Airworthiness Directives; Mitsubishi Heavy Industries MU-2B Series Airplanes, 25117-25120 [E6-6420]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 82 / Friday, April 28, 2006 / Proposed Rules
4
3
2
1
................................................
................................................
................................................
................................................
1
1
2
4
(2) Compute the mean of the
measured energy performance (x1) for
all tests as follows:
x1 =
1 n1
∑ xi
n1 i =1
[1]
where xi is the measured energy
efficiency or consumption from test
i, and n1 is the total number of tests.
(3) Compute the standard deviation
(s1) of the measured energy performance
from the n1 tests as follows:
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
n1
∑(x − x )
i
S1 =
2
1
i =1
n1 − 1
[ 2]
(4) Compute the standard error (sx1) of
the measured energy performance from
the n1 tests as follows:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:39 Apr 27, 2006
Jkt 208001
(5)(i) For an energy efficiency
standard, compute the lower control
limit (LCL1) according to:
LCL 1= EPS − tsx 1
[4a ]
or
LCL 1= 97.5 EPS (whichever is greater)
[4b]
]
(ii) For an energy use standard,
compute the upper control limit (UCL1)
according to:
UCL 1= EPS + tsx 1
[5a ]
or
UCL 1= 1.025 EPS (whichever is less)
If the combined sample mean does not
satisfy whichever of these two
conditions is applicable, the basic
model is in noncompliance and the
testing is at an end.
(b) In the case of a design standard for
a commercial HVAC&WH product, the
Department can determine that a model
is noncompliant after the Department
has examined the underlying design
information from the manufacturer and
after the manufacturer has had the
opportunity to verify compliance with
the applicable design standard.
[FR Doc. 06–3319 Filed 4–27–06; 8:45 am]
[5b]
where EPS is the energy performance
standard and t is a statistic based on a
97.5-percent, one-sided confidence limit
and a sample size of n1.
(6)(i) Compare the sample mean to the
control limit. The basic model is in
compliance, and testing is at an end, if,
for an energy efficiency standard, the
sample mean is equal to or greater than
the lower control limit or, for an energy
consumption standard, the sample mean
is equal to or less than the upper control
limit. If, for an energy efficiency
standard, the sample mean is less than
the lower control limit or, for an energy
consumption standard, the sample mean
is greater than the upper control limit,
compliance has not been demonstrated.
Unless the manufacturer requests
manufacturer-option testing, and
provides the additional units for such
testing, the basic model is in
noncompliance and the testing is at an
end.
(ii) If the manufacturer does request
additional testing, and provides the
necessary additional units, DOE will
test each of these additional units the
same number of times as it tested each
unit when it determined compliance
had not been demonstrated. The DOE
will then compute a combined sample
mean, standard deviation and standard
error as described above in this section.
(The ‘‘combined sample’’ refers to the
units DOE initially tested plus the
additional units DOE has tested at the
manufacturer’s request.) The DOE will
determine compliance or
noncompliance from the mean and the
new lower or upper control limit of the
combined sample. If, for an energy
efficiency standard, the combined
sample mean is equal to or greater than
the new lower control limit or, for an
energy consumption standard, the
sample mean is equal to or less than the
upper control limit, the basic model is
in compliance, and testing is at an end.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
BILLING CODE 6450–01–U
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2006–23884; Directorate
Identifier 2006-CE–13–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Mitsubishi
Heavy Industries MU–2B Series
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a
new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) MU–
2B series airplanes. This proposed AD
would require you to do flight checks of
the rigging of the engine and propeller
systems. This proposed 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
the identification of unsafe conditions
that exist or could develop on the
affected type design airplanes. We are
issuing this proposed AD to detect and
correct improper adjustment of the
flight idle fuel flow setting. This
condition, if uncorrected, could result
in degraded performance and poor
handling qualities with consequent loss
of control of the airplane in certain
situations.
We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by June 15, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following
addresses to comment on this proposed
AD:
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\28APP1.SGM
28APP1
EP28AP06.005</MATH>
Number of
tests for
each unit
Sample size
n1
[3]
EP28AP06.004</MATH>
(a) The Department will determine
compliance with performance standards
for commercial HVAC and WH products
as follows:
(1) After it has determined the sample
size, the Department will measure the
energy performance for each unit in
accordance with the following table:
S1
EP28AP06.003</MATH>
§ 431.507 Enforcement for performance
standard and design standard; compliance
determination procedure.
