Airworthiness Directives; Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (Type Certificate Previously Held by Raytheon Aircraft Company) Models 1900, 1900C, and 1900D Airplanes, 8885-8888 [E9-4213]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
8885
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 74, No. 38
Friday, February 27, 2009
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2009–0165; Directorate
Identifier 2008–CE–055–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Hawker
Beechcraft Corporation (Type
Certificate Previously Held by
Raytheon Aircraft Company) Models
1900, 1900C, and 1900D Airplanes
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY: Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
SUMMARY: We propose to supersede
Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2006–24–
11, which applies to certain Hawker
Beechcraft Corporation (Hawker) (Type
Certificate previously held by Raytheon
Aircraft Company) Models 1900, 1900C,
and 1900D airplanes. AD 2006–24–11
currently requires you to repetitively
inspect the forward, vertical, and aft
flanges of both the left and right wing
rear spar lower caps for cracks, repair
any cracks found, and report the
inspection results to the manufacturer.
Since we issued AD 2006–24–11, the
manufacturer has developed a
modification kit to install on the wing
rear spar lower caps that would
terminate the 200-hour repetitive
inspection required in AD 2006–24–11.
Consequently, this proposed AD would
require installing the new modification
kits on the wing rear spar lower caps
and would terminate the repetitive
inspections required in AD 2006–24–11
when the kits are installed. We are
proposing this AD to prevent fatigue
cracks in the wing rear spar lower caps,
which could result in fatigue failure of
the wing rear spar lower caps. A rear
spar failure could result in complete
wing failure and the wing separating
from the airplane.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:28 Feb 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by April 28, 2009.
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 Hawker
Beechcraft Corporation, Attn: Airline
Technical Support, P.O. Box 85,
Wichita, Kansas 67201; telephone: (800)
429–5372; fax: (316) 676–8745; Internet:
https://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Potter, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Wichita Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 1801 Airport Road, Room 100,
Wichita, Kansas 67209, phone: (316)
946–4124, fax: (316) 946–4107.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments
regarding this proposed AD. Send your
comments to an address listed under the
ADDRESSES section. Include the docket
number, ‘‘FAA–2009–0165; Directorate
Identifier 2008–CE–055–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.
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Discussion
We issued Emergency AD 2006–18–
51, Amendment 39–14757 on August
31, 2006 (71 FR 52983, September 8,
2006), due to significant cracks found in
the wing rear spar lower caps of Hawker
Beechcraft Model 1900D airplanes. AD
2006–18–51 applies to certain Hawker
Beechcraft Models 1900, 1900C, and
1900D airplanes and currently requires
a one-time visual inspection of both the
left and right wing rear spar lower caps
for cracking and other damage such as
loose or missing fasteners; repairing any
cracks or damage found; and reporting
any cracks or damage found to the FAA
and the manufacturer.
After complying with AD 2006–18–
51, additional fatigue cracks found in
the affected area of the wing rear spar
lower caps on certain Hawker
Beechcraft Models 1900, 1900C, and
1900D airplanes caused us to issue AD
2006–24–11, Amendment 39–14840 (71
FR 70297, December 4, 2006). AD 2006–
24–11 does not supersede or revise
Emergency AD 2006–18–51 because
both ADs are necessary to address the
unsafe condition. AD 2006–24–11
currently requires the following on
certain Hawker Beechcraft Models 1900,
1900C, and 1900D airplanes:
• Repetitively inspecting the forward,
vertical, and aft flanges of both the left
and right wing rear spar lower caps for
cracks;
• Repairing any cracks found; and
• Reporting the inspection results to
manufacturer.
Since we issued AD 2006–24–11, the
manufacturer has developed a
modification kit to install on the wing
rear spar lower caps that would
terminate the 200-hour repetitive
inspection required in AD 2006–24–11
when installed. The FAA’s aging
commuter aircraft policy briefly states
that, when a modification exists that
could eliminate or reduce the number of
required critical inspections, the
modification should be incorporated.
