Airworthiness Directives; Raytheon Aircraft Company Beech Models 45 (YT-34), A45 (T-34A, B-45), and D45 (T-34B) Airplanes, 43075-43083 [06-6581]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
43075
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 71, No. 146
Monday, July 31, 2006
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2006–25105; Directorate
Identifier 2006–CE–33–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Raytheon
Aircraft Company Beech Models 45
(YT–34), A45 (T–34A, B–45), and D45
(T–34B) Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS1
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We propose to supersede
Airworthiness Directive (AD) 62–24–01,
which applies to all Raytheon Aircraft
Company (Raytheon) Beech Models 45
(YT–34), A45 (T–34A, B45), and D45
(T–34B) airplanes. AD 62–24–01
currently requires you to repetitively
inspect, using the dye penetrant
method, the front and rear horizontal
stabilizer spars for cracks and replace
any cracked stabilizer. Since we issued
AD 62–24–01, we determined that using
dye penetrant inspection method may
not detect cracks before failure of the
horizontal stabilizer spars. Therefore,
we are proposing to require the surface
eddy current inspection method to
detect cracks in the horizontal stabilizer
spars. Consequently, this proposed AD
would retain the actions required in AD
62–24–01 and change the required
inspection method from dye penetrant
to surface eddy current. We are
proposing this AD to prevent failure of
the front and rear horizontal stabilizer
spars caused by fatigue cracks. This
failure could result in stabilizer
separation and loss of control of the
airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by September 29,
2006.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:10 Jul 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
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.
• Governmentwide 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 FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: T.N.
Baktha, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Wichita Aircraft Certification Office,
1801 Airport Road, Mid-Continent
Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209;
telephone: (316) 946–4155; facsimile:
(316) 946–4107.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments
regarding this proposed AD. Send your
comments to an address listed under the
ADDRESSES section. Include the docket
number, ‘‘FAA–2006–25105; Directorate
Identifier 2006–CE–33–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
Fatigue cracks found in the horizontal
stabilizer spars caused us to issue AD
62–24–01, Amendment 39–508. AD 62–
24–01 currently requires the following
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
on all Raytheon Beech Models 45 (YT–
34), A45 (T–34A, B45), and D45 (T–34B)
airplanes:
• Repetitive inspections, using the
dye penetrant method at 500-hour timein-service (TIS) intervals, of the front
and rear horizontal stabilizer spars
between the butt rib and the inboard
end for cracks; and
• Replacement of the horizontal
stabilizer if cracks are found in either
spar or the reinforcing doubler.
Investigation of a T–34 series airplane
accident where the wing separated in
flight revealed fatigue cracks in the
stabilizer spar root sections. These spar
root sections were inspected for fatigue
cracks using the dye penetrant method
(as required by AD 62–24–01) just 281
hours TIS before the fatal accident.
Since 281 hours TIS is much shorter
than the 500-hour TIS inspection
interval required by this AD, we have
determined that using dye penetrant
inspection method may not detect
cracks before failure of the horizontal
stabilizer spars. Therefore, we are
proposing to require the surface eddy
current inspection method to detect
cracks in the horizontal stabilizer spars.
This condition, if not corrected, could
result in failure of the horizontal
stabilizer spars caused by fatigue cracks,
which could result in stabilizer
separation and loss of control of the
airplane.
FAA’s Determination and Requirements
of This Proposed AD
We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all information and
determined the unsafe condition
described previously is likely to exist or
develop on other products of the same
type design. This proposed AD would
supersede AD 62–24–01 with a new AD
that would retain the actions required in
AD 62–24–01 and only change the
inspection procedure from the dye
penetrant method to the surface eddy
current method.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD
would affect 475 airplanes in the U.S.
registry.
We estimate the following costs to do
the proposed inspection:
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
43076
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 146 / Monday, July 31, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Labor cost
Parts cost
Total cost per
airplane
8 work-hours × $80 per hour = $640 .........................................
Not applicable ..........................