S x1 =
EP28AP06.001</MATH> EP28AP06.002</MATH>
paragraphs (a)(5), (b), (d) and (e) of this
section, and § 431.507(a)(6)(ii).
(2) The Department will advise the
manufacturer of the method for
selecting the additional units for testing,
the date and time at which testing is to
begin, the date by which testing is
scheduled to be completed, and the
facility at which the testing will occur.
(3) The manufacturer must cease
distribution of the basic model being
tested under the provisions of this
paragraph from the time the
manufacturer elects to exercise the
option provided in this paragraph until
the Department determines that the
basic model is in compliance. The DOE
may seek civil penalties for all units
distributed during such period.
(4) If the additional testing results in
a determination of compliance, the
Department will issue a notice of
allowance to resume distribution.
7. Section 431.507 is revised to read
as follows:
25117
25118
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 82 / Friday, April 28, 2006 / Proposed Rules
• 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: 1–202–493–2251.
• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on
the plaza level of the Nassif Building,
400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Contact Mitsubishi Heavy Industries,
Ltd., 4951 Airport Parkway, Suite 800,
Addison, Texas 75001; telephone: (972)
934–5480; facsimile: (972) 934–5488 for
the service information identified in this
proposed AD.
You may examine the comments on
this proposed AD in the AD docket on
the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rao
Edupuganti, Aerospace Engineer, ASW–
150, Fort Worth ACO, 2601 Meacham
Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76193;
telephone: (817) 222–5284; facsimile:
(817) 222–5960.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments
regarding this proposal. Send your
comments to an address listed under
ADDRESSES. Include the docket number,
‘‘FAA–2006–23884; Directorate
Identifier 2006–CE–13–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 with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed
rulemaking. Using the search function
of the DOT docket Web site, anyone can
find and read the comments received
into any of our dockets, including the
name of the individual who sent the
comment (or signed the comment on
behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review the DOT’s
complete Privacy Act Statement in the
Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477–78) or you may visit
https://dms.dot.gov.
Discussion
Recent accidents and the service
history of the Mitsubishi MU–2B series
airplanes prompted FAA to conduct an
MU–2B Safety Evaluation. This
evaluation 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 to ensure their safe operation.
The safety evaluation provided an indepth review and analysis of MU–2B
accidents, incidents, 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 the
identification of unsafe conditions that
exist or could develop on the affected
Type certificate
A10SW ........................
A2PC ...........................
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed the following MHI
service information:
• Service Bulletin No. 234, dated
October 7, 1998; and
• Service Bulletin No. 097/73–001,
dated July 24, 1998.
The service information describes
procedures for doing flight checks of the
rigging of the engine and propeller
systems.
Foreign Airworthiness Authority
Information
The MU–2B series airplane was
initially certificated in 1965 and again
in 1976 under two separate type
certificates that consist of basically the
same type design. Japan is the State of
Design for Type Certificate (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 Aviation Bureau, the
airworthiness authority for Japan, issued
Japanese AD No. TCD 4890–98, dated
October 7, 1998, to ensure the continued
airworthiness of the airplanes in Japan.
FAA’s Determination and Requirements
of the Proposed AD
We are proposing this AD to address
an unsafe condition that we determined
is likely to exist or develop on other
products of this same type design. The
proposed AD would require you to do
VerDate Aug<31>2005
type design airplanes. Some operators
may be improperly adjusting the flight
idle fuel flow setting on the engines to
allow a higher than normal sink rate
when the flight idle power is selected.
The manufacturer developed engine and
propeller rigging specifications after
considerable flight testing and
evaluation. Operation outside of the
specifications may result in unsafe flight
characteristics during landing or in the
event of a stall. In particular, improper
settings may cause one or both of the
propellers to go into negative torque
sensing mode, which may result in an
unsafe flight condition.
This condition, if not corrected, could
result in degraded performance and
poor handling qualities with consequent
loss of control of the airplane in certain
situations.
16:39 Apr 27, 2006
Jkt 208001
flight checks of the rigging of the engine
and propeller systems. The proposed
AD would require you to use the service
information described previously to
perform these actions.
The Agency 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
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 397 airplanes in the U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to
accomplish the proposed initial flight
check:
E:\FR\FM\28APP1.SGM
28APP1
25119
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 82 / Friday, April 28, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Labor cost
Parts cost
Total cost per
airplane
Total cost on
U.S. operators
1 workhour × $80 = $80 ............................................................................
Not applicable ..................................
