Airworthiness Directives; Taylorcraft A, B, and F Series Airplanes, 9655-9659 [E8-3074]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
9655
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 73, No. 36
Friday, February 22, 2008
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of
new books are listed in the first FEDERAL
REGISTER issue of each week.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2007–0286; Directorate
Identifier 2007–CE–086–AD; Amendment
39–15381; AD 2008–04–09]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Taylorcraft
A, B, and F Series Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We are adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) to
supersede AD 2007–16–14, which
applies to all Taylorcraft (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 AD retains 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 AD to
detect and correct cracks and corrosion
in the left and right wing front and aft
lift struts. This condition, if not
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:24 Feb 21, 2008
Jkt 214001
corrected, could result in failure of the
lift strut and lead to in-flight separation
of the wing.
DATES: This AD becomes effective on
March 28, 2008.
On March 28, 2008, the Director of the
Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of Taylorcraft
Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No.
2007–001, Revision B, dated October 15,
2007, listed in this AD.
As of August 20, 2007 (72 FR 45153,
August 13, 2007), the Director of the
Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of Taylorcraft
Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No.
2007–001, Revision A, dated August 1,
2007, listed in this AD.
ADDRESSES: For service information
identified 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. The docket
number is FAA–2007–0286; Directorate
Identifier 2007–CE–086–AD.
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:
Discussion
On December 3, 2007, we issued a
proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to
include an AD that would apply to
certain Taylorcraft (Taylorcraft) A, B,
and F series airplanes. This proposal
was published in the Federal Register
as a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) on December 10, 2007 (72 FR
69630). The NPRM proposed to
supersede AD 2007–16–14 with a new
AD that 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;
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
• Changes the Applicability section to
remove Models FA–III and TG–6
airplanes; and
• Changes the compliance time
between the repetitive inspections.
Comments
We provided the public the
opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the
comments received on the proposal and
FAA’s response to each comment:
Comment Issue No. 1: Approve
Installing Univair Part Numbers (P/N)
UA–A815 and UA–854 as a
Terminating Action for the Repetitive
Inspection Requirement for All Affected
Taylorcraft Airplanes
Univair Aircraft Corporation (Univair)
requests that we expand the airplane
model applicability for installation of
P/Ns UA–A815 and UA–854 as a
terminating action for the repetitive
inspection requirement from Taylorcraft
Models BC12–D/D1 and BCS12–D/D1
airplanes (as currently approved in an
alternative method of compliance
(AMOC) to AD 2007–16–14) to include
all affected Taylorcraft airplanes.
On January 2, 2008, Univair received
parts manufacturer approval (PMA)
under PMA Supplement Numbers 198
and 199 expanding the eligibility to
install P/Ns UA–A815 and UA–854 on
all Taylorcraft airplane models affected
by the proposed AD. Installation of
these sealed struts provides an
acceptable level of safety for terminating
action to the AD for all affected
Taylorcraft airplane models.
We agree with the commenter. We
will change the final rule AD action to
incorporate this change.
Comment Issue No. 2: Extend or
Eliminate Repetitive Inspection
Intervals
Richard W. Gross and seven other
commenters request that the repetitive
inspection interval be either extended
from 4 years to 10 years or terminated
altogether if no corrosion is found
during the initial inspection.
Some of the commenters base their
request on service history of some struts
having been in service for 60 years
without any signs of corrosion.
We do not agree with the commenters.
We have not received any data to
support extending the repetitive
inspection interval. We have received
reports of several corroded vented wing
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
9656
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
lift struts from different Taylorcraft
series airplanes. Repetitive inspections
are necessary to detect and correct
corrosion that can develop after the
initial inspection. Based on the
inspection methods used and the
application of corrosion inhibitor at
each inspection, 48 months is the
appropriate repetitive inspection
interval.
We are not changing the final rule AD
action based on these comments.
Comment Issue No. 3: Remove F-Model
Airplanes From the Applicability
Section
Shawn Coleman and three other
commenters request that the newer FModel Taylorcraft airplanes be removed
from the Applicability section. This
request is based on these models being
the most recent airplanes produced and
the expectation that they should not
have a corrosion problem.
We do not agree with the commenters.
