Airworthiness Directives; Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. Models PC-12 and PC-12/45 Airplanes, 35843-35845 [E6-9845]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Proposed Rules
has an illegible CAGE code or Code 15716 or
26098 with an FAA approved airworthy
slider without a CAGE code or with a legible
CAGE code other than 15716 or 26098. Any
T/R slider removed from service based on the
requirements of this paragraph is not eligible
for installation on any helicopter.
(iv) Replacing the T/R slider with an FAA
approved airworthy T/R slider without a
CAGE code or with a legible CAGE code
other than 15716 or 26098, constitutes
terminating action for the requirements of
this AD.
(b) To request a different method of
compliance or a different compliance time
for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR
39.19. Contact the Manager, Denver Aircraft
Certification Office (ANM–100D), ATTN:
Kreg Voorhies, Aerospace Engineer, 26805 E.
68th Ave., Room 214, Denver, Colorado
80249, telephone (303) 342–1092, fax (303)
342–1088, for information about previously
approved alternative methods of compliance.
Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on June 15,
2006.
S. Frances Cox,
Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 06–5600 Filed 6–21–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 2004–SW–16–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; MD
Helicopters, Inc., Model 600N
Helicopters
Federal Aviation
Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.
AGENCY:
The FAA withdraws a notice
of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
proposing a new Airworthiness
Directive (AD) for MD Helicopters, Inc.
(MDHI) Model 600N helicopters. The
NPRM proposed adding six more
inspection holes in the aft fuselage skin
panels and inspecting the upper and
lower tailboom attachment fittings, the
upper longerons, and the angles and
nutplates for cracks. Also, the NPRM
proposed a terminating action of
modifying the fuselage aft section to
strengthen the tailboom attachments
and longerons. Since issuing the NPRM,
we have received a report of an in-flight
separation of the tailboom in the
inspection area. Based on that accident
and due to the critical unsafe condition,
we issued a final rule; request for
comments that addressed the actions
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:02 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
proposed in the NPRM. Accordingly, we
withdraw the proposed AD.
ADDRESSES: This information may be
examined at the FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region,
2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort
Worth, Texas.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jon
Mowery, Aviation Safety Engineer,
FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, Airframe Branch, 3960
Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, California
90712, telephone (562) 627–5322, fax
(562) 627–5210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
A proposal to amend 14 CFR part 39
by superseding AD 2001–24–51, Docket
2001–SW–57–AD, Amendment 39–
12706 (67 FR 17934, April 12, 2002), for
the MDHI Model 600N helicopters was
published in the Federal Register on
February 10, 2005 (70 FR 7063). In
addition to retaining various
requirements of AD 2001–24–51, the
action proposed installing six more
inspection holes in the aft fuselage skin
panels and inspecting the upper and
lower tailboom attachment fittings, the
upper longerons, and the angles and
nutplates for cracks. Also, the action
proposed a terminating action of
modifying the fuselage aft section to
strengthen the tailboom attachments
and longerons. That actions was
prompted by analysis that shows that
certain tailboom attachments and
longerons may develop cracks. The
proposed actions were intended to
prevent failure of a tailboom
attachment, loss of the tailboom, and
subsequent loss of control of the
helicopter.
Since issuing the NPRM, we have
received an additional report of an inflight separation of the tailboom in the
inspection area. After reviewing the
data, we issued a final rule; request for
comments (AD 2006–08–12, 71 FR
24808, April 27, 2006) to correct a
critical unsafe condition. That AD,
2006–08–12, requires the necessary
actions proposed in the NPRM as well
as other actions necessary to correct the
unsafe condition.
FAA’s Conclusion
Since we issued AD 2006–08–12,
which includes the necessary actions
that were previously proposed, we are
withdrawing the NPRM.
Withdrawal of the NPRM does not
preclude the FAA from issuing another
notice in the future nor does it commit
the agency to any course of action in the
future.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35843
Regulatory Impact
Since this action only withdraws an
NPRM, it is neither a proposed nor a
final rule and therefore is not covered
under Executive Order 12866, the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, or DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44
FR 11034, February 26, 1979.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Safety.
