in-flight separation of the outer wing from
the center wing section and result in loss of
controlled flight.
Compliance
(e) To address this problem, you must do
the following, unless already done:
cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
Actions
Compliance
Procedures
(1) Remove each wing attach barrel nut, bolt, and
retainer and do a detailed visual inspection for
cracks, corrosion, and fractures.
Within the next 200 hours time-inservice (TIS) or 12 months after the
effective date of this AD, whichever
occurs first, unless already done.
Follow Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. MU–2
Service Bulletins referenced as JCAB T.C.: No.
241, dated July 14, 2004, and FAA T.C.: No.
103/57–004A, dated March 10, 2006, as applicable.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:27 Apr 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\24APP1.SGM
24APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 78 / Monday, April 24, 2006 / Proposed Rules
20919
Actions
Compliance
Procedures
(2) If any signs of cracks, corrosion, or fractures
are found on any wing attach barrel nut during
the inspection required in paragraph (e)(1) of this
AD, replace that wing attach barrel nut, bolt, and
retainer with new parts and install to the correct
torque value.
(3) If no signs of cracks, corrosion, or fractures are
found during the inspection required in paragraph
(e)(1) of this AD, you may reuse the wing attach
barrel nuts and bolts if they have been inspected
and are free of deformation and irregularities in
the threads and meet the minimum breakaway
torque requirement. Reinstall inspected parts to
the correct torque value. If the wing attach barrel
nuts and bolts are not free of deformation and
irregularities in the threads or do not meet the
minimum breakaway torque requirement, install
new parts to the correct torque value.
Before further flight after the inspection required in paragraph (e)(1) of
this AD, unless already done.
Follow Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. MU–2
Service Bulletins referenced as JCAB T.C.: No.
241, dated July 14, 2004, and FAA T.C.: No.
103/57–004A, dated March 10, 2006, as applicable, and the appropriate maintenance manual.
Before further flight after the inspection required in paragraph (e)(1) of
this AD, unless already done.
Follow Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. MU–2
Service Bulletins referenced as JCAB T.C.: No.
241, dated July 14, 2004, and FAA T.C.: No.
103/57–004A, dated March 10, 2006, as applicable, and the appropriate maintenance manual.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
(f) The Manager, Fort Worth Airplane
Certification Office, FAA, ATTN: Andrew
McAnaul, Aerospace Engineer, ASW–150
(c/o MIDO–43), 10100 Reunion Place, Suite
650, San Antonio, Texas 78216; telephone:
(210) 308–3365; facsimile: (210) 308–3370,
has the authority to approve alternative
methods of compliance for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19.
Federal Aviation Administration
Related Information
(g) Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. MU–
2 Service Bulletins JCAB T.C.: No. 241, dated
July 14, 2004, and FAA T.C.: No. 103/57–
004A, dated March 10, 2006, pertain to the
subject of this AD. To get copies of the
documents referenced in this AD, contact
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries America, Inc.,
4951 Airport Parkway, Suite 800, Addison,
Texas 95001; telephone: (972) 934–5480; fax:
(972) 934–5488, or Turbine Aircraft Services,
Inc., 4550 Jimmy Doolittle Drive, Addison,
Texas 75001; telephone: (972) 248–3108;
facsimile: (972) 248–3321. 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 https://dms.dot.gov. The docket
number is Docket No. FAA–2006–23578;
Directorate Identifier 2006–CE–01–AD.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April
18, 2006.
William J. Timberlake,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E6–6054 Filed 4–21–06; 8:45 am]
cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:27 Apr 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2006–24094; Directorate
Identifier 2006–CE–20–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Pilatus
Aircraft Ltd. Models PC–6, PC–6–H1,
PC–6–H2, PC–6/350, PC–6/350–H1, PC–
6/350–H2, PC–6/A, PC–6/A–H1, PC–6/
A–H2, PC–6/B–H2, PC–6/B1–H2, PC–6/
B2–H2, PC–6/B2–H4, PC–6/C–H2, and
PC–6/C1–H2 Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We propose to revise
Airworthiness Directive (AD) 68–17–03,
which applies to all Pilatus Aircraft Ltd.
