Airworthiness Directives; Vulcanair S.p.A. Airplanes, 41005-41009 [2013-16394]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
41005
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 78, No. 131
Tuesday, July 9, 2013
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–2013–0602; Directorate
Identifier 2012–CE–010–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Vulcanair
S.p.A. Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
We propose to adopt a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for
Vulcanair S.p.A. (type certificate
previously held by Partenavia) Models P
68, P 68B, P 68C, P 68C–TC, P 68
‘‘OBSERVER,’’ P68TC ‘‘OBSERVER,’’
and P68 ‘‘OBSERVER 2’’ airplanes that
would supersede AD 2008–24–11,
Amendment 39–15751. This proposed
AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI)
originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct
an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as cracking and/or corrosion
of the wing spar, which could result in
structural failure of the wing. We are
issuing this proposed AD to require
actions to address the unsafe condition
on these products.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by August 23, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments by
any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: (202) 493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:09 Jul 08, 2013
Jkt 229001
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 Vulcanair
Airworthiness Office, Via G Pascoli, 7,
80026 Casoria, Italy; phone: +39 081 59
18 135; fax: +39 081 59 18 172; email:
airworthiness@vulcanair.com; Internet:
https://www.vulcanair.com/pageview.php?pagename=Service Bulletins.
You may review copies of the
referenced service information at the
FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901
Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106.
For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call (816) 329–
4148.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket 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 AD
docket contains this proposed AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Office
(telephone (800) 647–5527) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mike Kiesov, Aerospace Safety
Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane
Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–
4144; fax: (816) 329–4090; email:
mike.kiesov@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments about
this proposed AD. Send your comments
to an address listed under the
ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No.
FAA–2013–0602; Directorate Identifier
2012–CE–010–AD’’ at the beginning of
your comments. We specifically invite
comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy
aspects of this proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the
closing date and may amend this
proposed AD because of those
comments.
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
We will post all comments we
receive, without change, to https://
regulations.gov, including any personal
information you provide. We will also
post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact we receive
about this proposed AD.
Discussion
On November 19, 2008, we issued AD
2008–24–11, Amendment 39–15751 (73
FR 72314; November 28, 2008). That AD
required actions intended to address an
unsafe condition on the Vulcanair
S.p.A. Models P 68, P 68B, P 68C, P
68C–TC, P 68 ‘‘OBSERVER,’’
AP68TP300 ‘‘SPARTACUS,’’ P68TC
‘‘OBSERVER,’’ AP68TP 600 ‘‘VIATOR,’’
and P68 ‘‘OBSERVER 2’’ airplanes.
Since we issued AD 2008–24–11 (73
FR 72314; November 28, 2008),
Vulcanair S.p.A. developed
modification kits to repair certain lower
spar caps. They also developed a
maintenance manual supplement with
special inspections of the wing and
stabilator structures and new limitations
for the wing structure.
The FAA also realized that the
Models AP68TP300 ’’SPARTACUS’’ and
AP68TP 600 ’’VIATOR’’ were
inadvertenly included in AD 2008–24–
11.
The European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA), which is the Technical Agent
for the Member States of the European
Community, has issued AD No.: 2010–
0051, dated March 25, 2010 (referred to
after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an
unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states:
Safe Life Limits of the wing structure of
P.68 Series aeroplanes have now been
extended up to a maximum of 23 900 Flight
Hours (FH), depending on the condition of
the spar lower cap angles and on the
embodiment of some modification kits.
Furthermore, special inspections of the wing
and stabilator structures, different from those
previously required by EASA AD 2007–0027,
have also been introduced. This change has
been developed by Vulcanair under change
No. MOD. P68/144 approved by EASA with
approval No. 10028661 on 02 February 2010.
Consequently this AD, which supersedes
EASA AD 2007–0027, allows the
implementation of the extended Safe Life
Limits, in accordance with the instructions of
Vulcanair SB 162, and requires the
accomplishment of special inspections for
the wing and stabilator structures, in
accordance with the Aircraft Maintenance
Manual (AMM) Supplement part number (P/
N) NOR 10.771–52.
E:\FR\FM\09JYP1.SGM
09JYP1
41006
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2013 / Proposed Rules
You may obtain further information by
examining the MCAI in the AD docket.
EASA AD No.: 2010–0051, dated
March 25, 2010; Vulcanair S.p.A.
Maintenance Manual Supplement
NOR10.771–52, dated March 1, 2010;
Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Bulletin No.
162, dated March 1, 2010; Vulcanair
S.p.A. Service Instruction No. 88, dated
March 1, 2010; and Vulcanair S.p.A.
Service Instruction No. 89, dated March
1, 2010, base the extended safe life
limits on repetitive inspections and
other required preventive and corrective
actions that under certain conditions
allow flight with known cracks in
critical structure. The FAA’s Small
Airplane Directorate does not allow
further flight with known cracks in
critical structure without additional
substantiating data. Advisory Circular
(AC) 23–13A, Chapter 6, dated
September 29, 2005, describes what
additional data is required to allow
flight with known cracks (found on the
Internet at https://rgl.faa.gov/
Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/
rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf).