This policy is based on the FAA’s
determination that reliance on critical
repetitive inspections on airplanes
utilized in commuter service carries an
unnecessary safety risk when a design
change exists that could eliminate or, in
certain instances, reduce the number of
those critical inspections. In
determining what inspections are
critical, the FAA considers (1) The
safety consequences of the airplane if
E:\FR\FM\27FEP1.SGM
27FEP1
8886
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 38 / Friday, February 27, 2009 / Proposed Rules
the known problem is not detected by
the inspection; (2) the reliability of the
inspection such as the probability of not
detecting the known problem; (3)
whether the inspection area is difficult
to access; and (4) the possibility of
damage to an adjacent structure as a
result of the problem.
The alternative to modifying the wing
rear spar lower caps with a modification
kit that improves the fatigue life would
be to repetitively inspect this area for
the life of the airplane.
This condition, if not corrected, could
result in fatigue failure of the wing rear
spar lower caps. A rear spar failure
could result in complete wing failure
and the wing separating from the
airplane.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Hawker Beechcraft
Mandatory Corporation Service Bulletin
SB 57–3816, issued January 2008.
The service information describes
procedures for installing wing rear spar
lower cap modification kits.
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 2006–24–11 with a new
AD that would require you to install
modification kits on the wing rear spar
lower caps. This proposed AD would
also retain the repetitive inspections
currently required in AD 2006–24–11
until the modification kits are installed.
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 243 airplanes in the U.S.
registry.
We estimate the following costs to do
the proposed inspections:
Labor cost
Parts cost
Total cost per
airplane
Total cost on
U.S. operators
10 work-hours × $80 per hour = $800 ........................................................................................
$20
$820
$199,260
Labor cost
Parts cost
Total cost per
airplane
Total cost on
U.S. operators
250 work-hours × $80 per hour = $20,000 .................................................................................
$2,200
$22,200
$5,394,600
We estimate the following costs to do
the proposed modification:
We have determined that the average
life to date of the affected airplanes is
16 years and the average usage rate
annually is 1,571 hours time-in-service.
The cost analysis shows that, based on
the average age and usage, AD 2006–24–
11 requires approximately 7.9
inspections per year with an
approximate annual cost of $6,500.
Based on the cost analysis, we have
determined that the proposed
modification would start showing a cost
savings over the repetitive inspection
currently required in AD 2006–24–11
after 5 years. This determination is
made based on the assumption that the
life-span of the airplanes affected by this
proposed AD is between 25 to 40 years.
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:28 Feb 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
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 Flexibility Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(Pub. L. 96–354) (RFA) establishes as a
principle of regulatory issuance that
agencies shall endeavor, consistent with
the objective of the rule and of
applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and
informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and
governmental jurisdictions subject to
regulation.
To achieve that principle, the RFA
requires agencies to solicit and consider
flexible regulatory proposals and to
explain the rationale for their actions.
The RFA covers a wide-range of small
entities, including small businesses,
not-for-profit organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
Agencies must perform a review to
determine whether a proposed or final
rule will have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. If the agency determines that it
will, the agency must prepare a
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
regulatory flexibility analysis as
described in the RFA.
However, if an agency determines that
a proposed or final rule is not expected
to have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities, section 605(b) of the RFA
provides that the head of the agency
may so certify and a regulatory
flexibility analysis is not required. The
FAA did make such a determination for
this proposed AD. The basis for this
determination is now discussed.
This proposed AD would supersede
existing AD 2006–24–11. The cost
analysis for the proposed AD shows that
the proposed modification will have a
cost savings from the accumulative
repetitive inspection cost now required
in AD 2006–24–11, reflecting cost
savings for 241 of the 243 affected
airplanes. For the two firms the analysis
did not show a cost savings, we have
identified one as a subsidiary of General
Electric Capital Corporation and the
other as the subsidiary of a firm that is
probably large. General Electric Capital
Corporation is not a small entity. We
were unable to determine the size
classification of the other firm. Even if
the corporate parent of the unidentified
firm is a small firm, this proposed rule
would impact at most one firm, and one
firm is not a substantial number.
