Airworthiness Directives; Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC A, B, and F Series Airplanes, 69630-69635 [E7-23860]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
69630
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 236 / Monday, December 10, 2007 / Proposed Rules
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify this proposed regulation:
1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866;
2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
3. Will not have a significant
economic impact, positive or negative,
on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation
of the estimated costs to comply with
this proposed AD and placed it in the
AD docket.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part
39 as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new AD:
Saab Aircraft AB: Docket No. FAA–2007–
0299; Directorate Identifier 2007–NM–
239–AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments by January
9, 2008.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Saab Model SAAB
2000 airplanes, all serial numbers,
certificated in any category.
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
Subject
(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of
America Code 57: Wings.
Reason
(e) The mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) states:
Subsequent to accidents involving Fuel
Tank System explosions in flight * * * and
on ground, the FAA has published Special
Federal Aviation Regulation 88 (SFAR88) in
June 2001.
In their Letters referenced 04/00/02/07/01–
L296 dated March 4th, 2002 and 04/00/02/
07/03–L024, dated February 3rd, 2003, the
JAA (Joint Aviation Authorities)
recommended the application of a similar
regulation to the National Aviation
Authorities (NAA).
Under this regulation, all holders of type
certificates for passenger transport aircraft
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:06 Dec 07, 2007
Jkt 214001
Actions and Compliance
(f) Within 48 months after the effective
date of this AD, unless already done, do
Modification 6089 and all related
investigative actions and applicable
corrective actions, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Saab Service
Bulletin 2000–57–033, dated March 2, 2000;
or Revision 01, dated March 31, 2000. Do all
applicable related investigative and
corrective actions before further flight.
Other FAA AD Provisions
(g) The following provisions also apply to
this AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs): The Manager, International
Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
Send information to ATTN: Shahram
Daneshmandi, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM–116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057–
3356; telephone (425) 227–1112; fax (425)
227–1149. Before using any approved AMOC
on any airplane to which the AMOC applies,
notify your appropriate principal inspector
(PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District
Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement
in this AD to obtain corrective actions from
a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective
actions are considered FAA-approved if they
are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required
to assure the product is airworthy before it
is returned to service.
(3) Reporting Requirements: For any
reporting requirement in this AD, under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act,
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
has approved the information collection
requirements and has assigned OMB Control
Number 2120–0056.
Related Information
(h) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness
Directive 2007–0167, dated June 15, 2007;
Saab Service Bulletin 2000–57–033, dated
March 2, 2000; and Saab Service Bulletin
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
2000–57–033, Revision 01, dated March 31,
2000; for related information.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on
November 30, 2007.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Assistant Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E7–23869 Filed 12–7–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2007–0286; Directorate
Identifier 2007–CE–086–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Taylorcraft
Aviation, LLC A, B, and F Series
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
FAA AD Differences
Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI
and/or service information as follows: No
differences.
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
§ 39.13
with either a passenger capacity of 30 or
more, or a payload capacity of 7,500 pounds
(3402 kg) or more, which have received their
certification since January 1st, 1958, are
required to conduct a design review against
explosion risks.
This Airworthiness Directive (AD), which
renders mandatory the modification [6089] of
improving the sealing of Fuel Access Doors,
is a consequence of the design review.
The unsafe condition is the potential of
ignition sources inside fuel tanks, which, in
combination with flammable fuel vapors,
could result in fuel tank explosions and
consequent loss of the airplane.
Sfmt 4702
SUMMARY: We propose to supersede
Airworthiness Directive (AD) AD 2007–
16–14, which applies to all Taylorcraft
Aviation, LLC (Taylorcraft) A, B, and F
series airplanes. AD 2007–16–14
currently requires you to do an initial
visual inspection of the left and right
wing front and aft lift struts for cracks
and corrosion and replace any cracked
strut or strut with corrosion that exceeds
certain limits. If the strut is replaced
with an original design vented strut, AD
2007–16–14 requires you to repetitively
inspect those struts thereafter. Since we
issued AD 2007–16–14, we determined
that the eddy current inspection method
does not address the unsafe condition
for the long term. We also determined
that Models FA–III and TG–6 airplanes
are not equipped with the affected
struts. Consequently, this proposed AD
would retain the actions required in AD
2007–16–14, except it removes the eddy
current inspection method (provides 24month credit if already done using this
method), adds the radiograph method as
an inspection method, changes the
Applicability section, and changes the
compliance time between the repetitive
inspections. We are issuing this
proposed AD to detect and correct
cracks and corrosion in the right and left
wing front and aft lift struts. This
condition, if not corrected, could result
in failure of the lift strut and lead to inflight separation of the wing.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by January 9, 2008.
E:\FR\FM\10DEP1.SGM
10DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 236 / Monday, December 10, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Use one of the following
addresses to comment on this proposed
AD:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: (202) 493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
For service information identified in
this proposed AD, contact Taylorcraft
Aviation, LLC, 2124 North Central
Avenue, Brownsville, Texas 78521;
telephone: 956–986–0700.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Andrew McAnaul, Aerospace Engineer,
ASW–150 (c/o MIDO–43), 10100
Reunion Place, Suite 650, San Antonio,
ADDRESSES:
Texas 78216; telephone: (210) 308–
3365; fax: (210) 308–3370.