$640
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
$640 × 475 = $304,000.
determining the number of airplanes
that may need this replacement:
Labor cost
Parts cost
4 work-hours × $80 per hour = $320 ...............................................................................................
$3,500
Cost Difference Between This Proposed
AD and AD 62–24–01
The only difference between this
proposed AD and AD 62–24–01 is the
proposed change of inspection method.
There may be some minimal additional
cost involved in doing the proposed
eddy current inspection because of
possible equipment rentals necessary.
No additional actions are being
proposed. We have determined that this
proposed AD action does not increase
the cost impact over that already
required by AD 62–24–01.
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
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS1
Total cost on U.S.
operators
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:10 Jul 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
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 FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part
39 as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Total cost per airplane
$320 + $3,500 = $3,820.
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
removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
62–24–01, Amendment 39–508, and
adding the following new AD:
Raytheon Aircraft Company: Docket No.
FAA–2006–25105; Directorate Identifier
2006–CE–33–AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments on this
airworthiness directive (AD) action by
September 29, 2006.
Affected ADs
(b) This AD supersedes AD 62–24–01,
Amendment 39–508.
Applicability
(c) This AD affects the following airplane
models and serial numbers that are
certificated in any category:
Model
Beech 45 (YT–34) .....................
Beech A45 (T34A, B–45) ..........
Beech D45 (T–34B) ...................
Serial
numbers
All.
All.
All.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from our determination
that the surface eddy current inspection
method should be used in place of the dye
penetrant inspection method currently
required in AD 62–24–01. We are issuing this
AD to prevent failure of the front and rear
horizontal stabilizer spars caused by fatigue
cracks. This failure could result in stabilizer
separation and loss of control of the airplane.
Compliance
(e) To address this problem, you must do
the following:
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 146 / Monday, July 31, 2006 / Proposed Rules
43077
Actions
Compliance
Procedures
(1) Using the surface eddy current inspection
procedures outlined in the appendix of this
AD, inspect the front and rear horizontal stabilizer spars between the butt rib and the inboard end for cracks.
At the next repetitive inspection interval required by AD 62–24–01 or within the next 6
months after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs first. Repetitively inspect
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 500
hours time-in-service
The surface eddy current inspection procedures are contained in the appendix to this
AD.
(2) If any crack is found in either spar or the
reinforcing doubler during any inspection required in paragraph (e)(1) of this AD, replace
the stabilizer.
Before further flight after the inspection in
which the crack is found. After the replacement, continue with the repetitive inspection
requirement in paragraph (e)(1) of this AD
Not applicable.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(f) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, ATTN: T.N.
Baktha, Aerospace Engineer, Wichita ACO,
1801 Airport Road, Mid-Continent Airport,
Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone: (316) 946–
4155; facsimile: (316) 946–4107, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19.
(g) AMOCs approved for AD 62–24–01 are
approved for this AD.
front and rear spar assemblies of Raytheon
Aircraft Company Beech Models 45 (YT–34),
A45 (T–34A, B–45), and D45 (T–34B)
airplane stabilizers outside of the steel
bushings in the attach holes.
specifications: ATA specification 105, SNT–
TC–1A, or NAS–410 (MIL-std 410E).
Related Information
(h) 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–2006–25105; Directorate Identifier
2006–CE–33–AD.
Preparing the Area for Inspection
Surface Eddy Current Inspection Procedure
Note: This surface eddy current inspection
procedure is based on T–34 Spar Corporation
TSC 3506, Rev C, dated May 10, 2005. The
T–34 Spar Corporation is allowing the use of
this procedure to be included in this
Airworthiness Directive. Alternative methods
of compliance procedures will be allowed, if
approved by the Wichita Aircraft
Certification Office and requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS1
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:10 Jul 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
Thoroughly clean area to be inspected with
solvent (acetone or equivalent) as required
until no signs of dirt, grime, or oil remain on
the front and rear spars from the closeout
former inboard on the forward and aft
surfaces of the spars.