E:\FR\FM\27FEP1.SGM
27FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 38 / Friday, February 27, 2009 / Proposed Rules
Therefore, the Acting FAA
Administrator certifies that this rule
will not impose a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
Regulatory Findings
We have determined that this
proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order
13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the
States, on the relationship between the
national Government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify that the proposed regulation:
1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866;
2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
3. Will not have a significant
economic impact, positive or negative,
on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation
of the estimated costs to comply with
this proposed AD and placed it in the
AD docket.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket that
contains the proposed AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information on the
Internet at https://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, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
8887
Affected ADs
(b) This AD supersedes AD 2006–24–11,
Amendment 39–14840. AD 2006–18–51
relates to the subject of this AD.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to the following
airplane models and serial numbers that are
certificated in any category:
Group 1 model
airplanes
Serial Nos.
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) 1900 .....................
(2) 1900C (C–12J) ....
UA–3.
UB–1 through UB–74.
Group 2 model
airplanes
Serial Nos.
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
(1) 1900C (C–12J) ....
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
(2) 1900D ..................
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by
removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2006–24–11, Amendment 39–14840 (71
FR 70297, December 4, 2006), and
adding the following new AD:
Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (Type
Certificate previously held by Raytheon
Aircraft Company): Docket No. FAA–
2009–0165; Directorate Identifier 2008–
CE–055–AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments on this
airworthiness directive (AD) action by April
28, 2009.
UC–1 through UC–
174, and UD–1
through UD–6.
UE–1 through UE–
439.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from the manufacturer
developing a modification kit to install on
the wing rear spar lower caps that would
terminate the 200-hour repetitive inspection
required in AD 2006–24–11. We are issuing
this AD to prevent fatigue cracks in the wing
rear spar lower caps, which could result in
fatigue failure of the wing rear spar lower
caps. A rear spar failure could result in
complete wing failure and the wing
separating from the airplane.
Compliance
(e) To address this problem, you must do
the following, unless already done:
Compliance
Procedures
(1) For Group 1 and Group 2 airplanes: Repetitively inspect both the left and right wing rear
spar lower caps for cracks and other damage, such as loose or missing fasteners.
(2) For Group 1 and Group 2 airplanes: If
cracks are found, repair all cracks by obtaining and incorporating an FAA-approved repair scheme from the manufacturer.
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
Actions
Repetitively inspect at intervals not to exceed
200 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the
last inspection required by AD 2006–24–11.
Follow the procedures in Raytheon Mandatory
Service Bulletin 57–3815, Issued: October,
2006.
Before further flight after any inspection required by paragraph (e)(1) of this AD where
cracks are found.
(3) For Group 1 and Group 2 airplanes: Report
the inspection results to Hawker Beechcraft
Company (formerly Raytheon Aircraft Company) using the instructions and forms in the
service bulletin. Complete all sections of the
required forms. Reporting requirements have
been approved by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) and assigned OMB control number 2120–0056.
(4) For Group 1 airplanes: Install Modification
Kit 114–4052–1 and Modification Kit 114–
4067–0001.
Report the repetitive inspection results within
30 days after the inspection.
For the repair scheme, contact Hawker
Beechcraft Corporation at P.O. Box 85,
Wichita, Kansas 67201–0085; phone: (800)
429–5372; fax: (316) 676–8745; e-mail:
tom_peay@rac.ray.com.
Follow the procedures in Raytheon Mandatory
Service Bulletin 57–3815, Issued: October,
2006.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:28 Feb 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
Upon reaching 22,000 total hours TIS or within the next 3 years after the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs later. Installing
the modification kits terminates the repetitive inspections required by paragraph
(e)(1) of this AD.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Follow the procedures in Hawker Beechcraft
Mandatory Service Bulletin 57–3816,
Issued: January, 2008.