$80
$31,760
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. See the ADDRESSES
section for a location to examine the
regulatory evaluation.
Examining the Dockets
You may examine the docket that
contains the proposal, any comments
received and any final disposition on
the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov, or in
person at the DOT Docket Offices
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
The Docket Office (telephone 1–800–
647–5227) is located on the plaza level
of the Department of Transportation
Nassif Building at the street address
stated in ADDRESSES. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after
the Docket Management Facility
receives them.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the Federal Aviation Administration
proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as
follows:
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new airworthiness
directive:
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries: Docket No.
FAA–2006–23884; Directorate Identifier
2006-CE–13-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) must receive comments on this
proposed airworthiness directive (AD) action
by June 15, 2006.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD affects the following airplane
models and serial numbers that are
certificated in any category:
TABLE 1.—APPLICABILITY
Type certificate
Models
Serial Nos.
(1) 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.
MU–2B–30, MU–2B–35, and MU–2B–36 ..........................
MU–2B–25, MU–2B–26, MU–2B–26A, and MU–2B–40 ....
MU–2B–35, MU–2B–36, MU–2B–36A, and MU–2B–60 ....
008 through 312, 314 through 320, and 322 through 347.
(2) A2PC .......................
(3) A10SW ....................
(4) A10SW ....................
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from a recent safety
evaluation that used a data-driven approach
to analyze 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:39 Apr 27, 2006
Jkt 208001
501 through 651, 653 through 660, and 662 through 696.
313SA, 321SA, and 348SA through 459SA.
652SA, 661SA, and 697SA through 1569SA.
operation. Part of that evaluation was the
identification of 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 improper
adjustment of the flight idle fuel flow setting.
The above issue, if uncorrected, could result
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
in degraded performance and poor handling
qualities with consequent loss of control of
the airplane in certain situations.
Compliance
(e) To address this problem, you must do
the following:
E:\FR\FM\28APP1.SGM
28APP1
25120
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 82 / Friday, April 28, 2006 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 2.—ACTIONS/COMPLIANCE/PROCEDURES
Actions
Compliance
Procedures
Do flight checks of the rigging of the engine
and propeller systems and make any necessary corrections. Make an entry into the
aircraft logbook showing compliance with this
portion of the AD in accordance with section
43.9 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 43.9).
Check within 100 hours time-in-service (TIS)
after the effective date of this AD, and repetitively thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 hours TIS. If any corrections are
necessary, make the corrections before further flight.
For airplanes listed in TCDS A2PC: follow
MHI Service Bulletin No. 234, dated October 7, 1998.
For airplanes listed in TCDS A10SW: follow
MHI Service Bulletin No. 097/73–001, dated
July 24, 1998.
(f) The flight checks required in paragraph
(e) of this AD must be done by two
individuals. One of the individuals must
hold at least a private pilot certificate as
authorized by section 43.7 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 43.7) and the
other must be one of the following
individuals:
(1) Another individual holding at least a
private pilot certificate as authorized by
section 43.7 of the Federal Aviation
Regulations (14 CFR43.7) or
(2) An authorized rated mechanic.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
Related Information
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
(i) Japan Civil Aviation Bureau
Airworthiness Directive No. TCD 4890–98,
dated October 7, 1998; and MHI Service
Bulletins No. 234, dated October 7, 1998; and
No. 097/73–001, dated July 24, 1998, also
address the subject of this AD.
(j) To get copies of the documents
referenced in this AD, contact Mitsubishi
Heavy Industries, Ltd., 4951 Airport
Parkway, Suite 800, Addison, Texas 75001;
telephone: (972) 934–5480; facsimile: (972)
934–5488. 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–2006–23884; Directorate
Identifier 2006–CE–13–AD.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April
21, 2006.
Kim Smith,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E6–6420 Filed 4–27–06; 8:45 am]
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:39 Apr 27, 2006
Jkt 208001
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2006–23883; Directorate
Identifier 2006–CE–12–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Mitsubishi
Heavy Industries MU–2B Series
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
(g) The Manager, Fort Worth ACO, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19.
(h) For information on any already
approved AMOCs or for information
pertaining to this AD, contact Rao
Edupuganti, Aerospace Engineer, ASW–150,
Fort Worth ACO, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort
Worth, Texas 76193; telephone: (817) 222–
5284; facsimile: (817) 222–5960.