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–2007–0286; Directorate
Identifier 2007–CE–086–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://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact we receive
concerning this proposed AD.
69631
Discussion
Reports of several corroded vented
wing lift struts from different
Taylorcraft series airplanes caused us to
issue AD 2007–16–14, Amendment 39–
15153 (72 FR 45153, August 13, 2007).
AD 2007–16–14 currently requires the
following on all Taylorcraft A, B, and F
series airplanes:
• Initial visual inspection of the left
and right wing front and aft lift struts for
cracks and corrosion;
• Replacement of any cracked strut or
strut with corrosion that exceeds certain
limits with either sealed or vented
struts; and
• Repetitive eddy current or
ultrasound inspection of any vented lift
struts.
Since issuing AD 2007–16–14, we
received several comments concerning
the AD. We reviewed all comments
submitted to the docket. The following
are significant comments that
influenced our decision to propose
superseding AD 2007–16–14 with a new
AD:
Comment
FAA discussion
We received several requests to use the radiograph inspection method
as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) for doing the repetitive strut inspection.
We approved the radiograph inspection procedure as an AMOC for the
repetitive inspections required in AD 2007–16–14, and the manufacturer has added the procedures for the radiograph inspection to their
revised service bulletin.
Based on the inspection methods used and the requirement to apply
corrosion inhibitor to the strut interior at each inspection, we believe
there is not an increased safety risk to the public by increasing the
compliance time between the repetitive inspections from 24 months
to 48 months for all airplanes. We do not have sufficient information
to determine if a different inspection interval for land and float
equipped airplanes is valid.
We have approved using these parts as an AMOC to AD 2007–16–14.
We received several requests to increase the compliance time between
repetitive inspections because the Taylorcraft service information requires the application of corrosion inhibitor to the interior of the strut
at each inspection. The commenters also requested a longer compliance time between repetitive inspections for land planes compared
to float equipped planes.
We received a request to use Univair part numbers (P/N) UA–A815
and UA–854 as a terminating action for the repetitive inspection requirement on Taylorcraft Models BC12–D/D1 and BCS12–D/D1 airplanes.
We received several requests to install used vented lift struts that have
been inspected using the criteria specified in paragraph (e)(2) of AD
2007–16–14.
In addition to the comments above,
we also received several reports of the
following:
• The eddy current inspection
method currently required in AD 2007–
We did not intend to preclude owners from installing these parts. Vented lift struts that are inspected using the ultrasound or radiograph inspection method, that meet the Acceptance/Rejection Criteria specified in Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No. 2007–001, Revision B, dated October 15, 2007, and that are treated with internal
corrosion protection are considered new struts.
16–14 may not adequately address the
unsafe condition for the long term; and
• Models FA–III (Airphibian) and
TG–6 Conversion airplanes do not have
the affected struts installed.
The following is a significant
comment that did not influence our
decision to propose superseding AD
2007–16–14 with a new AD:
FAA discussion
We received several requests to use the Maule Fabric Tester as an
AMOC for doing the repetitive strut inspection.
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
Comment
Testing of Taylorcraft strut samples with the Maule Fabric Tester
shows that both 1025 steel material, and to a greater degree 4130
steel material, resist showing a positive dent indication until a major
portion of the wall thickness is consumed. Taylorcraft used 4130
steel in a majority of their wing struts during production. We have not
received any data substantiating that Taylorcraft wing struts can still
carry required certification loads at the reduced strut wall material
thickness indicated in the testing.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:31 Dec 07, 2007
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\10DEP1.SGM
10DEP1
69632
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 236 / Monday, December 10, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Cracks and corrosion in the right and
left wing front and aft lift struts, if not
detected and corrected, could result in
failure of the wing lift strut and lead to
in-flight separation of the wing.
Relevant Service Information
We reviewed Taylorcraft Aviation,
LLC Service Bulletin (SB) No. 2007–001,
Revision B, dated October 15, 2007.
The service information describes
procedures for wing lift strut assembly
corrosion inspection and/or
replacement.
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
supersede AD 2007–16–14 with a new
AD that would do the following:
• Retain the actions of AD 2007–16–
14;
• Remove the eddy current inspection
method, but allow a 24-month credit for
those who already inspected once using
the eddy current method;
• Remove Models FA–III (Airphibian)
and TG–6 Conversion airplanes from the
Applicability section;
• Add the radiograph inspection
method;
• Increase the time interval between
the repetitive inspections;
• Allow the installation of Univair
P/Ns UA–A815 and UA–854 on
Taylorcraft Models BC12–D/D1 and
BCS12–D/D1 airplanes as a terminating
action for the repetitive inspection
requirement; and
• Allow the installation of used
vented lift struts that have been
inspected using ultrasound or
radiograph inspection methods, meet
the Acceptance/Rejection Criteria
specified in Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC
Service Bulletin No. 2007–001, Revision
B, dated October 15, 2007, and have
corrosion inhibitor applied to the
interior of the strut. These lift struts are
then subject to the repetitive 48-month
inspection thereafter.
We have determined that the Maule
Fabric Tester is not a viable AMOC to
this AD.
This proposed AD would require you
to use the service information described
previously to perform these actions.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD
would affect 3,119 airplanes in the U.S.
registry.