We do not have any data to support
excluding these airplane models from
the AD. These models use the same strut
design and material as the earlier
produced Taylorcraft model airplanes.
We have received reports of one Model
F–21 airplane and three Model F–22
airplanes having one or more struts that
failed inspection due to corrosion.
We are not changing the final rule AD
action based on these comments.
Conclusion
We have carefully reviewed the
available data and determined that air
safety and the public interest require
adopting the AD as proposed except for
the changes previously discussed and
minor editorial corrections. We have
determined that these minor
corrections:
• Are consistent with the intent that
was proposed in the NPRM for
correcting the unsafe condition; and
• Do not add any additional burden
upon the public than was already
proposed in the NPRM.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD will affect
3,119 airplanes in the U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to do
the visual inspection:
Labor cost
Parts cost
Total cost per
airplane
Total cost on
U.S. operators
1 work-hour × $80 per hour = $80 ...............................
Not applicable ...............................................................
$80
$249,520
We estimate the following costs to do
the repetitive ultrasound or radiograph
inspection:
Labor cost
Parts cost
Total cost per
airplane
4 work-hours × $80 per hour = $320 .........................................
Not applicable .............................................................................
$320
We estimate the following costs to do
any necessary replacements that will be
required based on the results of the
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. Two per airplane = $1,670 .......................
Sealed aft lift strut: $638 per strut. Two per airplane = $1,276.
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with RULES
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 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:24 Feb 21, 2008
Jkt 214001
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 AD.
Regulatory Findings
We have determined that this AD will
not have federalism implications under
Executive Order 13132. This AD will
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
$1,670 + $1,276 +
$320 = $3,266.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify that this AD:
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 summary of the costs
to comply with this AD (and other
information as included in the
Regulatory Evaluation) and placed it in
the AD Docket. You may get a copy of
this summary by sending a request to us
at the address listed under ADDRESSES.
Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2007–0286;
Directorate Identifier 2007–CE–086–
AD’’ in your request.
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the Federal Aviation Administration
amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation
Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
I
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
I
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 adding
the following new AD:
I
2008–04–09 Taylorcraft: Amendment 39–
15381; Docket No. FAA–2007–0286;
Directorate Identifier 2007–CE–086–AD.
9657
Effective Date
(a) This AD becomes effective on March 28,
2008.
dated October 15, 2007. If there are any other
differences between this AD and the above
service bulletin, this AD takes precedence.
Affected ADs
(b) This AD supersedes AD 2007–16–14,
Amendment 39–15153.
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.
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, or FAA-approved equivalent
P/N, and sealed aft lift struts, P/N MA–A854,
Univair P/N UA–854, 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,
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 left and
right 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:
Compliance
Procedures
(1) Visually inspect the left and right 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.
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with RULES
Actions
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.
(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, or FAA-approved
equivalent P/N, a sealed aft lift strut, P/N
MA–A854, Univair P/N UA–854, or FAAapproved equivalent P/N. Installing these
lift struts terminates the repetitive inspections required by this AD for that strut
and no further action is required.
(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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:24 Feb 21, 2008
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Following the Instructions in Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No. 2007–001,
Revision B, dated October 15, 2007.
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
9658
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Compliance
Procedures
(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.
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with RULES
Actions
Before further flight after the visual inspection
required in paragraph (e)(1) of this AD.
(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) It meets the Acceptance/Rejection Criteria; and
(iii) It is treated with internal corrosion protection as specified in Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No. 2007–001,
Revision B, dated October 15, 2007.
(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, MA–A854, UA–854, or FAA-approved
equivalent P/Ns).
(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.
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 105Guidelines 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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:24 Feb 21, 2008
Jkt 214001
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 March 28, 2008 the
effective date of this AD.
Not applicable.
At any time after March 28, 2008 the effective
date of this AD.
Not applicable.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
(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.
Federal Aviation Administration
Material Incorporated by Reference
(h) You must use Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC
Service Bulletin No. 2007–001, Revision A,
dated August 1, 2007; and Taylorcraft
Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No. 2007–001,
Revision B, dated October 15, 2007, to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD
specifies otherwise.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference of
Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin
No. 2007–001, Revision B, dated October 15,
2007, under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part
51.