PC–6 series airplanes. AD 68–17–03
currently requires you to repetitively
inspect the rudder end rib for cracks
and replace the rudder end rib with a
modified rudder end rib when you find
cracks. Installing the modified rudder
end rib terminates the repetitive
inspection requirements of AD 68–17–
03. Under a licensing agreement with
Pilatus, Fairchild Republic Company
(also identified as Fairchild Industries,
Fairchild Heli Porter, or Fairchild-Hiller
Corporation) produced Model PC–6
series airplanes (manufacturer serial
numbers 2001 through 2092) in the
United States. AD 68–17–03 was
intended to apply to all affected serial
numbers of Model PC–6 series airplanes
listed on Type Certificate Data Sheet
(TCDS) No. 7A15, including the
Fairchild-produced airplanes.
Consequently, this proposed AD would
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
clarify that all models of the PC–6
airplane on TCDS No. 7A15 (including
those models produced under the
licensing agreement by Fairchild
Republic Company) are included in the
applicability. We are proposing this AD
to detect and correct cracks in the
rudder end rib, which could result in
failure of the rudder end rib. This
failure could result in loss of directional
control.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by May 24, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following
addresses to comment on this proposed
AD:
• DOT Docket Web site: Go to
https://dms.dot.gov and follow the
instructions for sending your comments
electronically.
• Government-wide rulemaking Web
site: Go to https://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: (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.
For service information identified in
this proposed AD, contact Pilatus
Aircraft Ltd., Customer Liaison
Manager, CH–6371 Stans, Switzerland;
telephone: +41 41 619 63 19; facsimile:
+41 41 619 6224.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901
Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–
4059; facsimile: (816) 329–4090.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\24APP1.SGM
24APP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 78 (Monday, April 24, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20915-20919]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-6054]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2006-23578; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-01-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Mitsubishi Heavy Industries MU-2B
Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); Reopening of
the comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to revise an earlier proposed airworthiness
directive (AD) that applies to all Mitsubishi Heavy Industries MU-2B
series airplanes. The earlier NPRM would have required you to do the
following: Remove and visually inspect the wing attach barrel nuts,
bolts, and retainers for cracks, corrosion, and fractures; replace any
cracked, corroded, or fractured parts; inspect reusable wing attach
barrel nuts and bolts for deformation and irregularities in the
threads; replace any deformed or irregular parts; and install new or
reusable parts and torque to the correct value. The earlier NPRM
resulted from a recent safety evaluation that used a data-driven
approach to evaluate the design, operation, and maintenance of the MU-
2B series airplanes in order to determine their safety and define what
steps, if any, are necessary for their safe operation. This proposed AD
would retain the actions from the earlier NPRM, add airplanes to the
applicability, revise the serial numbers of the affected airplanes, and
update the manufacturer's contact information. This proposed AD results
from the manufacturer revising the service information to include two
additional airplane models. Since these actions impose an additional
burden over that proposed in the NPRM, we are reopening the comment
period to allow
[[Page 20916]]
the public the chance to comment on these additional actions.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 25, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to comment on this
proposed AD:
DOT Docket Web site: Go to https://dms.dot.gov and follow
the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to https://
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: (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.
For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries America, Inc., 4951 Airport Parkway, Suite
800, Addison, Texas 95001; telephone: (972) 934-5480; fax: (972) 934-
5488, or Turbine Aircraft Services, Inc., 4550 Jimmy Doolittle Drive,
Addison, Texas 75001; telephone: (972) 248-3108; facsimile: (972) 248-
3321.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew McAnaul, Aerospace Engineer,
ASW-150 (c/o MIDO-43), 10100 Reunion Place, Suite 650, San Antonio,
Texas 78216; telephone: (210) 308-3365; facsimile: (210) 308-3370.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposed airworthiness directive (AD). Send
your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include
the docket number, ``FAA-2006-23578; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-01-
AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments
on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects
of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the
closing date and may amend the proposed AD in light of those comments.
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https://
dms.dot.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will
also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive concerning this proposed AD.
Discussion
Recent accidents and the service history of the Mitsubishi Heavy
Industries (MHI) MU-2B series airplanes prompted the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) to conduct an MU-2B Safety Evaluation. This
evaluation used a data-driven approach to evaluate the design,
operation, and maintenance of MU-2B series airplanes in order to
determine their safety and define what steps, if any, are necessary for
their safe operation.