Relevant Service Information
Vulcanair S.p.A. has issued
Maintenance Manual Supplement
NOR10.771–52, dated March 1, 2010;
Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Bulletin No.
162, dated March 1, 2010; Vulcanair
S.p.A. Service Instruction No. 88, dated
March 1, 2010; and Vulcanair S.p.A.
Service Instruction No. 89, dated March
1, 2010. The actions described in this
service information are intended to
correct the unsafe condition identified
in the MCAI.
FAA’s Determination and Requirements
of the Proposed AD
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
This product has been approved by
the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation
in the United States. Pursuant to our
bilateral agreement with this State of
Design Authority, they have notified us
of the unsafe condition described in the
MCAI and service information
referenced above. We are proposing this
AD because we evaluated all
information and determined the unsafe
condition exists and is likely to exist or
develop on other products of the same
type design.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD
will affect 75 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it would take
about 60 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of
this proposed AD. The average labor
rate is $85 per work-hour.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:09 Jul 08, 2013
Jkt 229001
Based on these figures, we estimate
the cost of the proposed AD on U.S.
operators to be $382,500, or $5,100 per
product.
We estimate that the wing
replacement would take about 300
work-hours and require parts costing
$443,406, for a cost of $468,906 per
product. Wing replacement is only
required when the wing structure
exceeds the safe life established in this
AD.
In addition, we estimate that any
necessary follow-on actions for kit
installation would take about 120 workhours and require parts costing $2,595,
for a cost of $12,795 per product. We
have no way of determining the number
of products that may need these actions.
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.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
This section presents the initial
regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA)
that was done for this action. We have
reworded and reformatted for Federal
Register publication purposes. The
IRFA in its original form can be found
in the docket at https://
www.regulations.gov.
Introduction and Purpose of This
Analysis
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 objectives 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 this principle,
the RFA requires agencies to solicit and
consider flexible regulatory proposals
and to explain the rationale for their
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
actions to assure that such proposals are
seriously considered.’’ 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 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 an IRFA as
described in the RFA.
Section 603(a) of the RFA requires
that each initial regulatory flexibility
analysis contain the following
information:
• A description of the reasons action
by the agency is being considered;
• A succinct statement of the
objectives of, and legal basis for, the
proposed rule;
• A description of and, where
feasible, an estimate of the number of
small entities to which the proposed
rule will apply;
• A description of the projected
reporting, recordkeeping and other
compliance requirements of the
proposed rule, including an estimate of
the classes of small entities which will
be subject to the requirement and the
type of professional skills necessary for
preparation of the report or record;
• To the extent practicable, an
identification of all relevant Federal
rules which may duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with the proposed rule; and
• A description of any significant
alternatives to the proposed rule which
accomplish the stated objectives of
applicable statues and which minimize
any significant economic impact of the
proposed rule on small entities.
The following represents a detailed
description of the six items required by
section 603(a) of the RFA.
1. A Description of the Reasons Action
by the Agency Is Being Considered
This proposed AD results from
mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) originated by EASA
and would supersede AD 2008–24–11,
Amendment 39–15751 (73 FR 72314;
November 28, 2008). AD 2008–24–11
established safe limits for the wing
structure of Vulcanair P 68 series
airplanes and required repetitive
inspection and repair of the wing and
stabilator structures when the airplanes
reach safe life limits. Operation beyond
existing conservative safe limits (with
inspections and repair) is allowed
pending establishment of final safe
limits and a terminating action.
The proposed AD significantly
increases wing structure life limits (in a
few cases requiring kit modification of
E:\FR\FM\09JYP1.SGM
09JYP1
41007
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2013 / Proposed Rules
the wing structure), but establishes a
terminating action requiring
replacement of the wing structure and
wing fuselage attachments and bolts
when new established safe limits are
reached. Prior to the wing structure safe
life limit being reached, the proposed
AD also requires special inspections of
the wing structure with time limits,
since new, of 6,000; 12,000; and 18,000
flight hours.
2. Objectives of, and Legal Basis for, the
Proposed Rule
Title 49 of the U.S. 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 FAA’s authority. We
propose 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 the
airplanes identified in this AD.
3. A Description of and an Estimate of
the Number of Small Entities to Which
the Proposed Rule Will Apply
This proposed rule would affect 67
U.S.-registered airplanes, of which 40
are owned by corporations, 8 by
individuals, 2 by the Federal
Government, and 17 by state
governments. Of the 48 airplanes held
by private sector parties, one financing
firm owns 2 of them, and 2 operators
each own 2 of them. The remaining 36
airplanes are owned by 36 corporations
and individuals. The FAA believes that
all, or nearly all, of these private sector
owners are privately held small firms,
for which we cannot obtain financial
records. We conclude that the proposed
rule would affect a substantial number
of small entities.
Requirement
Work-hours
Special inspections ..........................................................................................
Wing structure replacement .............................................................................
Replacement of lower spar cap angles with Service Bulletin 162 (S/N 1–
256) ..............................................................................................................
4. Reporting, Record Keeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements of the
Proposed Rule
Small entities will incur no new
reporting and record-keeping
requirements as a result of this rule.
