Airworthiness Directives; Meggitt (Troy), Inc. Combustion Heaters, 76532-76540 [2016-26428]
Download as PDF
76532
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 81, No. 213
Thursday, November 3, 2016
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–2014–0603; Directorate
Identifier 2013–CE–026–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Meggitt
(Troy), Inc. Combustion Heaters
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking (SNPRM);
reopening of comment period.
AGENCY:
We are revising a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for
certain Meggitt (Troy), Inc. (previously
known as Stewart Warner South Wind
Corporation and as Stewart Warner
South Wind Division) Model Series (to
include all the variants) 921, 930, 937,
940, 944, 945, 977, 978, 979, 8240, 8253,
8259, and 8472 combustion heaters that
proposed to supersede airworthiness
directive (AD) 81–09–09. The NPRM
proposed to retain most actions from AD
81–09–09, add a calendar time to the
repetitive inspections, add more
detailed actions to the inspections, and
add a pressure decay test. The NPRM
was prompted by an airplane accident
and reports we received of the heater
malfunctioning. This action revises the
NPRM by adding combustion heater
models series to the applicability and
modifying the compliance times. We are
proposing this SNPRM to correct the
unsafe condition on these products.
Since these actions impose an
additional burden over that proposed in
the NPRM, we are reopening the
comment period to allow the public the
chance to comment on these proposed
changes.
DATES: The comment period for the
NPRM published in the Federal
Register on August 20, 2014 (79 FR
49249) is reopened. We must receive
comments on this SNPRM by December
19, 2016.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Nov 02, 2016
Jkt 241001
You may send comments,
using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, 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 Meggitt
Control Systems, 3 Industrial Drive,
Troy, Indiana 47588; telephone: (812)
547–7071; fax: (812) 547–2488; email:
infotroy@meggitt.com; Internet:
www.stewart-warner.com. You may
view this 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.
ADDRESSES:
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2014–
0603; 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
(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Chung-Der Young, Aerospace Engineer,
Chicago Aircraft Certification Office,
FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 2300
East Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, IL
60018–4696; telephone (847) 294–7309;
fax (847) 294–7834 email: chungder.young@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments about
this proposed AD. Send your comments
to an address listed under the
ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No.
FAA–2014–0603; Directorate Identifier
2013–CE–026–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://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact we receive
about this proposed AD.
Discussion
On April 16, 1981, we issued AD 81–
09–09, Amendment 39–4102 (46 FR
24936, May 4, 1981) (‘‘AD 81–09–09’’),
for certain Meggitt (Troy), Inc.
(previously known as Stewart Warner
South Wind Corporation and as Stewart
Warner South Wind Division) Model
Series 8240, 8253, 8259, and 8472
combustion heaters. AD 81–09–09
resulted from a hazardous condition
caused by deterioration of the
combustion heater. AD 81–09–09
currently requires repetitive inspections
of the combustion heater; repetitive
installation inspections of the
combustion heater; and, for combustion
heaters having 1,000 hours or more
time-in-service (TIS), overhaul of the
combustion heater.
We issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to supersede AD
81–09–09 on August 13, 2014, which
published in the Federal Register on
August 20, 2014 (79 FR 49249). The
NPRM was prompted by an airplane
accident and reports we received of the
heater malfunctioning. The NPRM
proposed to retain most actions from AD
81–09–09, add a calendar time to the
repetitive inspections, add more
detailed actions to the inspections, and
add a pressure decay test.
Actions Since the NPRM Was Issued
Since we issued the NPRM, we
received comments from the public
during the comment period that resulted
E:\FR\FM\03NOP1.SGM
03NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 213 / Thursday, November 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules
in our decision to issue this SNPRM.