E:\FR\FM\27FEP1.SGM
27FEP1
8888
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 38 / Friday, February 27, 2009 / Proposed Rules
Actions
Compliance
Procedures
(5) For Group 2 airplanes: Install Modification
Kit 118–4012–1 or 118–4012–3 and Modification Kit 118–4014–0003.
Upon reaching 22,000 total hours TIS or within the next 3 years after the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs later. Installing
the modification kits terminates the repetitive inspections required by paragraph
(e)(1) of this AD.
As of the effective date of this AD ...................
Follow the procedures in Hawker Beechcraft
Mandatory Service Bulletin 57–3816,
Issued: January, 2008.
(6) For all affected Group 1 and Group 2 airplanes: You may install the modification kits
specified in paragraphs (e)(4) and (e)(5) of
this AD at any time before the required compliance times specified in paragraphs (e)(4)
and (e)(5) of this AD. Installing the modification kits terminates the repetitive inspections
required by paragraph (e)(1) of this AD.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
(f) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 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: Steve
Potter, Aerospace Engineer, ACE–118W,
Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Wichita,
Kansas 67209, phone: (316) 946–4124, fax:
(316) 946–4107. 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 2006–24–11
are not approved for this AD.
Related Information
(h) To get copies of the service information
referenced in this AD, contact Hawker
Beechcraft, Attn: Airline Technical Support,
P.O. Box 85, Wichita, Kansas 67201;
telephone: (800) 429–5372; fax: (316) 676–
8745; Internet: https://
www.hawkerbeechcraft.com. 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
February 19, 2009.
John Colomy,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E9–4213 Filed 2–26–09; 8:45 am]
dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:28 Feb 26, 2009
Jkt 217001
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R01–OAR–2008–0485; A–1–FRL–
8771–4]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; New
Hampshire; 2009 Motor Vehicle
Emissions Budgets for the BostonManchester-Portsmouth (SE), New
Hampshire, 8-Hour Ozone
Nonattainment Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to
approve a State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revision submitted by the State of
New Hampshire. This revision contains
8-hour ozone transportation conformity
emission budgets for the BostonManchester-Portsmouth (SE), New
Hampshire, 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area. This action is being taken under
the Clean Air Act.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before March 30, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01–
OAR–2008–0485 by one of the following
methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail: arnold.anne@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (617) 918–0047.
4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R01–OAR–2008–
0485’’, Anne Arnold, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, One
Congress Street, Suite 1100 (mail code
CAQ), Boston, MA 02114–2023.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver
your comments to: Anne Arnold,
Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit,
Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, One
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Not applicable.
Congress Street, 11th floor, (CAQ),
Boston, MA 02114–2023. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office’s normal hours of
operation. The Regional Office’s official
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding legal
holidays.
Please see the direct final rule which
is located in the Rules Section of this
Federal Register for detailed
instructions on how to submit
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Donald O. Cooke, Air Quality Unit, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, One
Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAQ),
Boston, MA 02114–2023, telephone
number (617) 918–1668, fax number
(617) 918–0668, e-mail
cooke.donald@epa.gov.
In the
Final Rules Section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the State’s
SIP submittal as a direct final rule
without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial
submittal and anticipates no adverse
comments. A detailed rationale for the
approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no adverse comments are
received in response to this action rule,
no further activity is contemplated. If
EPA receives adverse comments, the
direct final rule will be withdrawn and
all public comments received will be
addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed rule. EPA will
not institute a second comment period.