The additional requirements of the
proposed AD compared to AD 2008–24–
11, Amendment 39–15751 (73 FR
72314; November 28, 2008) are the
special wing structure inspections at
6,000; 12,000; and 18,000 flight hours;
the terminating action to replace the
wing structure when the wing structure
safe limit is reached; and, for airplanes
with serial numbers 1–256 for which a
spar crack was found under previous
Partenavia Costruzioni Aeronautiche
S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 65, Revison
3, dated September 30, 1985,
replacement of the four main spar lower
cap angles using Vulcanair S.p.A.
Service Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1,
2010. The costs of the required actions
provided in the proposed AD are as
follows:
Labor cost
Cost of
materials
Total cost
60
300
$5,100
25,500
$443,406
$468,906
120
10,200
2,595
12,795
Figure 1 of the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis in this AD.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
The requirement to replace the wing
structure, at considerable cost, occurs
when the airplanes are old and have low
value, often less than the cost of wing
structure replacement. Therefore, in
many cases airplane retirement is the
least cost alternative, in which case the
effective cost of the requirement is the
loss in airplane value net of salvage
value. The requirement to replace the
lower spar cap angles applies to at most
ten U.S.-registered airplanes and only if
a front spar crack was previously found
under Partenavia Costruzioni
Aeronautiche S.p.A. Service Bulletin
No. 65, Revison 3, dated September 30,
1985. The expected present value cost of
this requirement is thus minimal. The
requirement for special inspections at
6,000; 12,000; and 18,000 flight hours
applies to all AD-affected airplanes.
Economic Impact on Small Entities
Since we have no financial
information of the privately held firms
that constitute most of the operators of
the affected airplanes, we assess the
economic impact of the proposed rule
using airplane values. As the Vulcanair
P 68 airplanes are not listed in the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:09 Jul 08, 2013
Jkt 229001
Aircraft Bluebook Price Digest, we
undertook an internet search and found
that the resale value of older P 68
airplanes, manufactured between 1975
and 1984 ranged from about $80,000 to
$300,000. Many of these airplanes will
be subject to the special inspection at
6,000 hours or even the special
inspection at 12,000 hours. Using a
significant economic impact criterion of
2 percent of airplane value, for operators
of many of these airplanes there is a
significant economic impact based on
just one $5,100 inspection. Taking into
account the present value cost of two to
three possible future inspections and
possible repair, as well as the present
value cost of forced early retirement,
there is a significant economic impact
on most if not all of these operators.
Therefore, we conclude that this
proposed rule will have a significant
impact on a substantial number of firms.
5. Duplicative, Overlapping or
Conflicting Federal Rules
The FAA is unaware of any Federal
rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict
with this proposed rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
6. Significant Alternatives to the
Proposed Rule
Because of an unsafe condition that is
likely to exist or develop on the
airplanes identified in this proposed
AD, there is no feasible significant
alternative to requiring the actions of
this proposed AD. The FAA invites
public comment on this determination.
Regulatory Findings
We 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 this proposed regulation:
(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under
the DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26,
1979),
E:\FR\FM\09JYP1.SGM
09JYP1
41008
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2013 / Proposed Rules
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation
in Alaska, and
(4) Will have a significant economic
impact, positive or negative, on a
substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
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.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by
removing Amendment 39–15751 (73 FR
72314; November 28, 2008), and adding
the following new AD:
Vulcanair S.p.A. (Type Certificate
Previously Held by Partenavia): Docket
No. FAA–2013–0602; Directorate
Identifier 2012–CE–010–AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by August 23,
2013.
(b) Affected ADs
This AD supersedes AD 2008–24–11,
Amendment 39–15751 (73 FR 72314;
November 28, 2008).
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to Vulcanair S.p.A.
Models P 68, P 68B, P 68C, P 68C–TC, P 68
‘‘OBSERVER,’’ P68TC ‘‘OBSERVER,’’ and
P68 ‘‘OBSERVER 2’’ airplanes, serial
numbers (S/N) 01 through 429, S/Ns 431
through 452, and S/N 454, certificated in any
category.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(d) Subject
Air Transport Association of America
(ATA) Code 57: Wings.
(e) Reason
This AD was prompted by 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 cracking
and/or corrosion of the wing spar. We are
issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking
and corrosion of the wing spars, which, if not
corrected, could result in structural failure of
the wing.
(f) Actions and Compliance
Unless already done, do the following
actions specified in paragraphs (f)(1) through
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:09 Jul 08, 2013
Jkt 229001
(f)(8) of this AD, to include all
subparagraphs.
(1) Within 10 days after the effective date
of this AD, incorporate Vulcanair S.p.A.
Maintenance Manual Supplement
NOR10.771–52, dated March 1, 2010, into the
FAA-approved maintenance program
(maintenance manual) following Vulcanair
S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 162, dated March
1, 2010.
(2) Within 10 days after the effective date
of this AD, determine the safe life limit of the
wing structure as follows:
(i) For all rows except rows (c) and (e) in
table 1, of paragraph 1.3, of Vulcanair S.p.A.
Service Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1,
2010, use the safe life limit specified in the
appropriate row of the table; and
(ii) For rows (c) and (e) in table 1, of
paragraph 1.3, of Vulcanair S.p.A. Service
Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 2010, before
further flight, you must modify the wing
structure following Vulcanair S.p.A. Service
Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 2010. After
modification, use the safe life limit specified
in the appropriate row of the table.