The safety evaluation provided an in-depth review and analysis of
MU-2B incidents, accidents, safety data, pilot training requirements,
engine reliability, and commercial operations. In conducting this
evaluation, the team employed new analysis tools that provided a much
more detailed root cause analysis of the MU-2B problems than was
previously possible.
Part of that evaluation was to identify unsafe conditions that
exist or could develop on the affected type design airplanes. One of
these conditions is the discovery of the right wing upper forward and
lower forward barrel nuts found cracked during routine maintenance on
one of the affected airplanes. The manufacturer conducted additional
investigations of the wing attach barrel nuts on other affected
airplanes. The result of this investigation revealed no other cracked
barrel nuts. However, it was discovered that several airplanes had
over-torqued barrel nuts, which could result in cracking.
This condition, if not detected and corrected, could result in
failure of the wing barrel nuts and/or associated wing attachment
hardware. This failure could lead to in-flight separation of the outer
wing from the center wing section and result in loss of controlled
flight.
We issued a proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation
Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an AD that would apply to all
MHI MU-2B series airplanes. This proposal was published in the Federal
Register as a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on January 25, 2006
(71 FR 4072). The NPRM proposed to require you to do the following:
Remove and visually inspect the wing attach barrel nuts,
bolts, and retainers for cracks, corrosion, and fractures;
Replace any cracked, corroded, or fractured wing attach
barrel nuts, bolts, and retainers with new parts;
Inspect reusable barrel nuts and bolts for deformation and
irregularities in the threads;
Replace any deformed or irregular wing attach barrel nuts
or bolts with new parts; and
Install new or reusable parts and torque to the correct
value.
Comments
The FAA encouraged interested persons to participate in developing
this amendment. The following presents the comments received on the
proposal and FAA's response to each comment:
Comment Issue No. 1: Incorporate Revised Service Bulletin
The manufacturer revised the MU-2 Service Bulletin referenced as
FAA T.C.: No. 103/57-004, dated August 2, 2004, to add two airplane
models to the effectivity. The change in the model effectivity
accurately reflects the airplanes for that service bulletin.
The manufacturer requests the revised service bulletin, MU-2
Service Bulletin referenced as FAA T.C.: No. 103/57-004A, dated March
10, 2006, be incorporated into the NPRM.
We agree with the commenter and will incorporate the revised
service bulletin into the supplemental NPRM.
Comment Issue No. 2: Revise the Manufacturer Contact Information
The manufacturer requests that we revise the manufacturer contact
information from Mitsubishi Heavy Industries in Nagoya, Japan, to
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries America, Inc. in Addison Texas.
We agree with the commenter and will incorporate the change into
the supplemental NPRM.
Comment Issue No. 3: Revise the Serial Numbers of the Affected
Airplanes
The manufacturer requests that we revise the serial numbers of the
affected airplanes based on additional information submitted for
clarification.
We agree with the commenter and will incorporate the change into
the supplemental NPRM.
Comment Issue No. 4
The manufacturer requests that we revise the proposed requirement
in the NPRM for ``replacing any bolts or barrel nuts with deformation
or irregularities in the threads'' to include a ``or that do not meet
the minimum breakaway torque check.''
We agree with the commenter and will incorporate the change into
the supplemental NPRM.
Events That Caused FAA To Issue a Supplemental NPRM
The manufacturer revised the service information to include two
additional airplane models.
[[Page 20917]]
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. MU-2 Service
Bulletin referenced as JCAB T.C.: No. 241, dated July 14, 2004, and MU-
2 Service Bulletin referenced as FAA T.C.: No. 103/57-004A, dated March
10, 2006.
These service bulletins describe procedures for:
Removing and inspecting the wing attach barrel nuts and
retainer for cracks, corrosion, and fractures;
Replacing any wing attach barrel nuts and retainer with
cracks, corrosion, or fractures;
Inspecting reusable wing attach barrel nuts and bolts for
deformation or irregularities in the threads;
Checking the minimum breakaway torque of the wing attach
barrel nuts;
Replacing any bolts or wing attach barrel nuts with
deformation or irregularities in the threads or that do not meet the
minimum breakaway torque check; and
Reinstalling the wing attach barrel nuts and hardware to
the correct torque value.