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a
new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Mitsubishi Heavy Industries
(MHI) MU–2B series airplanes. This
proposed AD would require you to
incorporate power assurance charts into
the Limitations Section of the Airplane
Flight Manual (AFM), inspect the
engine torque indication system, and
recalibrate the torque pressure
transducers as required. This proposed
AD results from a recent safety
evaluation that used a data-driven
approach to analyze 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
the identification of unsafe conditions
that exist or could develop on the
affected type design airplanes. We are
issuing this proposed AD to detect and
correct torque transducers that are out of
calibration. The above issue, if
uncorrected, could result in degraded
performance and poor handling
qualities with consequent loss of control
of the airplane in certain situations.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by June 15, 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
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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: 1–202–493–2251.
• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on
the plaza level of the Nassif Building,
400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Contact Mitsubishi Heavy Industries,
Ltd., 4951 Airport Parkway, Suite 800,
Addison, Texas 75001; telephone: (972)
934–5480; facsimile: (972) 934–5488 for
the service information identified in this
proposed AD.
You may examine the comments on
this proposed AD in the AD docket on
the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rao
Edupuganti, Aerospace Engineer, ASW–
150, Fort Worth Aircraft Certification
Office, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort
Worth, Texas 76193; telephone: (817)
222–5284; facsimile: (817) 222–5960.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
How do I comment on this proposed
AD? We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments
regarding this proposal. Send your
comments to an address listed under
ADDRESSES. Include the docket number,
‘‘FAA–2006–23883; Directorate
Identifier 2006–CE–12–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
E:\FR\FM\28APP1.SGM
28APP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 82 (Friday, April 28, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25117-25120]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-6420]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2006-23884; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-13-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Mitsubishi Heavy Industries MU-2B
Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for all Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) MU-2B series airplanes. This
proposed AD would require you to do flight checks of the rigging of the
engine and propeller systems. This proposed 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 the
identification of unsafe conditions that exist or could develop on the
affected type design airplanes. We are issuing this proposed AD to
detect and correct improper adjustment of the flight idle fuel flow
setting. This condition, if uncorrected, could result in degraded
performance and poor handling qualities with consequent loss of control
of the airplane in certain situations.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 15, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to comment on this
proposed AD:
[[Page 25118]]
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: 1-202-493-2251.
Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Contact Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., 4951 Airport Parkway,
Suite 800, Addison, Texas 75001; telephone: (972) 934-5480; facsimile:
(972) 934-5488 for the service information identified in this proposed
AD.
You may examine the comments on this proposed AD in the AD docket
on the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rao Edupuganti, Aerospace Engineer,
ASW-150, Fort Worth ACO, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76193;
telephone: (817) 222-5284; facsimile: (817) 222-5960.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposal. Send your comments to an address
listed under ADDRESSES. Include the docket number, ``FAA-2006-23884;
Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-13-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 with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Using the search
function of the DOT docket Web site, anyone can find and read the
comments received into any of our dockets, including the name of the
individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an
association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit https://dms.dot.gov.
Discussion
Recent accidents and the service history of the Mitsubishi MU-2B
series airplanes prompted FAA to conduct an MU-2B Safety Evaluation.
This evaluation 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 to
ensure their safe operation.
The safety evaluation provided an in-depth review and analysis of
MU-2B accidents, incidents, 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 the identification of unsafe conditions
that exist or could develop on the affected type design airplanes. Some
operators may be improperly adjusting the flight idle fuel flow setting
on the engines to allow a higher than normal sink rate when the flight
idle power is selected. The manufacturer developed engine and propeller
rigging specifications after considerable flight testing and
evaluation. Operation outside of the specifications may result in
unsafe flight characteristics during landing or in the event of a
stall. In particular, improper settings may cause one or both of the
propellers to go into negative torque sensing mode, which may result in
an unsafe flight condition.
This condition, if not corrected, could result in degraded
performance and poor handling qualities with consequent loss of control
of the airplane in certain situations.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed the following MHI service information:
Service Bulletin No. 234, dated October 7, 1998; and
Service Bulletin No. 097/73-001, dated July 24, 1998.
The service information describes procedures for doing flight
checks of the rigging of the engine and propeller systems.
Foreign Airworthiness Authority Information
The MU-2B series airplane was initially certificated in 1965 and
again in 1976 under two separate type certificates that consist of
basically the same type design. Japan is the State of Design for Type
Certificate (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 Aviation Bureau, the airworthiness authority for
Japan, issued Japanese AD No. TCD 4890-98, dated October 7, 1998, to
ensure the continued airworthiness of the airplanes in Japan.
FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD
We are proposing this AD to address an unsafe condition that we
determined is likely to exist or develop on other products of this same
type design. The proposed AD would require you to do flight checks of
the rigging of the engine and propeller systems. The proposed AD would
require you to use the service information described previously to
perform these actions.
The Agency 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 397 airplanes in the U.S.
registry.
We estimate the following costs to accomplish the proposed initial
flight check:
[[Page 25119]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total cost per Total cost on
Labor cost Parts cost airplane U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 workhour x $80 = $80....................... Not applicable................. $80 $31,760
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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. See the ADDRESSES section for a location
to examine the regulatory evaluation.
Examining the Dockets
You may examine the docket that contains the proposal, any comments
received and any final disposition on the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov, or in person at the DOT Docket Offices between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket
Office (telephone 1-800-647-5227) is located on the plaza level of the
Department of Transportation Nassif Building at the street address
stated in ADDRESSES. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after the Docket Management Facility receives them.
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 FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries: Docket No. FAA-2006-23884; Directorate
Identifier 2006-CE-13-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must receive
comments on this proposed airworthiness directive (AD) action by
June 15, 2006.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD affects the following airplane models and serial
numbers that are certificated in any category:
Table 1.--Applicability
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type certificate Models Serial Nos.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) A2PC.................... MU-2B, MU-2B-10, MU- 008 through 312, 314
2B-15, MU-2B-20, MU- through 320, and
2B-25, MU-2B-26, MU- 322 through 347.
2B-30, MU-2B-35,
and MU-2B-36.
(2) A2PC.................... MU-2B-30, MU-2B-35, 501 through 651, 653
and MU-2B-36. through 660, and
662 through 696.
(3) A10SW................... MU-2B-25, MU-2B-26, 313SA, 321SA, and
MU-2B-26A, and MU- 348SA through
2B-40. 459SA.
(4) A10SW................... MU-2B-35, MU-2B-36, 652SA, 661SA, and
MU-2B-36A, and MU- 697SA through
2B-60. 1569SA.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from a recent safety evaluation that used a
data-driven approach to analyze 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 the identification of
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 improper adjustment of the flight idle fuel flow
setting. The above issue, if uncorrected, could result in degraded
performance and poor handling qualities with consequent loss of
control of the airplane in certain situations.
Compliance
(e) To address this problem, you must do the following:
[[Page 25120]]
Table 2.--Actions/Compliance/Procedures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actions Compliance Procedures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do flight checks of the Check within 100 For airplanes listed
rigging of the engine and hours time-in- in TCDS A2PC:
propeller systems and make service (TIS) after follow MHI Service
any necessary corrections. the effective date Bulletin No. 234,
Make an entry into the of this AD, and dated October 7,
aircraft logbook showing repetitively 1998.
compliance with this thereafter at For airplanes listed
portion of the AD in intervals not to in TCDS A10SW:
accordance with section exceed 100 hours follow MHI Service
43.9 of the Federal TIS. If any Bulletin No. 097/73-
Aviation Regulations (14 corrections are 001, dated July 24,
CFR 43.9). necessary, make the 1998.
corrections before
further flight.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(f) The flight checks required in paragraph (e) of this AD must
be done by two individuals. One of the individuals must hold at
least a private pilot certificate as authorized by section 43.7 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 43.7) and the other must be
one of the following individuals:
(1) Another individual holding at least a private pilot
certificate as authorized by section 43.7 of the Federal Aviation
Regulations (14 CFR43.7) or
(2) An authorized rated mechanic.
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(g) The Manager, Fort Worth ACO, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19.
(h) For information on any already approved AMOCs or for
information pertaining to this AD, contact Rao Edupuganti, Aerospace
Engineer, ASW-150, Fort Worth ACO, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth,
Texas 76193; telephone: (817) 222-5284; facsimile: (817) 222-5960.
Related Information
(i) Japan Civil Aviation Bureau Airworthiness Directive No. TCD
4890-98, dated October 7, 1998; and MHI Service Bulletins No. 234,
dated October 7, 1998; and No. 097/73-001, dated July 24, 1998, also
address the subject of this AD.
(j) To get copies of the documents referenced in this AD,
contact Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., 4951 Airport Parkway,
Suite 800, Addison, Texas 75001; telephone: (972) 934-5480;
facsimile: (972) 934-5488. 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-
2006-23884; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-13-AD.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April 21, 2006.
Kim Smith,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E6-6420 Filed 4-27-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