(3) Before reaching the life limit as
determined in paragraph (f)(2) of this AD,
before further flight, you must replace the
wing structure and wing fuselage
attachments and bolts with new ones. Do the
replacement following Vulcanair S.p.A
Maintenance Manual Supplement
NOR10.771–52, dated March 1, 2010, as
specified in the instructions in WORK
PROCEDURE, paragraph 2 of Vulcanair
S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 162, dated March
1, 2010.
(4) Do an initial inspection of the wing
structure as specified in the instructions in
paragraph 2.1 of Vulcanair S.p.A. Service
Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 2010, at the
applicable times as specified in paragraphs
(f)(4)(i) and (f)(4)(ii). Repetitively thereafter
inspect and replace the wing structure
following the limitations in Vulcanair S.p.A.
Maintenance Manual Supplement
NOR10.771–52, dated March 1, 2010.
(i) For aircraft that have not exceeded the
safe life limit hours time-in-service (TIS) on
the wing structure as determined in
paragraph (f)(2) of this AD: Before
accumulating 6,000 hours TIS on the wing
structure or within 100 hours TIS after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs
later, follow Vulcanair S.p.A. Maintenance
Manual Supplement NOR10.771–52, dated
March 1, 2010. You may take unless already
done credit for this inspection if inspected in
compliance with AD 2008–24–11 (73 FR
72314; November 28, 2008); or
(ii) For aircraft that have exceeded the safe
life limit hours TIS on the wing structure as
determined in paragraph (f)(2) of this AD:
Within 100 hours TIS after the effective date
of this AD, follow Vulcanair S.p.A. Service
Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 2010.
(5) Before accumulating 8,500 hours TIS
since new on the stabilator, within 500 hours
TIS after January 2, 2009 (the effective date
of AD 2008–24–11 (73 FR 72314; November
28, 2008)), or within 500 hours TIS from the
last inspection done in compliance with AD
2008–24–11, whichever occurs later, do the
initial inspection of the stabilator following
Vulcanair S.p.A. Maintenance Manual
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Supplement NOR10.771–52, paragraph 2.2,
dated March 1, 2010, or Vulcanair S.p.A.
Service Bulletin No. 120 Rev. 1, dated June
7, 2006. Repetitively thereafter inspect the
stabilator following the limitations in
Vulcanair S.p.A. Maintenance Manual
Supplement NOR10.771–52, dated March 1,
2010.
(6) If any cracks are found during the
inspections required in paragraphs (f)(4) and/
or (f)(5) of this AD, before further flight,
modify the wing structure following
Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 162,
dated March 1, 2010.
(7) For certain Model P 68 airplanes, AD
2009–24–03, Amendment 39–16090 (74 FR
62211, November 27, 2009) requires
repetitive inspections of the front and rear
wing spars for cracks and modification if
cracks are found. The modification
terminates the repetitive inspections required
in AD 2009–24–03 and may be done
regardless if cracks are found. The actions of
AD 2009–24–03 are independent of this AD
action and remain in effect.
(8) EASA AD No.: 2010–0051, dated March
25, 2010; Vulcanair S.p.A. Maintenance
Manual Supplement NOR10.771–52, dated
March 1, 2010; Vulcanair S.p.A. Service
Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 2010;
Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Instruction No. 88,
dated March 1, 2010; and Vulcanair S.p.A.
Service Instruction No. 89, dated March 1,
2010, base the required preventive and
corrective actions on allowing flight with
known cracks in critical structure. The FAA’s
Small Airplane Directorate does not allow
further flight with known cracks in critical
structure without additional substantiating
data. Advisory Circular (AC) 23–13A,Chapter
6, dated September 29, 2005, describes what
additional data is required to allow flight
with known cracks (found on the Internet at
https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_
Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf).
(g) Other FAA AD Provisions
The following provisions also apply to this
AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs): The Manager, Standards 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: Mike Kiesov, Aerospace Safety
Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate,
901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106;
telephone: (816) 329–4144; fax: (816) 329–
4090; email: mike.kiesov@faa.gov. Before
using any approved AMOC on any airplane
to which the AMOC applies, notify your
appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the
FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO),
or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement
in this AD to obtain corrective actions from
a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective
actions are considered FAA-approved if they
are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required
to assure the product is airworthy before it
is returned to service.
(h) Related Information
(1) Refer to MCAI European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) AD No. 2010–0051,
E:\FR\FM\09JYP1.SGM
09JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2013 / Proposed Rules
dated March 25, 2010, which may be found
in the AD docket on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov; Vulcanair S.p.A.
Service Instruction No. 88, dated March 1,
2010; and Vulcanair S.p.A. Service
Instruction No. 89, dated March 1, 2010, for
related information.
(2) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Vulcanair Airworthiness
Office, Via G Pascoli, 7, 80026 Casoria, Italy;
phone: +39 081 59 18 135; fax: +39 081 59
18 172; email: airworthiness@vulcanair.com;
Internet: https://www.vulcanair.com/pageview.php?pagename=Service-Bulletins.
(3) You may view this service information
at FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901
Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call (816) 329–4148.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on July 2,
2013.