Any parties interested in commenting
on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse
comment on an amendment, paragraph,
or section of this rule and if that
provision may be severed from the
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that
are not the subject of an adverse
comment.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\27FEP1.SGM
27FEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 38 (Friday, February 27, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8885-8888]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-4213]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 38 / Friday, February 27, 2009 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 8885]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2009-0165; Directorate Identifier 2008-CE-055-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (Type
Certificate Previously Held by Raytheon Aircraft Company) Models 1900,
1900C, and 1900D Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2006-24-
11, which applies to certain Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (Hawker)
(Type Certificate previously held by Raytheon Aircraft Company) Models
1900, 1900C, and 1900D airplanes. AD 2006-24-11 currently requires you
to repetitively inspect the forward, vertical, and aft flanges of both
the left and right wing rear spar lower caps for cracks, repair any
cracks found, and report the inspection results to the manufacturer.
Since we issued AD 2006-24-11, the manufacturer has developed a
modification kit to install on the wing rear spar lower caps that would
terminate the 200-hour repetitive inspection required in AD 2006-24-11.
Consequently, this proposed AD would require installing the new
modification kits on the wing rear spar lower caps and would terminate
the repetitive inspections required in AD 2006-24-11 when the kits are
installed. We are proposing this AD to prevent fatigue cracks in the
wing rear spar lower caps, which could result in fatigue failure of the
wing rear spar lower caps. A rear spar failure could result in complete
wing failure and the wing separating from the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 28, 2009.
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
Hawker Beechcraft Corporation, Attn: Airline Technical Support, P.O.
Box 85, Wichita, Kansas 67201; telephone: (800) 429-5372; fax: (316)
676-8745; Internet: https://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Potter, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1801 Airport Road, Room
100, Wichita, Kansas 67209, phone: (316) 946-4124, fax: (316) 946-4107.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number, ``FAA-
2009-0165; Directorate Identifier 2008-CE-055-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
We issued Emergency AD 2006-18-51, Amendment 39-14757 on August 31,
2006 (71 FR 52983, September 8, 2006), due to significant cracks found
in the wing rear spar lower caps of Hawker Beechcraft Model 1900D
airplanes. AD 2006-18-51 applies to certain Hawker Beechcraft Models
1900, 1900C, and 1900D airplanes and currently requires a one-time
visual inspection of both the left and right wing rear spar lower caps
for cracking and other damage such as loose or missing fasteners;
repairing any cracks or damage found; and reporting any cracks or
damage found to the FAA and the manufacturer.
After complying with AD 2006-18-51, additional fatigue cracks found
in the affected area of the wing rear spar lower caps on certain Hawker
Beechcraft Models 1900, 1900C, and 1900D airplanes caused us to issue
AD 2006-24-11, Amendment 39-14840 (71 FR 70297, December 4, 2006). AD
2006-24-11 does not supersede or revise Emergency AD 2006-18-51 because
both ADs are necessary to address the unsafe condition. AD 2006-24-11
currently requires the following on certain Hawker Beechcraft Models
1900, 1900C, and 1900D airplanes:
Repetitively inspecting the forward, vertical, and aft
flanges of both the left and right wing rear spar lower caps for
cracks;
Repairing any cracks found; and
Reporting the inspection results to manufacturer.
Since we issued AD 2006-24-11, the manufacturer has developed a
modification kit to install on the wing rear spar lower caps that would
terminate the 200-hour repetitive inspection required in AD 2006-24-11
when installed. The FAA's aging commuter aircraft policy briefly states
that, when a modification exists that could eliminate or reduce the
number of required critical inspections, the modification should be
incorporated. This policy is based on the FAA's determination that
reliance on critical repetitive inspections on airplanes utilized in
commuter service carries an unnecessary safety risk when a design
change exists that could eliminate or, in certain instances, reduce the
number of those critical inspections. In determining what inspections
are critical, the FAA considers (1) The safety consequences of the
airplane if
[[Page 8886]]
the known problem is not detected by the inspection; (2) the
reliability of the inspection such as the probability of not detecting
the known problem; (3) whether the inspection area is difficult to
access; and (4) the possibility of damage to an adjacent structure as a
result of the problem.