Surfaces to be inspected should be smooth
and corrosion-free. Any loss of thickness due
to corrosion below material thickness
tolerance is cause for rejection of the
structure. An ultrasonic tester may be used
to determine if material thickness has been
compromised.
Typical Set-up Parameters:
Frequency ¥350 KHz, Gain Vertical ¥75
dB, Horizontal ¥69 dB, Drive-Mid, Filters-Lo
Pass-30, Hi Pass-0, Lift off-Horizontal to the
left, adjust as required. The most reliable
indication (minimum of 11⁄2 to 2 graticules)
of the smallest observable flaw in the coupon
(see attach Figures) occurs from the notch
extending 0.025″ past the edge of the nominal
fastener head (total notch length of 0.100″
from the edge of the nominal hole). Install
appropriate aluminum guide pin into
bushing such that the edge of the guide pin
is flush with the edge of the bushing. Using
the pin (see the attached Figures) as a guide,
circle the area surrounding the steel bushing
with the probe and adjacent area
(approximately 1⁄4″) to inspect for cracks.
Inspect forward and aft surfaces surrounding
bushings of each spar.
Note: T–34 Spar Corporation, 2800 Airport
Road, Hanger A, Ada, Oklahoma, 74820 is a
source for these coupons and pin.
Equipment Requirements
Accept/Reject Criteria
Nortec Stavely 2000D Eddy Current Tester
or equivalent.
Probe: 50–500 KHz, shielded, absolute,
0.071″ diameter (0.090 max. diameter), right
angle, pencil style, surface probe, 5″ long, 1⁄2″
drop or equivalent. Use 0.025″ notch (beyond
head) for calibration
Any repeatable flaw indication is cause for
rejection in accordance with the procedure.
In the event that any crack is detected,
describe the flaw in detail providing sketch
as needed and send the information to the
Wichita ACO.
Personal Requirements
Appendix to Docket No. FAA–2006–
25105
Purpose
This procedure is to be used to detect
cracks in the inner and outer spars of the
Methods
Record inspection findings in the aircraft
logbook.
Area To Be Inspected
To access the area of inspection, remove
the stabilizer from the airplane. The areas to
be inspected include the forward and aft
surfaces of the inner and outer front and rear
spars of the horizontal stabilizers in the areas
surrounding each of the attach holes.
Technicians with Eddy Current, Level II or
Level III per one of the following
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4700
Documentation Requirements
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 146 / Monday, July 31, 2006 / Proposed Rules
15:10 Jul 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
EP31JY06.001</GPH>
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS1
43078
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:10 Jul 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
43079
EP31JY06.002</GPH>
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 146 / Monday, July 31, 2006 / Proposed Rules
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 146 / Monday, July 31, 2006 / Proposed Rules
15:10 Jul 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
EP31JY06.003</GPH>
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS1
43080
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:10 Jul 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
43081
EP31JY06.004</GPH>
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 146 / Monday, July 31, 2006 / Proposed Rules
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 146 / Monday, July 31, 2006 / Proposed Rules
15:10 Jul 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
EP31JY06.005</GPH>
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS1
43082
43083
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 146 / Monday, July 31, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on July 24,
2006.
James E. Jackson,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 06–6581 Filed 7–28–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–C
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2006–25157; Directorate
Identifier 2006–CE–34–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Raytheon
Aircraft Company Models C90A, B200,
B200C, B300, and B300C Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Raytheon Aircraft Company (Raytheon)
(formerly Beech) Models C90A, B200,
B200C, B300, and B300C airplanes. This
proposed AD would require you to
inspect the flight controls for improper
assembly or damage, and if any
improperly assembled or damaged flight
controls are found, take corrective
action. This proposed AD results from a
report of inspections of several affected
airplanes with improperly assembled or
damaged flight controls. We are
proposing this AD to detect and correct
improperly assembled or damaged flight
controls, which could result in an
unsafe condition by reducing
capabilities of the flight controls and
lead to loss of control of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by September 29,
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 Raytheon
Aircraft Company, P.O. Box 85, Wichita,
Kansas 67201–0085; telephone: (800)
429–5372 or (316) 676–3140.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Chris B. Morgan, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Wichita Aircraft Certification
Office, 1801 Airport Road, Wichita,
Kansas 67209; telephone: (316) 946–
4154; facsimile: (316) 946–4107.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments
regarding this proposed AD. Send your
comments to an address listed under the
ADDRESSES section. Include the docket
number, ‘‘FAA–2006–25157; Directorate
Identifier 2006–CE–34–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
We have received a report from an
FAA Manufacturing Inspection District
Office that describes numerous
nonconformities during the manufacture
of Raytheon Models C90A, B200,
B200C, B300, and B300C airplanes.