This SNPRM proposes to increase the
applicability and modify the
compliance time. We also completed an
initial regulatory flexibility analysis to
determine the impact of the proposed
AD on small entities (this was at the
request of one of the comments received
on the NPRM). Adopted on September
5, 2014, the National Transportation
Safety Board issued the probable cause
for the airplane accident that initiated
this investigation. The probable cause
was identified as malfunction of the
cabin heater, which resulted in an
inflight fire and smoke in the airplane.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to
comment on the NPRM. The following
presents the comments received on the
NPRM and the FAA’s response to each
comment.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
Request To Allow Repair of the
Combustion Tube
James W. Tarter Jr. from Meggitt
(Troy), Inc. identified that the Meggitt
Inspection Procedure, Document No.
IP–347, dated May 17, 2014, allows
repair of combustion tubes that do not
pass the pressure decay test (PDT);
however, the proposed AD required a
combustion tube replacement. We infer
that the commenter wants to allow the
repair of the combustion tube when it
fails the PDT.
We disagree with allowing repair of
the combustion tube when it fails the
PDT. The cracked combustion tube
metal wall becomes oxidized and the
cross-section of the crack is
contaminated by combusted fuel
residuals; therefore, there is no way to
make a reliable repair. The welding will
crack again in an unpredictable period
of service time.
We did not make any changes to this
SNPRM as a result to this comment.
Request To Delay Issuance of AD Until
PDT Procedure Is Publically Available
Anthony Saxton requested we delay
the issuance of the final rule until the
PDT procedure is publicly available. He
stated that he had a difficult time getting
a copy of the procedure.
We do not agree with the commenter
about delaying the rule. By policy, the
FAA cannot post to the public docket
service information that is part of the
proposed action until the publication of
the final rule unless there is written
permission from the design approval
holder. The FAA does not currently
have such written permission. We
encourage the commenter to obtain a
copy of this document from the design
approval holder. After the final rule is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Nov 02, 2016
Jkt 241001
published in the Federal Register, the
PDT procedure will be readily available
to the public in the docket.
We did not make changes to this
SNPRM based on this comment.
Request To Change Number of
Airplanes Affected and Number of
Labor Hours Required To Comply
Anthony Saxton commented that the
number of airplanes affected was too
low and the labor cost was too low.
We partially agree with the
commenter. We agree the number of
airplanes affected was not complete, but
was the FAA’s best estimate at the time.
We obtained our initial information
from the FAA aircraft registry, and the
registry does not identify which
airplanes have combustion heaters. An
FAA economist has completed a more
complete assessment of the number of
affected aircraft during the development
of the initial regulatory flexibility
analysis. The estimated number of
affected airplanes has been modified
based on the initial regulatory
flexability analysis.
We disagree with modifying the labor
hours to perform the labor without more
substantive information to support a
different number.
Request To Withdraw the NPRM
William West commented that AD
action is not needed. He requested we
withdraw the NPRM and provide
guidance to owners/operators reminding
them that if the heater malfunctions to
not use it until it has been properly
inspected.
We disagree with this comment. We
completed a review of the accident/
incident data as well as service
difficulty reports over several years. The
level of risk identified in the data
review shows that we should address
this unsafe condition through
mandatory action rather than guidance.
This proposed AD action is consistent
with AD actions taken against other
similar products. We have no way of
assuring that the unsafe condition has
been mitigated through voluntary
guidance action.
We did not make changes to this
SNPRM based on this comment.
Request To Allow Limited Decay in the
PDT
Harold Haskins commented that we
should do a PDT that allows some
leakage as per AD 2004–21–05 (69 FR
61993, October 22, 2004). He
commented that the test identified in
the Meggitt (Troy), Inc. procedure is not
really a pressure decay test because no
decay is allowed. Allowing a certain
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
76533
amount of decay/leakage is consistent
with other AD actions.
We agree with the commenter that
there are other ADs where the required
pressure decay tests allow a certain
amount of leakage; however, we
disagree with modifying the SNPRM
because Meggitt (Troy), Inc., as the
design approval holder, has the
responsibility to develop what they
believe is appropriate procedures to
maintain their combustion heaters.