(2) On August 20, 2007 (72 FR 45153,
August 13, 2007), the Director of the Federal
Register approved the incorporation by
reference of Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC
Service Bulletin No. 2007–001, Revision A,
dated August 1, 2007.
(3) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC,
2124 North Central Avenue, Brownsville,
Texas 78521; telephone: 956–986–0700.
(4) You may review copies at the FAA,
Central Region, Office of the Regional
Counsel, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; or at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go
to: https://www.archives.gov/federal_register/
code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on
February 13, 2008.
David R. Showers,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E8–3074 Filed 2–21–08; 8:45 am]
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with RULES
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:24 Feb 21, 2008
Jkt 214001
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2007–0333; Directorate
Identifier 2007–NM–236–AD; Amendment
39–15379; AD 2008–04–07]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Saab Model
SAAB SF340A and SAAB 340B
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We are adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This 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:
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. We are issuing this AD to
require actions to correct the unsafe
condition on these products.
DATES: This AD becomes effective
March 28, 2008.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of a certain publication listed in this AD
as of March 28, 2008.
ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD
docket on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov or in person at the
U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M–30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC.
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:
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
9659
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would
apply to the specified products. That
NPRM was published in the Federal
Register on December 17, 2007 (72 FR
71271). That NPRM proposed 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
(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
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 1, 1958, are
required to conduct a design review against
explosion risks.
This Airworthiness Directive, which
renders mandatory the modification [3162] to
separate wiring of Fuel Quantity Indication
System [FQIS], 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. Modification 3162 includes
parking (stowing) of the existing wiring
to the FQIS, installing new wires with
shields to the FQIS, and operational and
functional tests of the FQIS. You may
obtain further information by examining
the MCAI in the AD docket.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to
participate in developing this AD. We
received no comments on the NPRM or
on the determination of the cost to the
public.
Conclusion
We reviewed the available data and
determined that air safety and the
public interest require adopting the AD
as proposed.
Differences Between This AD and the
MCAI or Service Information
We have reviewed the MCAI and
related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But
we might have found it necessary to use
different words from those in the MCAI
to ensure the AD is clear for U.S.
operators and is enforceable. In making
these changes, we do not intend to differ
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 36 (Friday, February 22, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9655-9659]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-3074]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2008 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 9655]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2007-0286; Directorate Identifier 2007-CE-086-AD;
Amendment 39-15381; AD 2008-04-09]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Taylorcraft A, B, and F Series
Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) to
supersede AD 2007-16-14, which applies to all Taylorcraft (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 AD retains 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 AD to detect and correct cracks and
corrosion in the left and right 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: This AD becomes effective on March 28, 2008.
On March 28, 2008, the Director of the Federal Register approved
the incorporation by reference of Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service
Bulletin No. 2007-001, Revision B, dated October 15, 2007, listed in
this AD.
As of August 20, 2007 (72 FR 45153, August 13, 2007), the Director
of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of
Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No. 2007-001, Revision A,
dated August 1, 2007, listed in this AD.
ADDRESSES: For service information identified 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. The docket number is FAA-2007-0286;
Directorate Identifier 2007-CE-086-AD.
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:
Discussion
On December 3, 2007, we issued a proposal to amend part 39 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an AD that
would apply to certain Taylorcraft (Taylorcraft) A, B, and F series
airplanes. This proposal was published in the Federal Register as a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on December 10, 2007 (72 FR
69630). The NPRM proposed to supersede AD 2007-16-14 with a new AD that
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 to remove Models FA-III
and TG-6 airplanes; and
Changes the compliance time between the repetitive
inspections.
Comments
We provided the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal
and FAA's response to each comment:
Comment Issue No. 1: Approve Installing Univair Part Numbers (P/N) UA-
A815 and UA-854 as a Terminating Action for the Repetitive Inspection
Requirement for All Affected Taylorcraft Airplanes
Univair Aircraft Corporation (Univair) requests that we expand the
airplane model applicability for installation of P/Ns UA-A815 and UA-
854 as a terminating action for the repetitive inspection requirement
from Taylorcraft Models BC12-D/D1 and BCS12-D/D1 airplanes (as
currently approved in an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) to AD
2007-16-14) to include all affected Taylorcraft airplanes.