The Withdrawal
Accordingly, we withdraw the NPRM,
Docket No. 2004–SW–16–AD, published
in the Federal Register on February 10,
2005, 70 FR 7063, FR Doc. 05–2608,
filed February 9, 2005.
Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on June 9,
2006.
Mark R. Schilling,
Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E6–9846 Filed 6–21–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2006–24954; Directorate
Identifier 2006–CE–30–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Pilatus
Aircraft Ltd. Models PC–12 and PC–12/
45 Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
AGENCY:
Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
ACTION:
SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This proposed
AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI)
issued by an airworthiness authority of
another country to identify and correct
an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The proposed AD would
require actions that are intended to
address an unsafe condition described
in the MCAI.
We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by July 24, 2006.
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\22JNP1.SGM
22JNP1
35844
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Proposed Rules
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.
• 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
the proposed AD, contact the Pilatus
Aircraft Ltd., Customer Support
Manager, CH–6371 STANS,
Switzerland; telephone: +41 41 619
6208; facsimile: +41 41 619 7311; email: SupportPC12@pilatusaircraft.com.
ADDRESSES:
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:
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
Streamlined Issuance of AD
The FAA is implementing a new
process for streamlining the issuance of
ADs related to MCAI. We are
prototyping this process and specifically
request your comments on its use. You
can find more information in FAA draft
Order 8040.2, ‘‘Airworthiness Directive
Process for Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information’’ which is
currently open for comments at https://
www.faa.gov/aircraft/draft_docs. This
streamlined process will allow us to
adopt MCAI safety requirements in a
more efficient manner and will reduce
safety risks to the public.
This process continues to follow all
existing AD issuance processes to meet
legal, economic, Administrative
Procedure Act, and Federal Register
requirements. We also continue to
follow our technical decision-making
processes in all aspects to meet our
responsibilities to determine and correct
unsafe conditions on U.S.-certificated
products.
This proposed AD references the
MCAI and related service information
that we considered in forming the
engineering basis to correct the unsafe
condition. The proposed AD contains
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:29 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
text copied from the MCAI and for this
reason might not follow our plain
language principles.
The comment period for this
proposed AD is open for 30 days to
allow time for comment on both the
process and the AD content. In the
future, ADs using this process will have
a 15-day comment period. The comment
period is reduced because the
airworthiness authority and
manufacturer have already published
the documents on which we based our
decision, making a longer comment
period unnecessary.
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
data, views, or arguments regarding this
proposed AD. Send your comments to
an address listed under the ADDRESSES
section. Include the docket number,
‘‘FAA–2006–24954; Directorate
Identifier 2006–CE–30–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 are also inviting
comments, views, or arguments on the
new MCAI process. 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
The Federal Office for Civil Aviation
(FOCA), which is the airworthiness
authority for Switzerland, has issued
FOCA AD HB–2006–223, effective date
April 20, 2006 (referred to after this as
‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe
condition for the specified products.
The MCAI states that the aircraft
manufacturer has identified drill
damage on some Frame 21 (FR21) lug
fittings on the production line and
during a number of midlife wing lug
inspections. It is thought that the
damage found on the FR21 lug fittings
occurred during assembly of the
airplane. Depending on the size and
location of the possible damage, if not
corrected, the fatigue life of the wing
attachment lugs on FR21 may be
affected. The MCAI requires a one-time
inspection of the FR21 adjacent to the
wing upper-attachment lugs, left and
right, and a repair if necessary. You may
obtain further information by examining
the MCAI in the docket.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Relevant Service Information
Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. issued Service
Bulletin No. 53–004, dated February 10,
2006. The actions described in this
service information are intended to
correct the unsafe condition identified
in the MCAI.
FAA’s Determination and Requirements
of the Proposed AD
This product is manufactured outside
the United States and is type certificated
for operation in the United States under
the provisions of section 21.29 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR
21.29) and the applicable bilateral
agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral
airworthiness agreement, the State of
Design’s airworthiness authority has
notified us of the unsafe condition
described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We have
examined the airworthiness authority’s
findings, evaluated all pertinent
information, and determined an unsafe
condition exists and is likely to exist or
develop on all products of this type
design. We are issuing this proposed AD
to correct the unsafe condition.