Foreign Airworthiness Authority Information
The MU-2B series airplane was initially certificated in 1965 and
again in 1976 under two separate type certificates (TC) that consist of
basically the same type design. Japan is the State of Design for TC No.
A2PC, and the United States is the State of Design for TC No. A10SW.
The affected models are as follows (where models are duplicated,
specific serial numbers are specified in the individual TCs):
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type certificate Affected models
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A10SW......................... MU-2B-25, MU-2B-26, MU-2B-26A, MU-2B-35,
MU-2B-36, MU-2B-36A, MU-2B-40, and MU-
2B-60.
A2PC.......................... MU-2B, MU-2B-10, MU-2B-15, MU-2B-20, MU-
2B-25, MU-2B-26, MU-2B-30, MU-2B-35,
and MU-2B-36.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Japan Civil Airworthiness Board (JCAB), which is the
airworthiness authority for Japan, approved Mitsubishi Heavy
Industries, Ltd. MU-2 Service Bulletin referenced as JCAB T.C.: No.
241, dated July 14, 2004, and MU-2 Service Bulletin referenced FAA
T.C.: No. 103/57-004A, dated March 10, 2006, to ensure the continued
airworthiness of these airplanes in Japan.
FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD
After examining the circumstances and reviewing all available
information related to the incidents described above, we have
determined that:
The unsafe condition referenced in this document exists or
could develop on other Mitsubishi MU-2B series airplanes of the same
type design that are on the U.S. registry;
We should change the NPRM to incorporate the concerns
addressed by the commenters and incorporate the revised service
information; and
We should take AD action to correct this unsafe condition.
The Supplemental NPRM
Adding airplanes to the applicability section of the NPRM goes
beyond the scope of what was originally proposed in the NPRM.
Therefore, we are reopening the comment period and allowing the public
the chance to comment on these additional actions.
This proposed AD would require you to do the following:
Remove and visually inspect the wing attach barrel nuts,
bolts, and retainers for cracks, corrosion, and fractures;
Replace any cracked, corroded, or fractured wing attach
barrel nuts, bolts, and retainers with new parts;
Inspect reusable wing attach barrel nuts and bolts for
deformation and irregularities in the threads;
Check the minimum breakaway torque of the wing attach
barrel nuts;
Replace any deformed or irregular wing attach barrel nuts
or bolts with new parts; and
Install new or reusable parts and torque to the correct
value.
The FAA is committed to updating the aviation community of expected
costs associated with the MU-2B series airplane safety evaluation
conducted in 2005. As a result of that commitment, the accumulating
expected costs of all ADs related to the MU-2B series airplane safety
evaluation may be found in the Final Report section at the following
Web site: https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/
small_airplanes/cos/mu2_foia_reading_library/.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD affects 399 airplanes in the U.S.
registry.
We estimate the following costs to do the proposed inspection:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total cost per
Labor cost Parts cost airplane Total cost on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12 workhours x $80 per hour = N/A................. $960 $960 x 399 = $383,040
$960.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacements
that would be required based on the results of the proposed inspection.
We have no way of determining the number of airplanes that may need
this replacement:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total cost per
airplane to
Labor cost Parts cost replace all 8
wing attach
barrel nuts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No additional labor cost. Any $60 for each barrel $480
necessary replacements will nut. There are 8
be done at the time of barrel nuts on each
inspection. airplane. Possible
total cost of: $60 x
8 = $480.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 20918]]
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 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the 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.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket that contains the proposed AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information on
the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov; or in person at the Docket
Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Docket Office (telephone (800) 647-5227)
is located at the street address stated in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.
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.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec. 39.13 by
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.: Docket No. FAA-2006-23578;
Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-01-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by May 25,
2006.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD affects the following Mitsubishi Heavy Industries,
Ltd. airplane models and serial numbers that are certificated in any
category:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model Serial numbers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MU-2B-10............................... 101 through 120 (Except 102, 114, 115, and 118).
MU-2B-15............................... 114, 115, and 118.
MU-2B-20............................... 102, and 121 through 238.
MU-2B-25............................... 239 through 318 (Except 313), and 313SA.
MU-2B-26............................... 319 through 347 (Except 321), and 349SA.
MU-2B-26A.............................. 321SA, 348SA, and 350SA through 394SA (Except 365SA).
MU-2B-30............................... 502 through 547.