These nonconformities affected the
flight controls and included improper
assembly and damage to the flight
controls that could lead to loss of
control of the airplane.
This condition, if not corrected, could
result in an unsafe condition by
reducing capabilities of the flight
controls.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Raytheon Aircraft
Company Mandatory Service Bulletin
Number SB 27–3761, Issued: February
2006.
The service information describes
procedures for inspecting the flight
control systems to ensure conformity
with type design and correct the unsafe
condition.
FAA’s Determination and Requirements
of the Proposed AD
We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all information and
determined the unsafe condition
described previously is likely to exist or
develop on other products of the same
type design. This proposed AD would
require you to inspect the flight controls
for improper assembly or damage, and
if any improperly assembled or
damaged flight controls are found, take
corrective action.
Differences Between This Proposed AD
and the Service Information
We are requiring all phases of the
flight control system be inspected at one
time. The service information as
presented allows some sections of the
system to go 800 hours time-in-service
before they are scheduled for
inspection. We feel this time is
excessive to allow potential safety items
and nonconformities to exist. We have
determined that the proposed
compliance time will not inadvertently
ground the affected airplanes.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD
would affect 135 airplanes in the U.S.
registry.
We estimate the following costs to do
the proposed inspection:
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS1
Labor cost
Parts cost
Total cost per
airplane
Total cost on
U.S. operators
80 work-hours × $80 per hour = $6,400 ...................................................
Not Applicable .................................
$6,400
$864,000
We have no way of determining the
number of airplanes that may need any
corrective action that would be required
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:10 Jul 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
based on the results of the proposed
inspection.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code
specifies the FAA’s authority to issue
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 146 (Monday, July 31, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43075-43083]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-6581]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 146 / Monday, July 31, 2006 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 43075]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2006-25105; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-33-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Raytheon Aircraft Company Beech Models
45 (YT-34), A45 (T-34A, B-45), and D45 (T-34B) Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 62-24-01,
which applies to all Raytheon Aircraft Company (Raytheon) Beech Models
45 (YT-34), A45 (T-34A, B45), and D45 (T-34B) airplanes. AD 62-24-01
currently requires you to repetitively inspect, using the dye penetrant
method, the front and rear horizontal stabilizer spars for cracks and
replace any cracked stabilizer. Since we issued AD 62-24-01, we
determined that using dye penetrant inspection method may not detect
cracks before failure of the horizontal stabilizer spars. Therefore, we
are proposing to require the surface eddy current inspection method to
detect cracks in the horizontal stabilizer spars. Consequently, this
proposed AD would retain the actions required in AD 62-24-01 and change
the required inspection method from dye penetrant to surface eddy
current. We are proposing this AD to prevent failure of the front and
rear horizontal stabilizer spars caused by fatigue cracks. This failure
could result in stabilizer separation and loss of control of the
airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 29,
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.