Owners/operators may provide
substantiating data and request approval
of an alternative method of compliance
(AMOC) using the procedures found in
14 CFR 39.19 and specified in paragraph
(m) of this SNPRM.
We did not make changes to this
SNPRM based on this comment.
Request To Change the Listing of the
Part Numbers or Model Numbers
Affected
Sin Kwong Chew, Anthony Saxton,
and the National Transportation Safety
Board (NTSB) commented that we
should use the part numbers or more
detailed model numbers for the affected
heaters. Another commenter suggested
we use the four upper level model series
number.
We agree with changing how the
model and series numbers are listed in
the Applicability, paragraph (c) of this
proposed AD. We want to ensure that
the applicability of the proposed AD
will address all affected model/part
number heaters.
We modified the Applicability,
paragraph (c) of this proposed AD, to
state the upper level model number of
the heaters and to specify that all the
part number heaters and dash numbers
are included under that higher level
designation.
Request Change to Procedures
William Sandmann requested we
change the heater disconnect
procedures to cap off the fuel supply as
near to the fuel source as possible to
reduce the possibility that fuel may leak
from the fuel line.
We disagree with this comment. The
manufacturer’s instructions are FAA
approved and acceptable. The
commenter’s suggestion may be an
improvement on the manufacturer’s
instructions, but it is not required and
is too detailed a level to include in this
proposed AD.
We did not make changes to this
SNPRM as a result of this comment.
Request Change to Credit for Previous
Inspections
Chris (no last name or company
affiliation given) requested we allow
E:\FR\FM\03NOP1.SGM
03NOP1
76534
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 213 / Thursday, November 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules
credit for PDTs previously done using
the manufacturer’s instructions within
the last 2 years/250 hours. The
commenter also requested that we do
not allow credit for the general
inspection of the combustion heater
because previous instructions are not
sufficient to meet the new inspection
criteria.
We agree with the commenter’s
suggestions. The proposed AD contains
the language ‘‘unless already done’’ in
paragraph (f) Compliance. That language
allows credit for any of the actions
required by the AD that were performed
before the effective date of the AD using
the instructions required by the AD.
That language does not allow credit for
the previous instructions in AD 81–09–
09 since we agree that they are not
sufficient to meet the inspection criteria.
We did not make changes to the
SNPRM based on this comment.
Request Replacement of Combustion
Heater Instead of Overhaul
Anthony Saxton and the Aircraft
Owners and Pilot’s Association (AOPA)
requested we require replacement of the
combustion heater tube instead of an
overhaul of the combustion heater if a
combustion heater fails the PDT. An
overhaul is a costly requirement that
adds no additional safety benefit.
We agree with the commenters’
suggestion. Additional inspections in
the proposed AD would require
inspection and possible replacement of
individual components of the
combustion heater. Therefore, if the
heater fails the PDT, replacement of the
combustion heater tube would be a
better option rather than heater
overhaul.
We have modified the corrective
action language for a PDT failure to
replacement, disable, or remove the
combustion heater.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
Request Removal of Combustion Heater
Model 8248
Harold Haskins and William
Sandmann commented they were
unaware of a Model 8248 combustion
heater.
We agree with this comment. The
Model 8248 was included based on the
FAA technical standard order (TSO)
database. After further research, Meggitt
(Troy), Inc. verified that the Model 8248
was included in the database in error
and did not exist.
We have removed the Model 8248
combustion heater from the
Applicability, paragraph (c) of this
proposed AD.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Nov 02, 2016
Jkt 241001
Request the Addition of Service
Information
Harold Haskins requested we add the
service information for the Model 8240
and 8259 combustion heaters.
We agree with the commenter’s
suggestion.
We have added South Wind Service
Manual for Stewart Warner South Wind
Aircraft Heaters 8240–A, 8240–C, 8259–
A, 8259–C, 8259–DL, 8259–FL1, 8259–
GL1, 8259–GL2, Form No. 09–998 (Rev.