Earl Lawrence,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–16394 Filed 7–8–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
(2) Fax: 202–493–2251.
(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility
(M–30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590–
0001.
(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail
address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The telephone number
is 202–366–9329.
To avoid duplication, please use only
one of these four methods. See the
‘‘Public Participation and Request for
Comments’’ portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below for instructions on submitting
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email Petty Officer Joseph
McCollum, U.S. Coast Guard Sector
Lake Michigan; telephone 414–747–
7148, email
Joseph.P.McCollum@uscg.mil. If you
have questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Barbara
Hairston, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone 202–366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
33 CFR Part 165
Table of Acronyms
[Docket No. USCG–2013–0501]
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; National Governors
Association, Milwaukee, WI
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard proposes to
establish two safety zones in
Milwaukee, Wisconsin for the 2013
National Governors Association summer
meeting. The first zone is intended to
restrict vessels from a portion of
Milwaukee Harbor; the second zone is
intended to restrict vessels from a
portion of the Menomonee River. These
two proposed safety zones are necessary
to protect the public and transiting
vessels from the hazards associated with
the anticipated congregation of
spectator, volunteer, and government
vessels in these areas. The proposed
safety zones are also necessary to
protect the public from the hazards
associated with a fireworks display.
DATES: Comments and related material
must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before August 8, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by docket number USCG–
2013–0501 using any one of the
following methods:
(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:09 Jul 08, 2013
Jkt 229001
A. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov and will include
any personal information you have
provided.
1. Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please
include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG–2013–0501),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You
may submit your comments and
material online at, https://
www.regulations.gov or by fax, mail, or
hand delivery, but please use only one
of these means. If you submit a
comment it will be considered received
by the Coast Guard when you
successfully transmit the comment. If
you fax, hand deliver, or mail your
comment, it will be considered as
having been received by the Coast
Guard when it is received at the Docket
Management Facility. We recommend
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
41009
that you include your name and a
mailing address, an email address, or a
telephone number in the body of your
document so that we can contact you if
we have questions regarding your
submission.
To submit your comment online, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number USCG–2013–0501 in the
‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’
Click on the ‘‘submit a comment’’ box,
which will then become highlighted in
blue. If you submit your comments by
mail or hand delivery, submit them in
an unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2
by 11 inches, suitable for copying and
electronic filing. If you submit
comments by mail and would like to
know that they reached the Facility,
please enclose a stamped, self-addressed
postcard or envelope. We will consider
all comments and material received
during the comment period and may
change the rule based on your
comments.
2. Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to
https://www.regulations.gov, click on the
‘‘read comments’’ box, which will then
become highlighted in blue. In the
‘‘SEARCH’’ box insert ‘‘USCG–2013–
0501’’ and click ‘‘Search.’’ Click the
‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ in the ‘‘Actions’’
column. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12–140
on the ground floor of the Department
of Transportation West Building, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
3. Privacy Act
Anyone can search the electronic
form of comments received into any of
our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on
behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review a Privacy
Act notice regarding our public dockets
in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
4. Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for one using one of the four methods
specified under ADDRESSES. Please
explain why you believe a public
meeting would be beneficial. If we
determine that one would aid this
rulemaking, we will hold one at a time
and place announced by a later notice
in the Federal Register.
E:\FR\FM\09JYP1.SGM
09JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 131 (Tuesday, July 9, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 41005-41009]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-16394]
========================================================================
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. 78, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2013 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 41005]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2013-0602; Directorate Identifier 2012-CE-010-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Vulcanair S.p.A. Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Vulcanair S.p.A. (type certificate previously held by Partenavia)
Models P 68, P 68B, P 68C, P 68C-TC, P 68 ``OBSERVER,'' P68TC
``OBSERVER,'' and P68 ``OBSERVER 2'' airplanes that would supersede AD
2008-24-11, Amendment 39-15751. This proposed AD results from mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation
authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as cracking and/or corrosion of the wing spar, which could
result in structural failure of the wing. We are issuing this proposed
AD to require actions to address the unsafe condition on these
products.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 23, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 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
Vulcanair Airworthiness Office, Via G Pascoli, 7, 80026 Casoria, Italy;
phone: +39 081 59 18 135; fax: +39 081 59 18 172; email:
airworthiness@vulcanair.com; Internet: https://www.vulcanair.com/page-view.php?pagename=Service Bulletins. You may review copies of the
referenced service information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate,
901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call (816) 329-4148.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket 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 AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (telephone (800) 647-5527) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Kiesov, Aerospace Safety
Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329-4144; fax: (816) 329-4090; email:
mike.kiesov@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2013-0602;
Directorate Identifier 2012-CE-010-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https://regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.
Discussion
On November 19, 2008, we issued AD 2008-24-11, Amendment 39-15751
(73 FR 72314; November 28, 2008). That AD required actions intended to
address an unsafe condition on the Vulcanair S.p.A. Models P 68, P 68B,
P 68C, P 68C-TC, P 68 ``OBSERVER,'' AP68TP300 ``SPARTACUS,'' P68TC
``OBSERVER,'' AP68TP 600 ``VIATOR,'' and P68 ``OBSERVER 2'' airplanes.