We estimate the following costs to do
the proposed visual inspection:
Total cost per
airplane
Labor cost
Parts cost
1 work-hour × $80 per hour = $80 ............................................................
Total cost on
U.S. operators
$80
$249,520
Not applicable ..................................
We estimate the following costs to do
the proposed repetitive ultrasound or
radiograph inspection:
Labor cost
Parts cost
4 work-hours × $80 per hour = $320 ...........................................................................
Total cost per
airplane
Not applicable ...........................................
We estimate the following costs to do
any necessary replacements that would
be required based on the results of the
proposed inspections. We have no way
of determining the number of airplanes
that may need this replacement:
Total cost per airplane to replace all 4 wing
lift struts
Labor cost
Parts cost
4 work-hours to replace all 4 struts × $80 per
hour = $320.
Sealed front lift strut: $835 per strut. 2 per airplane = $1,670.
Sealed aft lift strut: $638 per strut. 2 per airplane = $1,276.
$1,670 + $1,276 + $320 = $3,266.
Original design vented lift struts are
no longer manufactured. We have no
way of determining the cost associated
with obtaining a useable vented strut.
The estimated total cost on U.S.
operators includes the cumulative costs
associated with AD 2007–16–14 and any
actions being added in this proposed
AD.
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
Authority for This Rulemaking
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
$320
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:31 Dec 07, 2007
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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;
E:\FR\FM\10DEP1.SGM
10DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 236 / Monday, December 10, 2007 / Proposed Rules
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://www.regulations.gov;
or in person at the Docket Management
Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The Docket Office (telephone
(800) 647–5527) is located at the street
address stated in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.
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)
2007–16–14, Amendment 39–15153 (72
FR 45153, August 13, 2007), and by
adding a new AD to read as follows:
Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC: Docket No. FAA–
2007–0286; Directorate Identifier 2007–
CE–086–AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments on this
airworthiness directive (AD) action by
January 9, 2008.
Affected ADs
(b) This AD supersedes AD 2007–16–14,
Amendment 39–15153.
69633
P/N UA–A815 (for Models BC12–D/D1 and
BCS12–D/D1 only), or FAA-approved
equivalent P/N, and sealed aft lift struts,
P/N MA–A854, Univair P/N UA–854 (for
Models BC12–D/D1 and BCS12–D/D1 only),
or FAA-approved equivalent P/N, for all
struts.
Note 1: This AD applies to all Taylorcraft
models listed above, including those models
not listed in Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC
Service Bulletin No. 2007–001, Revision B,
dated October 15, 2007. If there are any other
differences between this AD and the above
service bulletin, this AD takes precedence.
Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a used
strut that has been inspected using the
ultrasound or radiograph inspection method,
meets the Acceptance/Rejection Criteria
specified in Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC
Service Bulletin No. 2007–001, Revision B,
dated October 15, 2007, and is treated with
internal corrosion protection, is considered a
new strut.
Unsafe Condition
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part
39 as follows:
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to all serial numbers
of Taylorcraft Models A, BC, BCS, BC–65,
BCS–65, BC12–65 (Army L–2H), BCS12–65,
BC12–D, BCS12–D, BC12–D1, BCS12–D1,
BC12D–85, BCS12D–85, BC12D–4–85,
BCS12D–4–85, (Army L–2G) BF, BFS, BF–60,
BFS–60, BF–65, (Army L–2K) BF 12–65,
BFS–65, BL, BLS, (Army L–2F) BL–65, BLS–
65, (Army L–2J) BL12–65, BLS12–65, 19,
F19, F21, F21A, F21B, F22, F22A, F22B, and
F22C airplanes that:
(1) Are certificated in any category; and
(2) Do not incorporate sealed wing front lift
struts, part number (P/N) MA–A815, Univair
Actions
Compliance
Procedures
(1) Visually inspect the right and left wing front
and aft lift struts, (P/N A–A815 and P/N A–
A854, or FAA-approved equivalent P/Ns),
along the entire bottom 12 inches of each
strut for cracks and corrosion.
Within the next 5 hours TIS after August 20,
2007 (the effective date of AD 2007–16–
14), unless one of the following conditions
is met:
(i) The struts have been replaced with parts
specified in paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this AD.
No further action is required on those
struts.
(ii) The struts have been replaced with parts
specified in paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this AD
and have been installed for less than 48
months. No visual inspection is required.
These parts are now subject to the repetitive inspection requirement specified in
paragraph (e)(4) of this AD.
Before further flight after the visual inspection
required in paragraph (e)(1) of this AD.
Follow Part 1 of the Instructions in Taylorcraft
Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No. 2007–
001, Revision A, dated August 1, 2007; or
Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin
No. 2007–001, Revision B, dated October
15, 2007.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Safety.
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
The Proposed Amendment
(2) If any cracks are found during the visual inspection required in paragraph (e)(1) of this
AD, replace the cracked strut with the following applicable strut:
(i) A sealed front lift strut, P/N MA–A815,
Univair P/N UA–A815 (for Models
BC12–D/D1 and BCS12–D/D1 only), or
FAA-approved equivalent P/N, a sealed
aft lift strut, P/N MA–A854, Univair P/N
UA–854 (for Models BC12–D/D1 and
BCS12–D/D1 only), or FAA-approved
equivalent P/N. Installing these lift struts
terminates the repetitive inspections required by this AD for that strut and no
further action is required.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:06 Dec 07, 2007
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(d) This AD results from our determination
that the radiograph inspection method
should be used in place of the eddy current
inspection method currently required in AD
2007–16–14. We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct corrosion or cracks in the right
and left wing front and aft lift struts, which
could result in failure of the lift strut and
lead to in-flight separation of the wing with
consequent loss of control.