12–69) to the service information
required for this proposed AD.
Request To Delete Piper From Possible
Combustion Heater Installation
Harold Haskins requested that we
delete Piper Aircraft, Inc. (Piper)
airplanes from possible airplanes that
may have the affected combustion
heaters installed. He does not know of
any Piper airplanes that have the
affected heaters installed.
We disagree with this comment. The
proposed AD addressed the combustion
heaters at the component level, and they
have the potential for installation on
various airplanes. Also, this AD as
proposed in this SNPRM would expand
the applicability to include combustion
heaters that are installed on Piper
airplanes as well as any other airplanes
not listed, thus the reason for the phrase
‘‘are installed on, but not limited to’’ in
the applicability.
Request Increasing the Time Allowed
for Initial Compliance Time
Anthony Saxton and AOPA requested
modifying the initial compliance time to
provide a longer period of time to
comply. Two commenters suggested
modifing the compliance time to better
coincide with a normal maintenance
schedule—within the next 10 hours of
time-in-service of the combustion heater
or at the next scheduled 100-hour
inspection, annual inspection, or phase
inspection. This would allow
maintenance shops to better
accommodate owners/operators in
complying with the AD.
We agree with the commenters. Since
the NPRM, this SNPRM adds
combustion heater models to the
Applicability, paragraph (c) of this
proposed AD. It would be appropriate to
allow more time to assure that
maintenance facilities are able to
support doing the work required by the
AD.
We have modified the wording for the
initial inspection compliance times for
the combustion heater inspection,
combustion heater installation
inspection, and the PDT to better
coincide with regularly scheduled
maintenance.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Request Adding Document Number to
Service Information
James W. Tartar Jr. and Meggitt (Troy),
Inc. requested adding the document
number for the Meggitt (Troy), Inc.
inspection procedure for the PDT for
clarity.
We agree with this comment. In this
proposed AD, we cite the Meggitt
(Troy), Inc. inspection procedure for the
PDT as Meggitt Inspection Procedure,
Document No. IP–347, dated May 17,
2014.
Request the AD Include an Analysis of
the Impact on Small Businesses
Anthony Saxton requested that we
include in the AD an analysis of the
AD’s impact on small businesses. The
commenter stated they are aware of a
number of small businesses that operate
the affected airplanes.
We agree with this comment. The
commenter has a good understanding of
the usage of the airplanes affected by
this SNPRM. Also, this proposed AD
adds combustion heater models to the
Applicability, paragraph (c) of this
proposed, that will affect additional
airplanes over that affected in the
proposed rule.
We have completed an initial
regulatory flexability analysis that we
have included in its entirety in this
SNPRM.
Support of Proposed AD
AOPA, NTSB, William Sandmann,
and Anthony Saxton all supported the
general intent of the proposed AD
action.
Related Service Information Under 1
CFR Part 51
We reviewed the following service
information that applies to this
proposed AD:
—Stewart-Warner South Wind
Corporation South Wind Service
Manual for Stewart Warner South
Wind Aircraft Heaters 8240–A, 8240–
C, 8259–A, 8259–C, 8259–DL, 8259–
FL1, 8259–GL1, 8259–GL2, Form No.
09–998, revised: December 1969;
—South Wind Division Stewart-Warner
Corporation Service Manual Beech
Aircraft Corporation PM–20688, Part
No. 404–001039 Heater Assy. (SW
8253–B), revised: April 1965;
—South Wind Division Stewart-Warner
Corporation Service Manual South
Wind Aircraft Heater 8472 Series,
Form No. 09–1015, issued: April
1975; and
The service information above
describes procedures for inspection of
the combustion heater and inspection of
the installation of the combustion heater
for the applicable heater models.