Differences Between the Proposed AD
and the MCAI or Service Information
We have reviewed the MCAI and
related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But
we might have found it necessary to use
different words from those in the MCAI
to ensure the AD is clear for U.S.
operators and is enforceable in a U.S.
court of law. In making these changes,
we do not intend to differ substantively
from the information provided in the
MCAI and related service information.
We might also have proposed
different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA
policies. Any such differences are
described in a separate paragraph of the
proposed AD. These proposed
requirements, if ultimately adopted, will
take precedence over the actions copied
from the MCAI.
Costs of Compliance
Based on the service information, we
estimate that this proposed AD would
affect about 394 products of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it would
take about 5 work-hours per product to
do the action and that the average labor
rate is $80 per work-hour. Where the
service information lists required parts
costs that are covered under warranty,
we have assumed that there will be no
charge for these costs. As we do not
control warranty coverage for affected
parties, some parties may incur costs
higher than estimated here. Based on
these figures, we estimate the cost of the
E:\FR\FM\22JNP1.SGM
22JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 120 / Thursday, June 22, 2006 / Proposed Rules
proposed AD on U.S. operators to be
$157,600, or $400 per product.
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code
specifies 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 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.
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:29 Jun 21, 2006
Jkt 208001
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 AD:
Pilatus Aircraft Ltd.: FAA–2006–24954;
Directorate Identifier 2006–CE–30–AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments on this
proposed airworthiness directive (AD) by
July 24, 2006.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Reason
(d) The mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) states that
the aircraft manufacturer has identified drill
damage on some Frame 21 (FR21) lug fittings
on the production line and during a number
of midlife wing lug inspections. It is thought
that the damage found on the FR21 lug
fittings occurred during assembly of the
airplane. Depending on the size and location
of the possible damage, if not corrected, the
fatigue life of the wing attachment lugs on
FR21 may be affected. The MCAI requires a
one-time inspection of the FR21 adjacent to
the wing upper-attachment lugs, left and
right, and a repair if necessary.
Actions and Compliance
(e) Unless already done, do the following
except as stated in paragraph (f) below.
(1) Within the next 100 hours time-inservice (TIS) after the effective date of this
AD, perform an inspection of FR21 in the
area of the outer sidewall frame attachment
lug forward and aft side faces, left and right,
to determine if there is any damage that may
have been made with a drill. Follow Pilatus
Aircraft Ltd. Service Bulletin No. 53–004,
dated February 10, 2006.
(2) Within the next 100 hours TIS after the
effective date of this AD, perform an
inspection of FR21 in the area of the top
surface of the wing upper-attachment lugs,
left and right, to determine if there is any
damage that may have been made with a
drill. Follow Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. Service
Frm 00010
Bulletin No. 53–004, dated February 10,
2006.
(3) If during the inspection required by
paragraph (e)(1) of this AD any damage less
than 0.1 mm (0.0040 inch) on any FR21 is
found, prior to further flight, repair the
damaged FR21 in accordance with Pilatus
Aircraft Ltd. Service Bulletin No. 53–004,
dated February 10, 2006.
(4) If during the inspection required in
paragraph (e)(1) of this AD any damage equal
to or greater than 0.1 mm (0.0040 inch) on
any FR21 is found, prior to further flight
contact Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. for an FAAapproved repair solution.
(5) If during the inspection required by
paragraph (e)(2) of this AD any damage less
than 1 mm (0.040 inch) depth on any FR21
wing attachment lug top surface is found,
prior to further flight, repair the damaged
FR21 in accordance with Pilatus Aircraft Ltd.
Service Bulletin No. 53–004, dated February
10, 2006.
(6) If during the inspection required by
paragraph (e)(2) of this AD any damage equal
to or greater than 1 mm (0.040 inch) depth
on any FR21 wing attachment lug top surface
is found, prior to further flight contact Pilatus
Aircraft Ltd. for an FAA-approved repair
solution.