Compliance
(e) To address this problem, you must do
the following, unless already done:
Following the Instructions in Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No. 2007–001,
Revision B, dated October 15, 2007.
E:\FR\FM\10DEP1.SGM
10DEP1
69634
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 236 / Monday, December 10, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Actions
Compliance
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
(ii) A new vented front lift strut, P/N A–
A815, a new vented aft lift strut, P/N A–
A854, or FAA-approved equivalent P/Ns,
that is treated with internal corrosion
protection specified in Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No. 2007–001,
Revision B, dated October 15, 2007. Installing one of these lift struts is subject
to the repetitive inspections required in
paragraph (e)(4) of this AD.
(3) If corrosion is found during the inspection
required in paragraph (e)(1) of this AD, do
an ultrasound or radiograph inspection to determine if the corrosion exceeds the Acceptance/Rejection
Criteria
specified
in
Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No.
2007–001, Revision B, dated October 15,
2007.
(4) If no corrosion or cracks are found during
the visual inspection required in paragraph
(e)(1) of this AD, or if the inspection required
in paragraph (e)(3) reveals that the corrosion
does not exceed the Acceptance/Rejection
Criteria specified in Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC
Service Bulletin No. 2007–001, Revision B,
dated October 15, 2007, repetitively inspect
thereafter using the ultrasound or radiograph
inspection method and treat with internal corrosion protection until all struts are replaced
with the sealed struts specified in paragraph
(e)(2)(i) of this AD. If any cracks are found or
corrosion is found that exceeds the Acceptance/Rejection
Criteria
specified
in
Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No.
2007–001, Revision B, dated October 15,
2007, during any of the repetitive inspections
required by this AD, take the necessary corrective actions as applicable in paragraph
(e)(5) of this AD.
(5) If, during any inspection required in paragraphs (e)(3) or (e)(4) of this AD, any cracks
are found or it is determined that the corrosion exceeds the Acceptance/Rejection Criteria specified in Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC
Service Bulletin No. 2007–001, Revision B,
dated October 15, 2007, replace the lift strut
with the applicable lift strut specified in paragraph (e)(2)(i) or (e)(2)(ii) of this AD.
(6) Do not install P/N A–A815, P/N A–A854, or
FAA-approved equivalent P/N, unless:
(i) within the last 48 months it has been inspected using the ultrasound or
radiograph method;
(ii) meets the Acceptance/Rejection Criteria; and
(iii) is treated with internal corrosion protection as specified in Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No. 2007–001,
Revision B, dated October 15, 2007.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:31 Dec 07, 2007
Jkt 214001
Procedures
Before further flight after the visual inspection
required in paragraph (e)(1) of this AD.
Follow Part 2 of the Instructions in Taylorcraft
Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No. 2007–
001, Revision B, dated October 15, 2007.
All ultrasound or radiograph inspections required by this AD must be done by one of
the following:
(i) A Level II or III inspector certified in
the applicable ultrasound or radiograph
inspection method using the guidelines
established by the American Society of
Nondestructive Testing or NAS 410
(formerly MIL–STD–410);
(ii) An inspector certified to specific FAA
or other acceptable government or industry standards, such as Air Transport
Association (ATA) Specifications 105–
Guidelines for Training and Qualifying
Personnel in Nondestructive Testing
Methods; or
(iii) An FAA Repair Station or a Testing/
Inspection Laboratory qualified to do
ultrasound or radiograph inspections.
Follow Part 2 of the Instructions in Taylorcraft
Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No. 2007–
001, Revision B, dated October 15, 2007,
using the ultrasound or radiograph inspection method.
(i) Initially inspect within the next 3 months
after August 20, 2007 (the effective date of
AD 2007–16–14) or within 48 months after
installing a lift strut specified in paragraph
(e)(2)(ii) of this AD, whichever occurs later.
(ii) Repetitively inspect thereafter at intervals
not to exceed 48 months, except as required by paragraph (e)(4)(iii) of this AD.
(iii) If the initial inspection was done using the
eddy current method as specified in AD
2007–16–14, the first ultrasound or
radiograph repetitive inspection must be
done within the next 24 months after doing
the eddy current inspection. Repetitively inspect thereafter at intervals not to exceed
48 months using the ultrasound or
radiograph inspection method.
Before further flight after the inspection required in paragraph (e)(3) or (e)(4) of this
AD.
Following the Instructions in Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No. 2007–001,
Revision B, dated October 15, 2007.
As of 5 hours TIS after the effective date of
this AD.
Not applicable.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\10DEP1.SGM
10DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 236 / Monday, December 10, 2007 / Proposed Rules
69635
Actions
Compliance
(7) As a terminating action for the repetitive inspections required by this AD, all vented lift
struts (P/Ns A–A815, A–A854, and FAA-approved equivalent P/Ns) may be replaced
with sealed lift struts (P/Ns MA–A815, UA–
A815 (for Models BC12–D/D1 and BCS12–
D/D1 only), MA–A854, UA–854 (for Models
BC12–D/D1 and BCS12–D/D1 only), or FAAapproved equivalent P/Ns).