MU-2B-35............................... 548 through 654 (Except 652), and 652SA.
MU-2B-36............................... 501, and 655 through 696 (Except 661).
MU-2B-36A.............................. 661SA, and 697SA through 730SA (Except 700SA).
MU-2B-40............................... 365SA.
MU-2B-60............................... 700SA.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from a recent safety evaluation that used a
data-driven approach to evaluate the design, operation, and
maintenance of the MU-2B series airplanes in order to determine
their safety and define what steps, if any, are necessary for their
safe operation. Part of that evaluation was to identify unsafe
conditions that exist or could develop on the affected type design
airplanes. The actions specified in this AD are intended to detect
and correct cracks, corrosion, fractures, and incorrect torque
values in the wing attach barrel nuts, which could result in failure
of the wing attach barrel nuts and/or associated wing attachment
hardware. This failure could lead to in-flight separation of the
outer wing from the center wing section and result in loss of
controlled flight.
Compliance
(e) To address this problem, you must do the following, unless
already done:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actions Compliance Procedures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Remove each wing attach Within the next Follow Mitsubishi
barrel nut, bolt, and 200 hours time- Heavy Industries,
retainer and do a detailed in-service (TIS) Ltd. MU-2 Service
visual inspection for cracks, or 12 months Bulletins referenced
corrosion, and fractures. after the as JCAB T.C.: No.
effective date 241, dated July 14,
of this AD, 2004, and FAA T.C.:
whichever occurs No. 103/57-004A,
first, unless dated March 10,
already done. 2006, as applicable.
[[Page 20919]]
(2) If any signs of cracks, Before further Follow Mitsubishi
corrosion, or fractures are flight after the Heavy Industries,
found on any wing attach inspection Ltd. MU-2 Service
barrel nut during the required in Bulletins referenced
inspection required in paragraph (e)(1) as JCAB T.C.: No.
paragraph (e)(1) of this AD, of this AD, 241, dated July 14,
replace that wing attach unless already 2004, and FAA T.C.:
barrel nut, bolt, and done. No. 103/57-004A,
retainer with new parts and dated March 10,
install to the correct torque 2006, as applicable,
value. and the appropriate
maintenance manual.
(3) If no signs of cracks, Before further Follow Mitsubishi
corrosion, or fractures are flight after the Heavy Industries,
found during the inspection inspection Ltd. MU-2 Service
required in paragraph (e)(1) required in Bulletins referenced
of this AD, you may reuse the paragraph (e)(1) as JCAB T.C.: No.
wing attach barrel nuts and of this AD, 241, dated July 14,
bolts if they have been unless already 2004, and FAA T.C.:
inspected and are free of done. No. 103/57-004A,
deformation and dated March 10,
irregularities in the threads 2006, as applicable,
and meet the minimum and the appropriate
breakaway torque requirement. maintenance manual.
Reinstall inspected parts to
the correct torque value. If
the wing attach barrel nuts
and bolts are not free of
deformation and
irregularities in the threads
or do not meet the minimum
breakaway torque requirement,
install new parts to the
correct torque value.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(f) The Manager, Fort Worth Airplane Certification Office, FAA,
ATTN: Andrew McAnaul, Aerospace Engineer, ASW-150 (c/o MIDO-43),
10100 Reunion Place, Suite 650, San Antonio, Texas 78216; telephone:
(210) 308-3365; facsimile: (210) 308-3370, has the authority to
approve alternative methods of compliance for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
Related Information
(g) Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. MU-2 Service Bulletins
JCAB T.C.: No. 241, dated July 14, 2004, and FAA T.C.: No. 103/57-
004A, dated March 10, 2006, pertain to the subject of this AD. To
get copies of the documents referenced in this AD, contact
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries America, Inc., 4951 Airport Parkway,
Suite 800, Addison, Texas 95001; telephone: (972) 934-5480; fax:
(972) 934-5488, or Turbine Aircraft Services, Inc., 4550 Jimmy
Doolittle Drive, Addison, Texas 75001; telephone: (972) 248-3108;
facsimile: (972) 248-3321. 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 https://dms.dot.gov. The docket number is Docket No. FAA-
2006-23578; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-01-AD.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April 18, 2006.
William J. Timberlake,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E6-6054 Filed 4-21-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