Since we issued AD 2008-24-11 (73 FR 72314; November 28, 2008),
Vulcanair S.p.A. developed modification kits to repair certain lower
spar caps. They also developed a maintenance manual supplement with
special inspections of the wing and stabilator structures and new
limitations for the wing structure.
The FAA also realized that the Models AP68TP300 ''SPARTACUS'' and
AP68TP 600 ''VIATOR'' were inadvertenly included in AD 2008-24-11.
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued AD
No.: 2010-0051, dated March 25, 2010 (referred to after this as ``the
MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The
MCAI states:
Safe Life Limits of the wing structure of P.68 Series aeroplanes
have now been extended up to a maximum of 23 900 Flight Hours (FH),
depending on the condition of the spar lower cap angles and on the
embodiment of some modification kits. Furthermore, special
inspections of the wing and stabilator structures, different from
those previously required by EASA AD 2007-0027, have also been
introduced. This change has been developed by Vulcanair under change
No. MOD. P68/144 approved by EASA with approval No. 10028661 on 02
February 2010.
Consequently this AD, which supersedes EASA AD 2007-0027, allows
the implementation of the extended Safe Life Limits, in accordance
with the instructions of Vulcanair SB 162, and requires the
accomplishment of special inspections for the wing and stabilator
structures, in accordance with the Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM)
Supplement part number (P/N) NOR 10.771-52.
[[Page 41006]]
You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.
EASA AD No.: 2010-0051, dated March 25, 2010; Vulcanair S.p.A.
Maintenance Manual Supplement NOR10.771-52, dated March 1, 2010;
Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 2010;
Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Instruction No. 88, dated March 1, 2010; and
Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Instruction No. 89, dated March 1, 2010, base
the extended safe life limits on repetitive inspections and other
required preventive and corrective actions that under certain
conditions allow flight with known cracks in critical structure. The
FAA's Small Airplane Directorate does not allow further flight with
known cracks in critical structure without additional substantiating
data. Advisory Circular (AC) 23-13A, Chapter 6, dated September 29,
2005, describes what additional data is required to allow flight with
known cracks (found on the Internet at https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf).
Relevant Service Information
Vulcanair S.p.A. has issued Maintenance Manual Supplement
NOR10.771-52, dated March 1, 2010; Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Bulletin
No. 162, dated March 1, 2010; Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Instruction No.
88, dated March 1, 2010; and Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Instruction No.
89, dated March 1, 2010. The actions described in this service
information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in
the MCAI.
FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD
This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they
have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because
we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type
design.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD will affect 75 products of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it would take about 60 work-hours per
product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The
average labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on
U.S. operators to be $382,500, or $5,100 per product.
We estimate that the wing replacement would take about 300 work-
hours and require parts costing $443,406, for a cost of $468,906 per
product. Wing replacement is only required when the wing structure
exceeds the safe life established in this AD.
In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions for
kit installation would take about 120 work-hours and require parts
costing $2,595, for a cost of $12,795 per product. We have no way of
determining the number of products that may need these actions.
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.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
This section presents the initial regulatory flexibility analysis
(IRFA) that was done for this action. We have reworded and reformatted
for Federal Register publication purposes. The IRFA in its original
form can be found in the docket at https://www.regulations.gov.
Introduction and Purpose of This Analysis
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 objectives 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 this principle, the RFA requires
agencies to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to
explain the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals
are seriously considered.'' 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 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 an IRFA as described in the RFA.
Section 603(a) of the RFA requires that each initial regulatory
flexibility analysis contain the following information:
A description of the reasons action by the agency is being
considered;
A succinct statement of the objectives of, and legal basis
for, the proposed rule;
A description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the
number of small entities to which the proposed rule will apply;
A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping
and other compliance requirements of the proposed rule, including an
estimate of the classes of small entities which will be subject to the
requirement and the type of professional skills necessary for
preparation of the report or record;
To the extent practicable, an identification of all
relevant Federal rules which may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with
the proposed rule; and
A description of any significant alternatives to the
proposed rule which accomplish the stated objectives of applicable
statues and which minimize any significant economic impact of the
proposed rule on small entities.
The following represents a detailed description of the six items
required by section 603(a) of the RFA.
1. A Description of the Reasons Action by the Agency Is Being
Considered
This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) originated by EASA and would supersede AD 2008-24-
11, Amendment 39-15751 (73 FR 72314; November 28, 2008). AD 2008-24-11
established safe limits for the wing structure of Vulcanair P 68 series
airplanes and required repetitive inspection and repair of the wing and
stabilator structures when the airplanes reach safe life limits.
Operation beyond existing conservative safe limits (with inspections
and repair) is allowed pending establishment of final safe limits and a
terminating action.
The proposed AD significantly increases wing structure life limits
(in a few cases requiring kit modification of
[[Page 41007]]
the wing structure), but establishes a terminating action requiring
replacement of the wing structure and wing fuselage attachments and
bolts when new established safe limits are reached. Prior to the wing
structure safe life limit being reached, the proposed AD also requires
special inspections of the wing structure with time limits, since new,
of 6,000; 12,000; and 18,000 flight hours.
2. Objectives of, and Legal Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Title 49 of the U.S. 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 FAA's authority. We propose
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 the airplanes identified in this AD.