E:\FR\FM\03NOP1.SGM
03NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 213 / Thursday, November 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules
We also reviewed Meggitt Inspection
Procedure, Pressure Decay Test, Aircraft
Heaters, dated May 17, 2014. This
service information describes
procedures for the PDT for airplane
combustion heaters for all heater
models.
This service information is reasonably
available because the interested parties
have access to it through their normal
course of business or by the means
identified in the ADDRESSES section.
FAA’s Determination
We are proposing this SNPRM
because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe
condition described previously is likely
to exist or develop in other products of
the same type design. Certain changes
described above expand the scope of
this rulemaking. As a result, we have
determined that it is necessary to reopen
the comment period to provide
additional opportunity for the public to
comment on this SNPRM.
Proposed Requirements of This SNPRM
This SNPRM would require repetitive
inspections of the combustion heater
and repetitive general inspections of the
combustion heater installation,
replacing any parts or components as
necessary. This SNPRM would also
require repetitive PDTs, with
replacement of the combustion heater
tube, disabling, or removal of the
combustion heater in the event of PDT
failure. This SNPRM also modifies the
inspection and PDT compliance times
allowing for the inspections to coincide
with regularly scheduled maintenance.
This SNPRM would not allow repair of
the combustion heater tube.
For combustion heater models other
than Models 8240, 8253, 8259, and
8472, this SNPRM does not have
referenced service information
associated with certain required
inspections and the PDT and, if
necessary, any replacement(s) that may
be required. Appendix 1 of this SNPRM
contains a listing of service information
that provides specific instructions, for
certain inspections and replacements,
that may be used to apply for an AMOC.
However, the listing in appendix 1 to
this SNPRM does not include any
instructions for the required PDT
because these procedures do not exist.
76535
If you are unable to obtain instructions
for the PDT, you must disable or remove
the combustion heater.
The service information listed in
appendix 1 of this SNPRM did not meet
Office of the Federal Register regulatory
requirements for incorporation by
reference approval due to the condition
of the documents.
We are evaluating the actions required
in AD 69–13–03 (38 FR 33765,
December 7, 1973) and may take further
AD action in the future.
Differences Between This SNPRM and
the Service Information
The proposed AD would prohibit
repair of any defective combustion tube
while the service information does not
specify this.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD
affects 6,300 combustion heaters
installed on, but not limited to, certain
Beech, Britten-Norman, Cessna Aircraft
Company, and Piper Aircraft, Inc.
airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to
comply with this proposed AD:
ESTIMATED COSTS
Action
Labor cost
Inspections and pressure decay test of the combustion heater.
We estimate the following costs to do
any necessary combustion heater
disable/removal/related replacement
Cost per
product
Parts cost
7 work-hours × $85 per
hour = $595.
Not applicable ..................
that would be required based on the
results of the proposed inspections/test.
We have no way of determining the
$595
Cost on U.S.
operators
$3,748,500
number of aircraft that might need a
combustion heater disable/removal/
related replacement:
ON-CONDITION COSTS
Action
Labor cost
Replace combustion heater tube ..........................
Replace temperature switches ..............................
Repair pump ..........................................................
Disable heater .......................................................
Remove heater ......................................................
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Nov 02, 2016
Jkt 241001
8
1
2
2
3
Parts cost
work-hours × $85 per hour = $680 ...................
work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 .......................
work-hours × $85 per hour = $170 ...................
work-hours × $85 per hour = $170 ...................
work-hours × $85 per hour = $255 ...................
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
$3,900 ...........................
$320 ..............................
$470 ..............................
Not Applicable ...............
Not Applicable ...............
Cost per
product
$4,580
405
640
170
255
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.
E:\FR\FM\03NOP1.SGM
03NOP1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
76536
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 213 / Thursday, November 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules
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 initial
regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) as
described in the RFA. The FAA finds
that the proposed AD would have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Accordingly, in the following sections
we discuss the compliance requirements
of the proposed AD, the cost of
compliance, and the economic impact
on small entities.