Governmentwide 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 FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: T.N. Baktha, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, 1801 Airport Road, Mid-Continent
Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone: (316) 946-4155; facsimile:
(316) 946-4107.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number, ``FAA-
2006-25105; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-33-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
Fatigue cracks found in the horizontal stabilizer spars caused us
to issue AD 62-24-01, Amendment 39-508. AD 62-24-01 currently requires
the following on all Raytheon Beech Models 45 (YT-34), A45 (T-34A,
B45), and D45 (T-34B) airplanes:
Repetitive inspections, using the dye penetrant method at
500-hour time-in-service (TIS) intervals, of the front and rear
horizontal stabilizer spars between the butt rib and the inboard end
for cracks; and
Replacement of the horizontal stabilizer if cracks are
found in either spar or the reinforcing doubler.
Investigation of a T-34 series airplane accident where the wing
separated in flight revealed fatigue cracks in the stabilizer spar root
sections. These spar root sections were inspected for fatigue cracks
using the dye penetrant method (as required by AD 62-24-01) just 281
hours TIS before the fatal accident.
Since 281 hours TIS is much shorter than the 500-hour TIS
inspection interval required by this AD, we have determined that using
dye penetrant inspection method may not detect cracks before failure of
the horizontal stabilizer spars. Therefore, we are proposing to require
the surface eddy current inspection method to detect cracks in the
horizontal stabilizer spars.
This condition, if not corrected, could result in failure of the
horizontal stabilizer spars caused by fatigue cracks, which could
result in stabilizer separation and loss of control of the airplane.
FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD
We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all information and
determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist
or develop on other products of the same type design. This proposed AD
would supersede AD 62-24-01 with a new AD that would retain the actions
required in AD 62-24-01 and only change the inspection procedure from
the dye penetrant method to the surface eddy current method.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 475 airplanes in the
U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to do the proposed inspection:
[[Page 43076]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total cost per
Labor cost Parts cost airplane Total cost on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8 work-hours x $80 per hour = Not applicable...... $640 $640 x 475 = $304,000.
$640.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Labor cost Parts cost Total cost per airplane
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 work-hours x $80 per hour = $320.......... $3,500 $320 + $3,500 = $3,820.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost Difference Between This Proposed AD and AD 62-24-01
The only difference between this proposed AD and AD 62-24-01 is the
proposed change of inspection method. There may be some minimal
additional cost involved in doing the proposed eddy current inspection
because of possible equipment rentals necessary. No additional actions
are being proposed. We have determined that this proposed AD action
does not increase the cost impact over that already required by AD 62-
24-01.
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 FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive
(AD) 62-24-01, Amendment 39-508, and adding the following new AD:
Raytheon Aircraft Company: Docket No. FAA-2006-25105; Directorate
Identifier 2006-CE-33-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) action by September 29, 2006.
Affected ADs
(b) This AD supersedes AD 62-24-01, Amendment 39-508.
Applicability
(c) This AD affects the following airplane models and serial
numbers that are certificated in any category:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model Serial numbers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beech 45 (YT-34).......................... All.
Beech A45 (T34A, B-45).................... All.
Beech D45 (T-34B)......................... All.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from our determination that the surface eddy
current inspection method should be used in place of the dye
penetrant inspection method currently required in AD 62-24-01. We
are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the front and rear
horizontal stabilizer spars caused by fatigue cracks. This failure
could result in stabilizer separation and loss of control of the
airplane.
Compliance
(e) To address this problem, you must do the following:
[[Page 43077]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actions Compliance Procedures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Using the surface eddy At the next The surface eddy
current inspection repetitive current inspection
procedures outlined in the inspection interval procedures are
appendix of this AD, required by AD 62- contained in the
inspect the front and rear 24-01 or within the appendix to this
horizontal stabilizer spars next 6 months after AD.
between the butt rib and the effective date
the inboard end for cracks. of this AD,
whichever occurs
first. Repetitively
inspect thereafter
at intervals not to
exceed 500 hours
time-in-service
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) If any crack is found in Before further Not applicable.
either spar or the flight after the
reinforcing doubler during inspection in which
any inspection required in the crack is found.
paragraph (e)(1) of this After the
AD, replace the stabilizer. replacement,
continue with the
repetitive
inspection
requirement in
paragraph (e)(1) of
this AD
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(f) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, ATTN: T.N. Baktha, Aerospace Engineer, Wichita ACO, 1801
Airport Road, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209;
telephone: (316) 946-4155; facsimile: (316) 946-4107, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(g) AMOCs approved for AD 62-24-01 are approved for this AD.