The alternative to modifying the wing rear spar lower caps with a
modification kit that improves the fatigue life would be to
repetitively inspect this area for the life of the airplane.
This condition, if not corrected, could result in fatigue failure
of the wing rear spar lower caps. A rear spar failure could result in
complete wing failure and the wing separating from the airplane.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Hawker Beechcraft Mandatory Corporation Service
Bulletin SB 57-3816, issued January 2008.
The service information describes procedures for installing wing
rear spar lower cap modification kits.
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 2006-24-11 with a new AD that would require you to
install modification kits on the wing rear spar lower caps. This
proposed AD would also retain the repetitive inspections currently
required in AD 2006-24-11 until the modification kits are installed.
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 243 airplanes in the
U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to do the proposed inspections:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total cost per Total cost on
Labor cost Parts cost airplane U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 work-hours x $80 per hour = $800.......................... $20 $820 $199,260
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We estimate the following costs to do the proposed modification:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total cost per Total cost on
Labor cost Parts cost airplane U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
250 work-hours x $80 per hour = $20,000...................... $2,200 $22,200 $5,394,600
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have determined that the average life to date of the affected
airplanes is 16 years and the average usage rate annually is 1,571
hours time-in-service. The cost analysis shows that, based on the
average age and usage, AD 2006-24-11 requires approximately 7.9
inspections per year with an approximate annual cost of $6,500.
Based on the cost analysis, we have determined that the proposed
modification would start showing a cost savings over the repetitive
inspection currently required in AD 2006-24-11 after 5 years. This
determination is made based on the assumption that the life-span of the
airplanes affected by this proposed AD is between 25 to 40 years.
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 Flexibility Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA)
establishes as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall
endeavor, consistent with the objective of the rule and of applicable
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions
subject to regulation.
To achieve that principle, the RFA requires agencies to solicit and
consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the rationale for
their actions. The RFA covers a wide-range of small entities, including
small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a proposed or
final rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. If the agency determines that it will, the
agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in
the RFA.
However, if an agency determines that a proposed or final rule is
not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the
head of the agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis
is not required. The FAA did make such a determination for this
proposed AD. The basis for this determination is now discussed.
This proposed AD would supersede existing AD 2006-24-11. The cost
analysis for the proposed AD shows that the proposed modification will
have a cost savings from the accumulative repetitive inspection cost
now required in AD 2006-24-11, reflecting cost savings for 241 of the
243 affected airplanes. For the two firms the analysis did not show a
cost savings, we have identified one as a subsidiary of General
Electric Capital Corporation and the other as the subsidiary of a firm
that is probably large. General Electric Capital Corporation is not a
small entity. We were unable to determine the size classification of
the other firm. Even if the corporate parent of the unidentified firm
is a small firm, this proposed rule would impact at most one firm, and
one firm is not a substantial number.
[[Page 8887]]
Therefore, the Acting FAA Administrator certifies that this rule
will not impose a significant economic impact on a substantial number
of small entities.
Regulatory Findings
We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed
regulation:
1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket that contains the proposed AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information on
the Internet at https://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, Incorporation by
reference, 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) 2006-24-11, Amendment 39-14840 (71 FR 70297, December 4, 2006),
and adding the following new AD:
Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (Type Certificate previously held by
Raytheon Aircraft Company): Docket No. FAA-2009-0165; Directorate
Identifier 2008-CE-055-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) action by April 28, 2009.
Affected ADs
(b) This AD supersedes AD 2006-24-11, Amendment 39-14840. AD
2006-18-51 relates to the subject of this AD.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to the following airplane models and serial
numbers that are certificated in any category:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group 1 model airplanes Serial Nos.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) 1900.................................. UA-3.
(2) 1900C (C-12J)......................... UB-1 through UB-74.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group 2 model airplanes Serial Nos.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) 1900C (C-12J)......................... UC-1 through UC-174, and UD-
1 through UD-6.