Section 603(a) of the RFA requires
that each initial regulatory flexibility
analysis contain:
—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; and 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Nov 02, 2016
Jkt 241001
1. 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 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 the
airplanes identified in this proposed
AD.
2. A Description of the Reasons Action
by the Agency Is Being Considered
This proposed AD stems from the
crash of a Cessna 401 near Chanute,
Kansas, on May 11, 2012, killing the
pilot and three of the four passengers
aboard, and seriously injuring the fourth
passenger. According to the NTSB
report, the crash occurred after dark
smoke emanated from the cabin heater
and entered the cabin obscuring the
occupants’ vision. According to the
Report: ‘‘The smoke likely interfered
with the pilot’s ability to identify a safe
landing site.’’ When the pilot attempted
an emergency landing in a field, the
airplane’s wing contacted the ground
and the airplane cartwheeled.
The NTSB determined the probable
cause of the accident to be:
The malfunction of the cabin heater, which
resulted in an inflight fire and smoke in the
airplane. Contributing to the accident was the
pilot’s lack of understanding concerning the
status of the airplane’s heater system
following an earlier overheat event and the
risk of its continued use. Also contributing
were the inadequate inspection criteria for
the cabin heater.
As result of this accident, the FAA is
proposing this AD to detect and correct
a hazardous condition caused by
deterioration of the combustion heater,
a condition that could lead to ignition
of heater components and result in
smoke and fumes in the airplane cabin.
3. A Description of and an Estimate of
the Number of Small Entities To Which
the Proposed Rule Will Apply
This proposed AD would supersede
AD 81–09–09, which applies to 8000
series Meggitt combustion heaters
installed on certain twin-engine piston
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
airplanes, primarily Cessna 300 and 400
series airplanes, but also installed on
the Beech D18S twin-engine airplane
and some Britten Norman twin-engine
piston airplanes. The proposed AD
would extend applicability to 900 series
Meggitt combustion heaters installed on
certain Cessna single-engine piston
airplanes, Cessna 310 twin-engine
airplanes, Lake LA–4 and LA–250
airplanes, certain Ryan Navion singleengine piston airplanes and certain
Piper PA–23 and PA–30 airplanes. The
FAA estimates that there are 4,121
airplanes equipped with 8000 series
Meggitt combustion heaters, and 2,123
airplanes equipped with 900 series
Meggitt combustion heaters. Since many
of these airplanes are registered to
Limited Liability Companies (LLCs),
Limited Liability Partnerships (LLPs)
and other company forms typically
suited for single proprietors, small
partnerships, etc., we conclude that the
proposed rule would affect a substantial
number of small entities.
4. Duplicative, Overlapping or
Conflicting Federal Rules
The FAA is unaware of any Federal
rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict
with this proposed AD.
5. 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.
The FAA considered allowing more
flight hours or calendar time before
requiring compliance, but this
alternative would increase the risk of
another fatal accident. This proposed
AD allows the combustion heater to be
disconnected or removed, but, as noted
above, operating without a heater is
unlikely to be viable.
6. Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements of the
Proposed Rule
Small entities would incur no new
reporting and recordkeeping
requirements as a result of this rule.
Compliance Requirements
This proposed AD would carry over
the following requirements from AD 81–
09–09:
—Conduction of the 250-hour heater
inspection every 250 hours of heater
operation, in accordance with the
manufacturer’s service manual. We
estimate the labor cost of this action
to be 2 hours × $85 = $170.
E:\FR\FM\03NOP1.SGM
03NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 213 / Thursday, November 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules
—General inspection of the heater
installation at the same time as the
250-hour inspection. We estimate the
labor cost of this action to also be 2
hours × $85 = $170.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
Since the proposed rule would extend
applicability to 900 series heaters
Meggitt combustion heaters, which are
installed on certain airplanes, there is
an incremental cost associated with the
existing requirement for these two
inspections. There is no incremental
cost associated with applicability to
8000 series heaters, installed on certain
airplanes, as the current rule already
applies to these heaters.