3. A Description of and an Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to
Which the Proposed Rule Will Apply
This proposed rule would affect 67 U.S.-registered airplanes, of
which 40 are owned by corporations, 8 by individuals, 2 by the Federal
Government, and 17 by state governments. Of the 48 airplanes held by
private sector parties, one financing firm owns 2 of them, and 2
operators each own 2 of them. The remaining 36 airplanes are owned by
36 corporations and individuals. The FAA believes that all, or nearly
all, of these private sector owners are privately held small firms, for
which we cannot obtain financial records. We conclude that the proposed
rule would affect a substantial number of small entities.
4. Reporting, Record Keeping, and Other Compliance Requirements of the
Proposed Rule
Small entities will incur no new reporting and record-keeping
requirements as a result of this rule.
The additional requirements of the proposed AD compared to AD 2008-
24-11, Amendment 39-15751 (73 FR 72314; November 28, 2008) are the
special wing structure inspections at 6,000; 12,000; and 18,000 flight
hours; the terminating action to replace the wing structure when the
wing structure safe limit is reached; and, for airplanes with serial
numbers 1-256 for which a spar crack was found under previous
Partenavia Costruzioni Aeronautiche S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 65,
Revison 3, dated September 30, 1985, replacement of the four main spar
lower cap angles using Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 162, dated
March 1, 2010. The costs of the required actions provided in the
proposed AD are as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost of
Requirement Work-hours Labor cost materials Total cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special inspections............................. 60 $5,100
Wing structure replacement...................... 300 25,500 $443,406 $468,906
Replacement of lower spar cap angles with 120 10,200 2,595 12,795
Service Bulletin 162 (S/N 1-256)...............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 1 of the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis in this AD.
The requirement to replace the wing structure, at considerable
cost, occurs when the airplanes are old and have low value, often less
than the cost of wing structure replacement. Therefore, in many cases
airplane retirement is the least cost alternative, in which case the
effective cost of the requirement is the loss in airplane value net of
salvage value. The requirement to replace the lower spar cap angles
applies to at most ten U.S.-registered airplanes and only if a front
spar crack was previously found under Partenavia Costruzioni
Aeronautiche S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 65, Revison 3, dated September
30, 1985. The expected present value cost of this requirement is thus
minimal. The requirement for special inspections at 6,000; 12,000; and
18,000 flight hours applies to all AD-affected airplanes.
Economic Impact on Small Entities
Since we have no financial information of the privately held firms
that constitute most of the operators of the affected airplanes, we
assess the economic impact of the proposed rule using airplane values.
As the Vulcanair P 68 airplanes are not listed in the Aircraft Bluebook
Price Digest, we undertook an internet search and found that the resale
value of older P 68 airplanes, manufactured between 1975 and 1984
ranged from about $80,000 to $300,000. Many of these airplanes will be
subject to the special inspection at 6,000 hours or even the special
inspection at 12,000 hours. Using a significant economic impact
criterion of 2 percent of airplane value, for operators of many of
these airplanes there is a significant economic impact based on just
one $5,100 inspection. Taking into account the present value cost of
two to three possible future inspections and possible repair, as well
as the present value cost of forced early retirement, there is a
significant economic impact on most if not all of these operators.
Therefore, we conclude that this proposed rule will have a
significant impact on a substantial number of firms.
5. Duplicative, Overlapping or Conflicting Federal Rules
The FAA is unaware of any Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with this proposed rule.
6. Significant Alternatives to the Proposed Rule
Because of an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop
on the airplanes identified in this proposed AD, there is no feasible
significant alternative to requiring the actions of this proposed AD.
The FAA invites public comment on this determination.
Regulatory Findings
We 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 this proposed
regulation:
(1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
[[Page 41008]]
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(4) Will have a significant economic impact, positive or negative,
on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
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 Amendment 39-15751 (73 FR
72314; November 28, 2008), and adding the following new AD:
Vulcanair S.p.A. (Type Certificate Previously Held by Partenavia):
Docket No. FAA-2013-0602; Directorate Identifier 2012-CE-010-AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by August 23, 2013.
(b) Affected ADs
This AD supersedes AD 2008-24-11, Amendment 39-15751 (73 FR
72314; November 28, 2008).
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to Vulcanair S.p.A. Models P 68, P 68B, P 68C, P
68C-TC, P 68 ``OBSERVER,'' P68TC ``OBSERVER,'' and P68 ``OBSERVER
2'' airplanes, serial numbers (S/N) 01 through 429, S/Ns 431 through
452, and S/N 454, certificated in any category.
(d) Subject
Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 57: Wings.
(e) Reason
This AD was prompted by 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 cracking and/or
corrosion of the wing spar. We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct cracking and corrosion of the wing spars, which, if not
corrected, could result in structural failure of the wing.
(f) Actions and Compliance
Unless already done, do the following actions specified in
paragraphs (f)(1) through (f)(8) of this AD, to include all
subparagraphs.
(1) Within 10 days after the effective date of this AD,
incorporate Vulcanair S.p.A. Maintenance Manual Supplement
NOR10.771-52, dated March 1, 2010, into the FAA-approved maintenance
program (maintenance manual) following Vulcanair S.p.A. Service
Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 2010.