On January 2, 2008, Univair received parts manufacturer approval
(PMA) under PMA Supplement Numbers 198 and 199 expanding the
eligibility to install P/Ns UA-A815 and UA-854 on all Taylorcraft
airplane models affected by the proposed AD. Installation of these
sealed struts provides an acceptable level of safety for terminating
action to the AD for all affected Taylorcraft airplane models.
We agree with the commenter. We will change the final rule AD
action to incorporate this change.
Comment Issue No. 2: Extend or Eliminate Repetitive Inspection
Intervals
Richard W. Gross and seven other commenters request that the
repetitive inspection interval be either extended from 4 years to 10
years or terminated altogether if no corrosion is found during the
initial inspection.
Some of the commenters base their request on service history of
some struts having been in service for 60 years without any signs of
corrosion.
We do not agree with the commenters. We have not received any data
to support extending the repetitive inspection interval. We have
received reports of several corroded vented wing
[[Page 9656]]
lift struts from different Taylorcraft series airplanes. Repetitive
inspections are necessary to detect and correct corrosion that can
develop after the initial inspection. Based on the inspection methods
used and the application of corrosion inhibitor at each inspection, 48
months is the appropriate repetitive inspection interval.
We are not changing the final rule AD action based on these
comments.
Comment Issue No. 3: Remove F-Model Airplanes From the Applicability
Section
Shawn Coleman and three other commenters request that the newer F-
Model Taylorcraft airplanes be removed from the Applicability section.
This request is based on these models being the most recent airplanes
produced and the expectation that they should not have a corrosion
problem.
We do not agree with the commenters. We do not have any data to
support excluding these airplane models from the AD. These models use
the same strut design and material as the earlier produced Taylorcraft
model airplanes. We have received reports of one Model F-21 airplane
and three Model F-22 airplanes having one or more struts that failed
inspection due to corrosion.
We are not changing the final rule AD action based on these
comments.
Conclusion
We have carefully reviewed the available data and determined that
air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD as proposed
except for the changes previously discussed and minor editorial
corrections. We have determined that these minor corrections:
Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD will affect 3,119 airplanes in the U.S.
registry.
We estimate the following costs to do the 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 repetitive ultrasound or
radiograph inspection:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total cost per
Labor cost Parts cost airplane
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 work-hours x $80 per hour = Not applicable...... $320
$320.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacements
that will be required based on the results of the inspections. We have
no way of determining the number of airplanes that may need this
replacement:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total cost per airplane to replace
Labor cost Parts cost all 4 wing lift struts
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 work-hours to replace all 4 struts x Sealed front lift strut: $835 $1,670 + $1,276 +
$80 per hour = $320. per strut. Two per airplane = $320 = $3,266.
$1,670.
Sealed aft lift strut: $638 per
strut. Two 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
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 AD.
Regulatory Findings
We have determined that this AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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 this AD:
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 summary of the costs to comply with this AD (and
other information as included in the Regulatory Evaluation) and placed
it in the AD Docket. You may get a copy of this summary by sending a
request to us at the address listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket
No. FAA-2007-0286; Directorate Identifier 2007-CE-086-AD'' in your
request.
[[Page 9657]]
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
0
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]
0
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
adding the following new AD:
2008-04-09 Taylorcraft: Amendment 39-15381; Docket No. FAA-2007-
0286; Directorate Identifier 2007-CE-086-AD.
Effective Date
(a) This AD becomes effective on March 28, 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, or FAA-approved
equivalent P/N, and sealed aft lift struts, P/N MA-A854, Univair P/N
UA-854, 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
left and right 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 left and Within the next 5 hours TIS after Follow Part 1 of the Instructions in
right wing front and aft lift August 20, 2007 (the effective date Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service
struts, (P/N A-A815 and P/N A-A854, of AD 2007-16-14), unless one of Bulletin No. 2007-001, Revision A,
or FAA-approved equivalent P/Ns), the following conditions is met: dated August 1, 2007; or
along the entire bottom 12 inches (i) The struts have been replaced Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service
of each strut for cracks and with parts specified in paragraph Bulletin No. 2007-001, Revision B,
corrosion. (e)(2)(i) of this AD. No further dated October 15, 2007.