This proposed AD would add the
following new provisions, which will
apply to both 900 and 8000 series
heaters installed on certain airplanes:
—During each 250-hour inspection
more detailed actions would be
required, namely inspection of the
thermostat and upper limit switches,
and inspection of the solenoid valve
and fuel pump. In conjunction with
the 250-hour and installation
inspections already required, the
labor cost of these more detailed
actions would be one hour of labor at
$85. ‘‘On-condition’’ costs to replace
the temperature switches would be an
additional hour of labor ($85) and
$320 in materials cost, for a total of
$405. On-condition costs to repair/
overhaul the pump would be an
additional two hours of labor ($170)
and $470 in materials cost for a total
of $640.
—Operators would be required to
replace defective combustion tubes
with new tubes as repair of
combustion tubes would be
prohibited. We estimate the cost of
prohibiting repair of combustion
tubes to be minimal as industry
reports that the Meggitt heater
combustion tubes are effectively nonrepairable.
—At the same time as the 250-hour and
installation inspection, a combustion
heater pressure decay test (PDT)
would be required. The PDT would
cost $170. If the combustion heater
fails the PDT, the operator would be
required to replace the combustion
tube at an installed cost of $4,580.
—Operators have the options of
disabling the heater at an estimated
cost of $170 or removing it at
estimated cost of $255.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Nov 02, 2016
Jkt 241001
Cost of Compliance
In calculating the cost of compliance,
we assume that operating without a
heater is unlikely to be viable. We
estimate the ten-year cost of the
proposed rule. Based on data in the
2014 GA Survey, we can somewhat
conservatively assume that average
flight hours per airplane per year are
about 100 hours. We estimate heater
time to be 50 percent of airplane flight
hours so, on average, flight hours will
accumulate to about 1,000 hours in ten
years and heater time will accumulate to
about 500 hours. Since requirements for
inspection internals are ‘‘250 hours of
combustion heater operations or two
years, whichever occurs first,’’ we
expect inspections to usually occur
every two years. As will be seen below,
compliance costs are dominated by the
almost immediate requirement for the
PDT test.
Pressure Decay Test
The FAA estimates that 90 percent of
combustion tubes tested will fail the
first PDT test. Since replacing the
combustion tube, like an overhaul,
requires complete disassembly of the
combustion heater, we somewhat
conservatively assume that operators
will overhaul their combustion heaters
at $4,580, rather than simply replace the
combustion tube, at $4,900. Major
components such as the combustion
tube, fuel pump, and temperature
switches that are typically replaced or
overhauled in a combustion heater
overhaul have service lives of 750 heater
hours, equivalent to about 1,500 flight
hours or 15 years. Therefore, we assume
that once replaced or overhauled, these
components will not need to be
replaced during our 10-year period of
cost estimation. So aside from the initial
tube replacement, we estimate that, for
inspections required by this proposed
AD, ‘‘on-condition’’ costs would be
minimal.
Table 1 below shows our calculation
of compliance cost for airplanes with
the affected Meggitt combustion heaters.
We assume the rule to be effective in
2017 and, as discussed above, in the
first year we assume the combustion
heater fails the PDT resulting in a
subsequent overhaul. For the 8000
series heaters note that the $935 labor
cost for 2017 includes three hours of
labor ($255) for the detailed inspection
and the PDT in addition to eight hours
of labor for the overhaul ($680).
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
76537
As the table shows, we estimate the
present value cost of compliance to be
$6,020 for airplanes equipped with 8000
series Meggitt combustion heaters and
$7,514 for airplanes equipped with 900
series Meggitt combustion heaters. The
lower cost for airplanes with 8000 series
combustion heaters reflects the
previously noted fact that 8000 series
heaters are currently subject to the 250hour inspection and installation
inspection requirements, and, therefore,
the incremental cost would be
correspondingly less for airplanes with
8000 series combustion heaters
compared to airplanes with 900 series
heaters.