At any time after the effective date of this AD
Not applicable.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(f) The Manager, Fort Worth Airplane
Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
Send information to ATTN: Andrew
McAnaul, Aerospace Engineer, ASW–150
(c/o MIDO–43), 10100 Reunion Place, Suite
650, San Antonio, Texas 78216; telephone:
(210) 308–3365; fax: (210) 308–3370. Before
using any approved AMOC on any airplane
to which the AMOC applies, notify your
appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the
FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO),
or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
(g) AMOCs approved for AD 2007–16–14
are approved for this AD.
products listed above. This proposed
AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI)
originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct
an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as:
the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace
Engineer, International Branch, ANM–
116, Transport Airplane Directorate,
FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057–3356; telephone
(425) 227–1112; fax (425) 227–1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Related Information
(h) To get copies of the service information
referenced in this AD, contact Taylorcraft
Aviation, LLC, 2124 North Central Avenue,
Brownsville, Texas 78521; telephone: 956–
986–0700. To view the AD docket, go to U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M–30, West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, or on
the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on
December 3, 2007.
John R. Colomy,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E7–23860 Filed 12–7–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2007–0298; Directorate
Identifier 2007–NM–238–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
Airworthiness Directives; Saab Model
SAAB SF340A and Model SAAB 340B
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:31 Dec 07, 2007
Jkt 214001
Procedures
Subsequent to accidents involving Fuel
Tank System explosions in flight * * * and
on ground, the FAA has published Special
Federal Aviation Regulation 88 (SFAR88)
* * * [which] required * * * [conducting] a
design review against explosion risks.
The unsafe condition is the potential of
ignition sources inside fuel tanks,
which, in combination with flammable
fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank
explosions and consequent loss of the
airplane. The proposed AD would
require actions that are intended to
address the unsafe condition described
in the MCAI.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by January 9, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments by
any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: (202) 493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–40, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the
Docket Operations office between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Operations
office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is in
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments about
this proposed AD. Send your comments
to an address listed under the
ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No.
FAA–2007–0298; Directorate Identifier
2007–NM–238–AD’’ at the beginning of
your comments. We specifically invite
comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy
aspects of this proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the
closing date and may amend this
proposed AD based on those comments.
We will post all comments we
receive, without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact we receive
about this proposed AD.
Discussion
The European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA), which is the Technical Agent
for the Member States of the European
Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2007–0168,
dated June 15, 2007 (referred to after
this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe
condition for the specified products.
The MCAI states:
Subsequent to accidents involving Fuel
Tank System explosions in flight * * * and
on ground, the FAA has published Special
Federal Aviation Regulation 88 (SFAR88) in
June 2001.
In their Letters referenced 04/00/02/07/01–
L296 dated March 4, 2002 and 04/00/02/07/
03–L024, dated February 3, 2003, the JAA
recommended the application of a similar
regulation to the National Aviation
Authorities (NAA).
E:\FR\FM\10DEP1.SGM
10DEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 236 (Monday, December 10, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69630-69635]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-23860]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2007-0286; Directorate Identifier 2007-CE-086-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC A, B, and F
Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) AD 2007-
16-14, which applies to all Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC (Taylorcraft) A,
B, and F series airplanes. AD 2007-16-14 currently requires you to do
an initial visual inspection of the left and right wing front and aft
lift struts for cracks and corrosion and replace any cracked strut or
strut with corrosion that exceeds certain limits. If the strut is
replaced with an original design vented strut, AD 2007-16-14 requires
you to repetitively inspect those struts thereafter. Since we issued AD
2007-16-14, we determined that the eddy current inspection method does
not address the unsafe condition for the long term. We also determined
that Models FA-III and TG-6 airplanes are not equipped with the
affected struts. Consequently, this proposed AD would retain the
actions required in AD 2007-16-14, except it removes the eddy current
inspection method (provides 24-month credit if already done using this
method), adds the radiograph method as an inspection method, changes
the Applicability section, and changes the compliance time between the
repetitive inspections. We are issuing this proposed AD to detect and
correct cracks and corrosion in the right and left wing front and aft
lift struts. This condition, if not corrected, could result in failure
of the lift strut and lead to in-flight separation of the wing.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 9, 2008.
[[Page 69631]]
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to comment on this
proposed AD:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC, 2124 North Central Avenue, Brownsville,
Texas 78521; telephone: 956-986-0700.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew McAnaul, Aerospace Engineer,
ASW-150 (c/o MIDO-43), 10100 Reunion Place, Suite 650, San Antonio,
Texas 78216; telephone: (210) 308-3365; fax: (210) 308-3370.
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-
2007-0286; Directorate Identifier 2007-CE-086-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://www.regulations.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
Reports of several corroded vented wing lift struts from different
Taylorcraft series airplanes caused us to issue AD 2007-16-14,
Amendment 39-15153 (72 FR 45153, August 13, 2007). AD 2007-16-14
currently requires the following on all Taylorcraft A, B, and F series
airplanes:
Initial visual inspection of the left and right wing front
and aft lift struts for cracks and corrosion;
Replacement of any cracked strut or strut with corrosion
that exceeds certain limits with either sealed or vented struts; and
Repetitive eddy current or ultrasound inspection of any
vented lift struts.