(2) Within 10 days after the effective date of this AD,
determine the safe life limit of the wing structure as follows:
(i) For all rows except rows (c) and (e) in table 1, of
paragraph 1.3, of Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 162, dated
March 1, 2010, use the safe life limit specified in the appropriate
row of the table; and
(ii) For rows (c) and (e) in table 1, of paragraph 1.3, of
Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 2010,
before further flight, you must modify the wing structure following
Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 2010.
After modification, use the safe life limit specified in the
appropriate row of the table.
(3) Before reaching the life limit as determined in paragraph
(f)(2) of this AD, before further flight, you must replace the wing
structure and wing fuselage attachments and bolts with new ones. Do
the replacement following Vulcanair S.p.A Maintenance Manual
Supplement NOR10.771-52, dated March 1, 2010, as specified in the
instructions in WORK PROCEDURE, paragraph 2 of Vulcanair S.p.A.
Service Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 2010.
(4) Do an initial inspection of the wing structure as specified
in the instructions in paragraph 2.1 of Vulcanair S.p.A. Service
Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 2010, at the applicable times as
specified in paragraphs (f)(4)(i) and (f)(4)(ii). Repetitively
thereafter inspect and replace the wing structure following the
limitations in Vulcanair S.p.A. Maintenance Manual Supplement
NOR10.771-52, dated March 1, 2010.
(i) For aircraft that have not exceeded the safe life limit
hours time-in-service (TIS) on the wing structure as determined in
paragraph (f)(2) of this AD: Before accumulating 6,000 hours TIS on
the wing structure or within 100 hours TIS after the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs later, follow Vulcanair S.p.A.
Maintenance Manual Supplement NOR10.771-52, dated March 1, 2010. You
may take unless already done credit for this inspection if inspected
in compliance with AD 2008-24-11 (73 FR 72314; November 28, 2008);
or
(ii) For aircraft that have exceeded the safe life limit hours
TIS on the wing structure as determined in paragraph (f)(2) of this
AD: Within 100 hours TIS after the effective date of this AD, follow
Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 2010.
(5) Before accumulating 8,500 hours TIS since new on the
stabilator, within 500 hours TIS after January 2, 2009 (the
effective date of AD 2008-24-11 (73 FR 72314; November 28, 2008)),
or within 500 hours TIS from the last inspection done in compliance
with AD 2008-24-11, whichever occurs later, do the initial
inspection of the stabilator following Vulcanair S.p.A. Maintenance
Manual Supplement NOR10.771-52, paragraph 2.2, dated March 1, 2010,
or Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 120 Rev. 1, dated June 7,
2006. Repetitively thereafter inspect the stabilator following the
limitations in Vulcanair S.p.A. Maintenance Manual Supplement
NOR10.771-52, dated March 1, 2010.
(6) If any cracks are found during the inspections required in
paragraphs (f)(4) and/or (f)(5) of this AD, before further flight,
modify the wing structure following Vulcanair S.p.A. Service
Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1, 2010.
(7) For certain Model P 68 airplanes, AD 2009-24-03, Amendment
39-16090 (74 FR 62211, November 27, 2009) requires repetitive
inspections of the front and rear wing spars for cracks and
modification if cracks are found. The modification terminates the
repetitive inspections required in AD 2009-24-03 and may be done
regardless if cracks are found. The actions of AD 2009-24-03 are
independent of this AD action and remain in effect.
(8) EASA AD No.: 2010-0051, dated March 25, 2010; Vulcanair
S.p.A. Maintenance Manual Supplement NOR10.771-52, dated March 1,
2010; Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 162, dated March 1,
2010; Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Instruction No. 88, dated March 1,
2010; and Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Instruction No. 89, dated March
1, 2010, base the required preventive and corrective actions on
allowing flight with known cracks in critical structure. The FAA's
Small Airplane Directorate does not allow further flight with known
cracks in critical structure without additional substantiating data.
Advisory Circular (AC) 23-13A,Chapter 6, dated September 29, 2005,
describes what additional data is required to allow flight with
known cracks (found on the Internet at https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf).
(g) Other FAA AD Provisions
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Standards 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: Mike Kiesov, Aerospace Safety Engineer, FAA,
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106;
telephone: (816) 329-4144; fax: (816) 329-4090; email:
mike.kiesov@faa.gov. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane
to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal
inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO),
or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
(h) Related Information
(1) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD No.
2010-0051,
[[Page 41009]]
dated March 25, 2010, which may be found in the AD docket on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov; Vulcanair S.p.A. Service
Instruction No. 88, dated March 1, 2010; and Vulcanair S.p.A.
Service Instruction No. 89, dated March 1, 2010, for related
information.
(2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Vulcanair Airworthiness Office, Via G Pascoli, 7, 80026 Casoria,
Italy; phone: +39 081 59 18 135; fax: +39 081 59 18 172; email:
airworthiness@vulcanair.com; Internet: https://www.vulcanair.com/page-view.php?pagename=Service-Bulletins.
(3) You may view this service information at FAA, Small Airplane
Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
(816) 329-4148.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on July 2, 2013.
Earl Lawrence,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-16394 Filed 7-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