(2) 1900D................................. UE-1 through UE-439.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from the manufacturer developing a
modification kit to install on the wing rear spar lower caps that
would terminate the 200-hour repetitive inspection required in AD
2006-24-11. We are issuing this AD to prevent fatigue cracks in the
wing rear spar lower caps, which could result in fatigue failure of
the wing rear spar lower caps. A rear spar failure could result in
complete wing failure and the wing separating from the airplane.
Compliance
(e) To address this problem, you must do the following, unless
already done:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actions Compliance Procedures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) For Group 1 and Group 2 Repetitively inspect Follow the
airplanes: Repetitively at intervals not to procedures in
inspect both the left and exceed 200 hours Raytheon Mandatory
right wing rear spar lower time-in-service Service Bulletin 57-
caps for cracks and other (TIS) after the 3815, Issued:
damage, such as loose or last inspection October, 2006.
missing fasteners. required by AD 2006-
24-11.
(2) For Group 1 and Group 2 Before further For the repair
airplanes: If cracks are flight after any scheme, contact
found, repair all cracks by inspection required Hawker Beechcraft
obtaining and incorporating by paragraph (e)(1) Corporation at P.O.
an FAA-approved repair of this AD where Box 85, Wichita,
scheme from the cracks are found. Kansas 67201-0085;
manufacturer. phone: (800) 429-
5372; fax: (316)
676-8745; e-mail:
tom_peay@rac.ray.c
om.
(3) For Group 1 and Group 2 Report the Follow the
airplanes: Report the repetitive procedures in
inspection results to inspection results Raytheon Mandatory
Hawker Beechcraft Company within 30 days Service Bulletin 57-
(formerly Raytheon Aircraft after the 3815, Issued:
Company) using the inspection. October, 2006.
instructions and forms in
the service bulletin.
Complete all sections of
the required forms.
Reporting requirements have
been approved by the Office
of Management and Budget
(OMB) and assigned OMB
control number 2120-0056.
(4) For Group 1 airplanes: Upon reaching 22,000 Follow the
Install Modification Kit total hours TIS or procedures in
114-4052-1 and Modification within the next 3 Hawker Beechcraft
Kit 114-4067-0001. years after the Mandatory Service
effective date of Bulletin 57-3816,
this AD, whichever Issued: January,
occurs later. 2008.
Installing the
modification kits
terminates the
repetitive
inspections
required by
paragraph (e)(1) of
this AD.
[[Page 8888]]
(5) For Group 2 airplanes: Upon reaching 22,000 Follow the
Install Modification Kit total hours TIS or procedures in
118-4012-1 or 118-4012-3 within the next 3 Hawker Beechcraft
and Modification Kit 118- years after the Mandatory Service
4014-0003. effective date of Bulletin 57-3816,
this AD, whichever Issued: January,
occurs later. 2008.
Installing the
modification kits
terminates the
repetitive
inspections
required by
paragraph (e)(1) of
this AD.
(6) For all affected Group 1 As of the effective Not applicable.
and Group 2 airplanes: You date of this AD.
may install the
modification kits specified
in paragraphs (e)(4) and
(e)(5) of this AD at any
time before the required
compliance times specified
in paragraphs (e)(4) and
(e)(5) of this AD.
Installing the modification
kits terminates the
repetitive inspections
required by paragraph
(e)(1) of this AD.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(f) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
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: Steve Potter, Aerospace Engineer, ACE-118W, Wichita Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Wichita,
Kansas 67209, phone: (316) 946-4124, fax: (316) 946-4107. 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 2006-24-11 are not approved for this
AD.
Related Information
(h) To get copies of the service information referenced in this
AD, contact Hawker Beechcraft, Attn: Airline Technical Support, P.O.
Box 85, Wichita, Kansas 67201; telephone: (800) 429-5372; fax: (316)
676-8745; Internet: https://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com. 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 February 19, 2009.
John Colomy,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-4213 Filed 2-26-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