Since issuing AD 2007-16-14, we received several comments
concerning the AD. We reviewed all comments submitted to the docket.
The following are significant comments that influenced our decision to
propose superseding AD 2007-16-14 with a new AD:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment FAA discussion
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We received several requests to use the We approved the radiograph
radiograph inspection method as an inspection procedure as an
alternative method of compliance AMOC for the repetitive
(AMOC) for doing the repetitive strut inspections required in AD
inspection. 2007-16-14, and the
manufacturer has added the
procedures for the radiograph
inspection to their revised
service bulletin.
We received several requests to Based on the inspection methods
increase the compliance time between used and the requirement to
repetitive inspections because the apply corrosion inhibitor to
Taylorcraft service information the strut interior at each
requires the application of corrosion inspection, we believe there
inhibitor to the interior of the strut is not an increased safety
at each inspection. The commenters risk to the public by
also requested a longer compliance increasing the compliance time
time between repetitive inspections between the repetitive
for land planes compared to float inspections from 24 months to
equipped planes. 48 months for all airplanes.
We do not have sufficient
information to determine if a
different inspection interval
for land and float equipped
airplanes is valid.
We received a request to use Univair We have approved using these
part numbers (P/N) UA-A815 and UA-854 parts as an AMOC to AD 2007-16-
as a terminating action for the 14.
repetitive inspection requirement on
Taylorcraft Models BC12-D/D1 and BCS12-
D/D1 airplanes.
We received several requests to install We did not intend to preclude
used vented lift struts that have been owners from installing these
inspected using the criteria specified parts. Vented lift struts that
in paragraph (e)(2) of AD 2007-16-14. are inspected using the
ultrasound or radiograph
inspection method, that meet
the Acceptance/Rejection
Criteria specified in
Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC
Service Bulletin No. 2007-001,
Revision B, dated October 15,
2007, and that are treated
with internal corrosion
protection are considered new
struts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the comments above, we also received several reports
of the following:
The eddy current inspection method currently required in
AD 2007-16-14 may not adequately address the unsafe condition for the
long term; and
Models FA-III (Airphibian) and TG-6 Conversion airplanes
do not have the affected struts installed.
The following is a significant comment that did not influence our
decision to propose superseding AD 2007-16-14 with a new AD:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment FAA discussion
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We received several requests to use the Testing of Taylorcraft strut
Maule Fabric Tester as an AMOC for samples with the Maule Fabric
doing the repetitive strut inspection. Tester shows that both 1025
steel material, and to a
greater degree 4130 steel
material, resist showing a
positive dent indication until
a major portion of the wall
thickness is consumed.
Taylorcraft used 4130 steel in
a majority of their wing
struts during production. We
have not received any data
substantiating that
Taylorcraft wing struts can
still carry required
certification loads at the
reduced strut wall material
thickness indicated in the
testing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 69632]]
Cracks and corrosion in the right and left wing front and aft lift
struts, if not detected and corrected, could result in failure of the
wing lift strut and lead to in-flight separation of the wing.
Relevant Service Information
We reviewed Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin (SB) No.
2007-001, Revision B, dated October 15, 2007.
The service information describes procedures for wing lift strut
assembly corrosion inspection and/or replacement.
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 supersede AD 2007-16-14 with a new AD that would do the
following:
Retain the actions of AD 2007-16-14;
Remove the eddy current inspection method, but allow a 24-
month credit for those who already inspected once using the eddy
current method;
Remove Models FA-III (Airphibian) and TG-6 Conversion
airplanes from the Applicability section;
Add the radiograph inspection method;
Increase the time interval between the repetitive
inspections;
Allow the installation of Univair P/Ns UA-A815 and UA-854
on Taylorcraft Models BC12-D/D1 and BCS12-D/D1 airplanes as a
terminating action for the repetitive inspection requirement; and
Allow the installation of used vented lift struts that
have been inspected using ultrasound or radiograph inspection methods,
meet the Acceptance/Rejection Criteria specified in Taylorcraft
Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No. 2007-001, Revision B, dated October
15, 2007, and have corrosion inhibitor applied to the interior of the
strut. These lift struts are then subject to the repetitive 48-month
inspection thereafter.
We have determined that the Maule Fabric Tester is not a viable
AMOC to this AD.
This proposed AD would require you to use the service information
described previously to perform these actions.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 3,119 airplanes in
the U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to do the proposed visual
inspection:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total cost per Total cost on
Labor cost Parts cost airplane U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 work-hour x $80 per hour = $80.............. Not applicable.................. $80 $249,520
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We estimate the following costs to do the proposed repetitive
ultrasound or radiograph inspection:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total cost per
Labor cost Parts cost airplane
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 work-hours x $80 per hour = $320 Not applicable...... $320
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacements
that would be required based on the results of the proposed
inspections. We have no way of determining the number of airplanes that
may need this replacement:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total cost per
airplane to
Labor cost Parts cost replace all 4 wing
lift struts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 work-hours to replace all 4 Sealed front lift $1,670 + $1,276 +
struts x $80 per hour = $320. strut: $835 per $320 = $3,266.
strut. 2 per
airplane = $1,670.