Related Information
(h) 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-2006-25105;
Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-33-AD.
Appendix to Docket No. FAA-2006-25105
Surface Eddy Current Inspection Procedure
Note: This surface eddy current inspection procedure is based on
T-34 Spar Corporation TSC 3506, Rev C, dated May 10, 2005. The T-34
Spar Corporation is allowing the use of this procedure to be
included in this Airworthiness Directive. Alternative methods of
compliance procedures will be allowed, if approved by the Wichita
Aircraft Certification Office and requested using the procedures
found in 14 CFR 39.19.
Purpose
This procedure is to be used to detect cracks in the inner and
outer spars of the front and rear spar assemblies of Raytheon
Aircraft Company Beech Models 45 (YT-34), A45 (T-34A, B-45), and D45
(T-34B) airplane stabilizers outside of the steel bushings in the
attach holes.
Area To Be Inspected
To access the area of inspection, remove the stabilizer from the
airplane. The areas to be inspected include the forward and aft
surfaces of the inner and outer front and rear spars of the
horizontal stabilizers in the areas surrounding each of the attach
holes.
Preparing the Area for Inspection
Thoroughly clean area to be inspected with solvent (acetone or
equivalent) as required until no signs of dirt, grime, or oil remain
on the front and rear spars from the closeout former inboard on the
forward and aft surfaces of the spars.
Surfaces to be inspected should be smooth and corrosion-free.
Any loss of thickness due to corrosion below material thickness
tolerance is cause for rejection of the structure. An ultrasonic
tester may be used to determine if material thickness has been
compromised.
Equipment Requirements
Nortec Stavely 2000D Eddy Current Tester or equivalent.
Probe: 50-500 KHz, shielded, absolute, 0.071'' diameter (0.090
max. diameter), right angle, pencil style, surface probe, 5'' long,
\1/2\'' drop or equivalent. Use 0.025'' notch (beyond head) for
calibration
Personal Requirements
Technicians with Eddy Current, Level II or Level III per one of
the following specifications: ATA specification 105, SNT-TC-1A, or
NAS-410 (MIL-std 410E).
Methods
Typical Set-up Parameters:
Frequency -350 KHz, Gain Vertical -75 dB, Horizontal -69 dB,
Drive-Mid, Filters-Lo Pass-30, Hi Pass-0, Lift off-Horizontal to the
left, adjust as required. The most reliable indication (minimum of
1\1/2\ to 2 graticules) of the smallest observable flaw in the
coupon (see attach Figures) occurs from the notch extending 0.025''
past the edge of the nominal fastener head (total notch length of
0.100'' from the edge of the nominal hole). Install appropriate
aluminum guide pin into bushing such that the edge of the guide pin
is flush with the edge of the bushing. Using the pin (see the
attached Figures) as a guide, circle the area surrounding the steel
bushing with the probe and adjacent area (approximately \1/4\'') to
inspect for cracks. Inspect forward and aft surfaces surrounding
bushings of each spar.
Note: T-34 Spar Corporation, 2800 Airport Road, Hanger A, Ada,
Oklahoma, 74820 is a source for these coupons and pin.
Accept/Reject Criteria
Any repeatable flaw indication is cause for rejection in
accordance with the procedure. In the event that any crack is
detected, describe the flaw in detail providing sketch as needed and
send the information to the Wichita ACO.
Documentation Requirements
Record inspection findings in the aircraft logbook.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
[[Page 43078]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP31JY06.001
[[Page 43079]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP31JY06.002
[[Page 43080]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP31JY06.003
[[Page 43081]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP31JY06.004
[[Page 43082]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP31JY06.005
[[Page 43083]]
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on July 24, 2006.
James E. Jackson,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 06-6581 Filed 7-28-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-C