FAA AD Differences
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Models PC–12 and
PC–12/45 airplanes; manufacturer serial
numbers 101 through 617 inclusive,
certificated in any U.S. category.
PO 00000
35845
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(f) None.
Other FAA AD Provisions
(g) The following provisions also apply to
this AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Staff,
FAA, ATTN: Doug Rudolph, Aerospace
Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate,
901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone: (816) 329–4059; facsimile:
(816) 329–4090, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2) Return to Airworthiness: When
complying with this AD, perform FAAapproved corrective actions before returning
the product to an airworthy condition.
(3) Reporting Requirements: For any
reporting requirement in this AD, under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act,
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
has approved the information collection
requirements and has assigned OMB Control
Number 2120–0056.
Related Information
(h) This AD is related to Federal Office for
Civil Aviation AD HB–2006–223, effective
date April 20, 2006, which references Pilatus
Aircraft Ltd. Service Bulletin No. 53–004,
dated February 10, 2006.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on June
12, 2006.
James E. Jackson,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E6–9845 Filed 6–21–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
E:\FR\FM\22JNP1.SGM
22JNP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 120 (Thursday, June 22, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35843-35845]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-9845]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2006-24954; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-30-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. Models PC-12 and
PC-12/45 Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) issued by an airworthiness
authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. The proposed AD would require actions
that are intended to address an unsafe condition described in the MCAI.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 24, 2006.
[[Page 35844]]
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.
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 the proposed AD, contact the
Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., Customer Support Manager, CH-6371 STANS,
Switzerland; telephone: +41 41 619 6208; facsimile: +41 41 619 7311; e-
mail: SupportPC12@pilatus-aircraft.com.
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:
Streamlined Issuance of AD
The FAA is implementing a new process for streamlining the issuance
of ADs related to MCAI. We are prototyping this process and
specifically request your comments on its use. You can find more
information in FAA draft Order 8040.2, ``Airworthiness Directive
Process for Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information'' which is
currently open for comments at https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/draft_docs.
This streamlined process will allow us to adopt MCAI safety
requirements in a more efficient manner and will reduce safety risks to
the public.
This process continues to follow all existing AD issuance processes
to meet legal, economic, Administrative Procedure Act, and Federal
Register requirements. We also continue to follow our technical
decision-making processes in all aspects to meet our responsibilities
to determine and correct unsafe conditions on U.S.-certificated
products.
This proposed AD references the MCAI and related service
information that we considered in forming the engineering basis to
correct the unsafe condition. The proposed AD contains text copied from
the MCAI and for this reason might not follow our plain language
principles.
The comment period for this proposed AD is open for 30 days to
allow time for comment on both the process and the AD content. In the
future, ADs using this process will have a 15-day comment period. The
comment period is reduced because the airworthiness authority and
manufacturer have already published the documents on which we based our
decision, making a longer comment period unnecessary.
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written data, views, or arguments
regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number, ``FAA-2006-
24954; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-30-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 are
also inviting comments, views, or arguments on the new MCAI process. 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
The Federal Office for Civil Aviation (FOCA), which is the
airworthiness authority for Switzerland, has issued FOCA AD HB-2006-
223, effective date April 20, 2006 (referred to after this as ``the
MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The
MCAI states that the aircraft manufacturer has identified drill damage
on some Frame 21 (FR21) lug fittings on the production line and during
a number of midlife wing lug inspections. It is thought that the damage
found on the FR21 lug fittings occurred during assembly of the
airplane. Depending on the size and location of the possible damage, if
not corrected, the fatigue life of the wing attachment lugs on FR21 may
be affected. The MCAI requires a one-time inspection of the FR21
adjacent to the wing upper-attachment lugs, left and right, and a
repair if necessary. You may obtain further information by examining
the MCAI in the docket.
Relevant Service Information
Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. issued Service Bulletin No. 53-004, dated
February 10, 2006. The actions described in this service information
are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.
FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD
This product is manufactured outside the United States and is type
certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of
section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and
the applicable bilateral agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral
airworthiness agreement, the State of Design's airworthiness authority
has notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. We have examined the
airworthiness authority's findings, evaluated all pertinent
information, and determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to
exist or develop on all products of this type design. We are issuing
this proposed AD to correct the unsafe condition.