Sealed aft lift
strut: $638 per
strut. 2 per
airplane = $1,276.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original design vented lift struts are no longer manufactured. We
have no way of determining the cost associated with obtaining a useable
vented strut.
The estimated total cost on U.S. operators includes the cumulative
costs associated with AD 2007-16-14 and any actions being added in this
proposed AD.
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;
[[Page 69633]]
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://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket
Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Docket Office (telephone (800) 647-5527)
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) 2007-16-14, Amendment 39-15153 (72 FR 45153, August 13, 2007), and
by adding a new AD to read as follows:
Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC: Docket No. FAA-2007-0286; Directorate
Identifier 2007-CE-086-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) action by January 9, 2008.
Affected ADs
(b) This AD supersedes AD 2007-16-14, Amendment 39-15153.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to all serial numbers of Taylorcraft Models
A, BC, BCS, BC-65, BCS-65, BC12-65 (Army L-2H), BCS12-65, BC12-D,
BCS12-D, BC12-D1, BCS12-D1, BC12D-85, BCS12D-85, BC12D-4-85, BCS12D-
4-85, (Army L-2G) BF, BFS, BF-60, BFS-60, BF-65, (Army L-2K) BF 12-
65, BFS-65, BL, BLS, (Army L-2F) BL-65, BLS-65, (Army L-2J) BL12-65,
BLS12-65, 19, F19, F21, F21A, F21B, F22, F22A, F22B, and F22C
airplanes that:
(1) Are certificated in any category; and
(2) Do not incorporate sealed wing front lift struts, part
number (P/N) MA-A815, Univair P/N UA-A815 (for Models BC12-D/D1 and
BCS12-D/D1 only), or FAA-approved equivalent P/N, and sealed aft
lift struts, P/N MA-A854, Univair P/N UA-854 (for Models BC12-D/D1
and BCS12-D/D1 only), or FAA-approved equivalent P/N, for all
struts.
Note 1: This AD applies to all Taylorcraft models listed above,
including those models not listed in Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC
Service Bulletin No. 2007-001, Revision B, dated October 15, 2007.
If there are any other differences between this AD and the above
service bulletin, this AD takes precedence.
Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a used strut that has been
inspected using the ultrasound or radiograph inspection method,
meets the Acceptance/Rejection Criteria specified in Taylorcraft
Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No. 2007-001, Revision B, dated
October 15, 2007, and is treated with internal corrosion protection,
is considered a new strut.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from our determination that the radiograph
inspection method should be used in place of the eddy current
inspection method currently required in AD 2007-16-14. We are
issuing this AD to detect and correct corrosion or cracks in the
right and left wing front and aft lift struts, which could result in
failure of the lift strut and lead to in-flight separation of the
wing with consequent loss of control.
Compliance
(e) To address this problem, you must do the following, unless
already done:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actions Compliance Procedures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Visually inspect the right Within the next 5 Follow Part 1 of
and left wing front and aft hours TIS after the Instructions
lift struts, (P/N A-A815 and P/ August 20, 2007 in Taylorcraft
N A-A854, or FAA-approved (the effective Aviation, LLC
equivalent P/Ns), along the date of AD 2007- Service Bulletin
entire bottom 12 inches of each 16-14), unless No. 2007-001,
strut for cracks and corrosion. one of the Revision A, dated
following August 1, 2007;
conditions is or Taylorcraft
met: Aviation, LLC
(i) The struts Service Bulletin
have been No. 2007-001,
replaced with Revision B, dated
parts specified October 15, 2007.
in paragraph
(e)(2)(i) of this
AD. No further
action is
required on those
struts.
(ii) The struts
have been
replaced with
parts specified
in paragraph
(e)(2)(ii) of
this AD and have
been installed
for less than 48
months. No visual
inspection is
required. These
parts are now
subject to the
repetitive
inspection
requirement
specified in
paragraph (e)(4)
of this AD.
(2) If any cracks are found Before further Following the
during the visual inspection flight after the Instructions in
required in paragraph (e)(1) of visual inspection Taylorcraft
this AD, replace the cracked required in Aviation, LLC
strut with the following paragraph (e)(1) Service Bulletin
applicable strut: of this AD. No. 2007-001,
Revision B, dated
October 15, 2007.
(i) A sealed front lift
strut, P/N MA-A815, Univair
P/N UA-A815 (for Models
BC12-D/D1 and BCS12-D/D1
only), or FAA-approved
equivalent P/N, a sealed
aft lift strut, P/N MA-
A854, Univair P/N UA-854
(for Models BC12-D/D1 and
BCS12-D/D1 only), or FAA-
approved equivalent P/N.
Installing these lift
struts terminates the
repetitive inspections
required by this AD for
that strut and no further
action is required.
[[Page 69634]]
(ii) A new vented front lift
strut, P/N A-A815, a new
vented aft lift strut, P/N
A-A854, or FAA-approved
equivalent P/Ns, that is
treated with internal
corrosion protection
specified in Taylorcraft
Aviation, LLC Service
Bulletin No. 2007-001,
Revision B, dated October
15, 2007. Installing one of
these lift struts is
subject to the repetitive
inspections required in
paragraph (e)(4) of this AD.