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 during Before further flight after the Following the Instructions in
the visual inspection required in visual inspection required in Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service
paragraph (e)(1) of this AD, paragraph (e)(1) of this AD. Bulletin No. 2007-001, Revision B,
replace the cracked strut with the dated October 15, 2007.
following applicable strut:
(i) A sealed front lift strut, P/N
MA-A815, Univair P/N UA-A815, or
FAA-approved equivalent P/N, a
sealed aft lift strut, P/N MA-A854,
Univair P/N UA-854, 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.
(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.
[[Page 9658]]
(3) If corrosion is found during the Before further flight after the Follow Part 2 of the Instructions in
inspection required in paragraph visual inspection required in Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service
(e)(1) of this AD, do an ultrasound paragraph (e)(1) of this AD. Bulletin No. 2007-001, Revision B,
or radiograph inspection to dated October 15, 2007. All
determine if the corrosion exceeds ultrasound or radiograph
the Acceptance/Rejection Criteria inspections required by this AD
specified in Taylorcraft Aviation, must be done by one of the
LLC Service Bulletin No. 2007-001, following:
Revision B, dated October 15, 2007. (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 are (i) Initially inspect within the Follow Part 2 of the Instructions in
found during the visual inspection next 3 months after August 20, 2007 Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service
required in paragraph (e)(1) of (the effective date of AD 2007-16- Bulletin No. 2007-001, Revision B,
this AD, or if the inspection 14) or within 48 months after dated October 15, 2007, using the
required in paragraph (e)(3) installing a lift strut specified ultrasound or radiograph inspection
reveals that the corrosion does not in paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this AD, method.
exceed the Acceptance/Rejection whichever occurs later.
Criteria specified in Taylorcraft (ii) Repetitively inspect thereafter
Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No. at intervals not to exceed 48
2007-001, Revision B, dated October months, except as required by
15, 2007, repetitively inspect paragraph (e)(4)(iii) of this AD.
thereafter using the ultrasound or (iii) If the initial inspection was
radiograph inspection method and done using the eddy current method
treat with internal corrosion as specified in AD 2007-16-14, the
protection until all struts are first ultrasound or radiograph
replaced with the sealed struts repetitive inspection must be done
specified in paragraph (e)(2)(i) of within the next 24 months after
this AD. If any cracks are found or doing the eddy current inspection.
corrosion is found that exceeds the Repetitively inspect thereafter at
Acceptance/Rejection Criteria intervals not to exceed 48 months
specified in Taylorcraft Aviation, using the ultrasound or radiograph
LLC Service Bulletin No. 2007-001, inspection method.
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 Before further flight after the Following the Instructions in
required in paragraphs (e)(3) or inspection required in paragraph Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service
(e)(4) of this AD, any cracks are (e)(3) or (e)(4) of this AD. Bulletin No. 2007-001, Revision B,
found or it is determined that the dated October 15, 2007.
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- As of 5 hours TIS after March 28, Not applicable.
A854, or FAA-approved equivalent P/ 2008 the effective date of this AD.
N, unless:
(i) Within the last 48 months it has
been inspected using the ultrasound
or radiograph method;
(ii) It meets the Acceptance/
Rejection Criteria; and
(iii) It is treated with
internal corrosion protection
as specified in Taylorcraft
Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin
No. 2007-001, Revision B, dated
October 15, 2007.
(7) As a terminating action for the At any time after March 28, 2008 the Not applicable.
repetitive inspections required by effective date of this AD.
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, MA-A854, UA-854, or
FAA-approved equivalent P/Ns).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 9659]]
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.
Material Incorporated by Reference
(h) You must use Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No.
2007-001, Revision A, dated August 1, 2007; and Taylorcraft
Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No. 2007-001, Revision B, dated
October 15, 2007, to do the actions required by this AD, unless the
AD specifies otherwise.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service
Bulletin No. 2007-001, Revision B, dated October 15, 2007, under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) On August 20, 2007 (72 FR 45153, August 13, 2007), the
Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC Service Bulletin No. 2007-
001, Revision A, dated August 1, 2007.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Taylorcraft Aviation, LLC, 2124 North Central Avenue, Brownsville,
Texas 78521; telephone: 956-986-0700.
(4) You may review copies at the FAA, Central Region, Office of
the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; or at
the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-
741-6030, or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_
of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on February 13, 2008.
David R. Showers,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-3074 Filed 2-21-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