Differences Between the Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service Information
We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable in a U.S. court of
law. In making these changes, we do not intend to differ substantively
from the information provided in the MCAI and related service
information.
We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
described in a separate paragraph of the proposed AD. These proposed
requirements, if ultimately adopted, will take precedence over the
actions copied from the MCAI.
Costs of Compliance
Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 394 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 5 work-hours per product to do the action and that
the average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Where the service
information lists required parts costs that are covered under warranty,
we have assumed that there will be no charge for these costs. As we do
not control warranty coverage for affected parties, some parties may
incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these figures, we
estimate the cost of the
[[Page 35845]]
proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $157,600, or $400 per product.
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies 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 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 FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new AD:
Pilatus Aircraft Ltd.: FAA-2006-24954; Directorate Identifier 2006-
CE-30-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments on this proposed airworthiness
directive (AD) by July 24, 2006.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Models PC-12 and PC-12/45 airplanes;
manufacturer serial numbers 101 through 617 inclusive, certificated
in any U.S. category.
Reason
(d) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states that the aircraft manufacturer has identified drill damage on
some Frame 21 (FR21) lug fittings on the production line and during
a number of midlife wing lug inspections. It is thought that the
damage found on the FR21 lug fittings occurred during assembly of
the airplane. Depending on the size and location of the possible
damage, if not corrected, the fatigue life of the wing attachment
lugs on FR21 may be affected. The MCAI requires a one-time
inspection of the FR21 adjacent to the wing upper-attachment lugs,
left and right, and a repair if necessary.
Actions and Compliance
(e) Unless already done, do the following except as stated in
paragraph (f) below.
(1) Within the next 100 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the
effective date of this AD, perform an inspection of FR21 in the area
of the outer sidewall frame attachment lug forward and aft side
faces, left and right, to determine if there is any damage that may
have been made with a drill. Follow Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. Service
Bulletin No. 53-004, dated February 10, 2006.
(2) Within the next 100 hours TIS after the effective date of
this AD, perform an inspection of FR21 in the area of the top
surface of the wing upper-attachment lugs, left and right, to
determine if there is any damage that may have been made with a
drill. Follow Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. Service Bulletin No. 53-004,
dated February 10, 2006.
(3) If during the inspection required by paragraph (e)(1) of
this AD any damage less than 0.1 mm (0.0040 inch) on any FR21 is
found, prior to further flight, repair the damaged FR21 in
accordance with Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. Service Bulletin No. 53-004,
dated February 10, 2006.
(4) If during the inspection required in paragraph (e)(1) of
this AD any damage equal to or greater than 0.1 mm (0.0040 inch) on
any FR21 is found, prior to further flight contact Pilatus Aircraft
Ltd. for an FAA-approved repair solution.
(5) If during the inspection required by paragraph (e)(2) of
this AD any damage less than 1 mm (0.040 inch) depth on any FR21
wing attachment lug top surface is found, prior to further flight,
repair the damaged FR21 in accordance with Pilatus Aircraft Ltd.
Service Bulletin No. 53-004, dated February 10, 2006.
(6) If during the inspection required by paragraph (e)(2) of
this AD any damage equal to or greater than 1 mm (0.040 inch) depth
on any FR21 wing attachment lug top surface is found, prior to
further flight contact Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. for an FAA-approved
repair solution.
FAA AD Differences
(f) None.
Other FAA AD Provisions
(g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Standards Staff, FAA, ATTN: Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329-4059; facsimile: (816) 329-
4090, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2) Return to Airworthiness: When complying with this AD,
perform FAA-approved corrective actions before returning the product
to an airworthy condition.
(3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.
Related Information
(h) This AD is related to Federal Office for Civil Aviation AD
HB-2006-223, effective date April 20, 2006, which references Pilatus
Aircraft Ltd. Service Bulletin No. 53-004, dated February 10, 2006.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on June 12, 2006.
James E. Jackson,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E6-9845 Filed 6-21-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