(3) If corrosion is found during Before further Follow Part 2 of
the inspection required in flight after the the Instructions
paragraph (e)(1) of this AD, do visual inspection in Taylorcraft
an ultrasound or radiograph required in Aviation, LLC
inspection to determine if the paragraph (e)(1) Service Bulletin
corrosion exceeds the of this AD. No. 2007-001,
Acceptance/Rejection Criteria Revision B, dated
specified in Taylorcraft October 15, 2007.
Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin All ultrasound or
No. 2007-001, Revision B, dated radiograph
October 15, 2007. inspections
required by this
AD must be done
by one of the
following:
(i) A Level II or
III inspector
certified in the
applicable
ultrasound or
radiograph
inspection method
using the
guidelines
established by
the American
Society of
Nondestructive
Testing or NAS
410 (formerly MIL-
STD-410);
(ii) An inspector
certified to
specific FAA or
other acceptable
government or
industry
standards, such
as Air Transport
Association (ATA)
Specifications
105-Guidelines
for Training and
Qualifying
Personnel in
Nondestructive
Testing Methods;
or
(iii) An FAA
Repair Station or
a Testing/
Inspection
Laboratory
qualified to do
ultrasound or
radiograph
inspections.
(4) If no corrosion or cracks (i) Initially Follow Part 2 of
are found during the visual inspect within the Instructions
inspection required in the next 3 months in Taylorcraft
paragraph (e)(1) of this AD, or after August 20, Aviation, LLC
if the inspection required in 2007 (the Service Bulletin
paragraph (e)(3) reveals that effective date of No. 2007-001,
the corrosion does not exceed AD 2007-16-14) or Revision B, dated
the Acceptance/Rejection within 48 months October 15, 2007,
Criteria specified in after installing using the
Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC a lift strut ultrasound or
Service Bulletin No. 2007-001, specified in radiograph
Revision B, dated October 15, paragraph inspection
2007, repetitively inspect (e)(2)(ii) of method.
thereafter using the ultrasound this AD,
or radiograph inspection method whichever occurs
and treat with internal later.
corrosion protection until all (ii) Repetitively
struts are replaced with the inspect
sealed struts specified in thereafter at
paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this AD. intervals not to
If any cracks are found or exceed 48 months,
corrosion is found that exceeds except as
the Acceptance/Rejection required by
Criteria specified in paragraph
Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC (e)(4)(iii) of
Service Bulletin No. 2007-001, this AD.
Revision B, dated October 15, (iii) If the
2007, during any of the initial
repetitive inspections required inspection was
by this AD, take the necessary done using the
corrective actions as eddy current
applicable in paragraph (e)(5) method as
of this AD. specified in AD
2007-16-14, the
first ultrasound
or radiograph
repetitive
inspection must
be done within
the next 24
months after
doing the eddy
current
inspection.
Repetitively
inspect
thereafter at
intervals not to
exceed 48 months
using the
ultrasound or
radiograph
inspection method.
(5) If, during any inspection Before further Following the
required in paragraphs (e)(3) flight after the Instructions in
or (e)(4) of this AD, any inspection Taylorcraft
cracks are found or it is required in Aviation, LLC
determined that the corrosion paragraph (e)(3) Service Bulletin
exceeds the Acceptance/ or (e)(4) of this No. 2007-001,
Rejection Criteria specified in AD. Revision B, dated
Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC October 15, 2007.
Service Bulletin No. 2007-001,
Revision B, dated October 15,
2007, replace the lift strut
with the applicable lift strut
specified in paragraph
(e)(2)(i) or (e)(2)(ii) of this
AD.
(6) Do not install P/N A-A815, P/ As of 5 hours TIS Not applicable.
N A-A854, or FAA-approved after the
equivalent P/N, unless: effective date of
this AD.
(i) within the last 48
months it has been
inspected using the
ultrasound or radiograph
method;
(ii) meets the Acceptance/
Rejection Criteria; and
(iii) is treated with
internal corrosion
protection as specified in
Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC
Service Bulletin No. 2007-
001, Revision B, dated
October 15, 2007.
[[Page 69635]]
(7) As a terminating action for At any time after Not applicable.
the repetitive inspections the effective
required by this AD, all vented date of this AD.
lift struts (P/Ns A-A815, A-
A854, and FAA-approved
equivalent P/Ns) may be
replaced with sealed lift
struts (P/Ns MA-A815, UA-A815
(for Models BC12-D/D1 and BCS12-
D/D1 only), MA-A854, UA-854
(for Models BC12-D/D1 and BCS12-
D/D1 only), or FAA-approved
equivalent P/Ns).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(f) The Manager, Fort Worth Airplane Certification Office, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN:
Andrew McAnaul, Aerospace Engineer, ASW-150 (c/o MIDO-43), 10100
Reunion Place, Suite 650, San Antonio, Texas 78216; telephone: (210)
308-3365; fax: (210) 308-3370. Before using any approved AMOC on any
airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate
principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office
(FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
(g) AMOCs approved for AD 2007-16-14 are approved for this AD.
Related Information
(h) To get copies of the service information referenced in this
AD, contact Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC, 2124 North Central Avenue,
Brownsville, Texas 78521; telephone: 956-986-0700. To view the AD
docket, go to U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations,
M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, or on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on December 3, 2007.
John R. Colomy,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E7-23860 Filed 12-7-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