Economic Impact on Small Entities
If the cost of compliance is greater
than 2 percent of the value of an
operator’s airplane, the FAA considers
the cost impact to be significant. So if
the value of an airplane equipped with
an affected Meggitt combustion heater is
less than 50 times the cost of
compliance, we consider that the
operator of the airplane would incur a
substantial economic impact. With a
present value cost of about $6,000 for
airplanes equipped with 8000 series
Meggitt combustion heaters, the FAA
considers the cost impact to be
significant for all such airplanes with
values below about $300,000. With a
present value cost of about $7,500 for
airplanes equipped with 900 series
Meggitt combustion heaters, the FAA
considers the cost impact to be
significant for all such airplanes with
values below about $350,000. The
airplanes equipped with the affected
heaters are single- and twin-engine
piston airplanes that, for the most part,
were manufactured from the 1940s to
the 1980s, and range in price from about
$350,000 for a Cessna 221C Golden
Eagle down to a price as low as $30,000
for a Piper 23–150 Apache. Accordingly,
most of the 6,244 airplanes equipped
with Meggitt combustion heaters have
values low enough to consider that the
airplane operators would incur a
significant economic impact. As noted
above, many of these airplanes are
registered to LLCs and other small
companies.
The FAA therefore concludes that this
proposed AD would have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
E:\FR\FM\03NOP1.SGM
03NOP1
76538
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 213 / Thursday, November 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—COSTS OF COMPLIANCE
Year
Materials cost
Mtls + labor
cost
Labor cost
Discount factor
(@7%)
Actions
PV Cost
Airplanes with 8000 Series Meggitt Combustion Heaters
2017 .......................
$4,220
$935
$5,155
2019 .......................
........................
255
255
2021 .......................
........................
255
255
2023 .......................
........................
255
255
2025 .......................
........................
255
255
2027 .......................
........................
255
255
........................
........................
........................
Total PV Cost
Detailed inspection (1 hr labor),
PDT (2 hrs labor)—Overhaul
after assumed failure (8 hrs
labor, $4,220 materials).
Detailed inspection (1 hr labor),
PDT inspection (2 hrs labor).
Detailed inspection (1 hr labor),
PDT inspection (2 hrs labor).
Detailed inspection (1 hr labor),
PDT inspection (2 hrs labor).
Detailed inspection (1 hr labor),
PDT inspection (2 hrs labor).
Detailed inspection (1 hr labor),
PDT inspection (2 hrs labor).
..........................................................
1.000
$5,155
0.873
223
0.763
195
0.666
170
0.582
148
0.508
130
........................
6,020
1.000
5,495
0.873
520
0.763
454
0.666
396
0.582
346
0.508
302
........................
7,514
Airplanes with 900 Series Combustion Meggitt Heaters
2017 .......................
4,220
1,275
5,495
2019 .......................
........................
595
595
2021 .......................
........................
595
595
2023 .......................
........................
595
595
2025 .......................
........................
595
595
2027 .......................
........................
595
595
........................
........................
........................
Total PV Cost
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Nov 02, 2016
Jkt 241001
250-hr inspection (2 hrs labor), installation inspection (2 hrs labor),
detailed inspection (1 hr labor),
PDT (2 hrs labor)—Overhaul
after assumed failure (8 hrs
labor, 4,220 materials).
250-hr inspection (2 hrs labor), installation inspection (2 hrs labor),
detailed inspection (1 hr labor),
PDT (2 hrs labor).
250-hr inspection (2 hrs labor), installation inspection (2 hrs labor),
detailed inspection (1 hr labor),
PDT (2 hrs labor).
250-hr inspection (2 hrs labor), installation inspection (2 hrs labor),
detailed inspection (1 hr labor),
PDT (2 hrs labor).
250-hr inspection (2 hrs labor), installation inspection (2 hrs labor),
detailed inspection (1 hr labor),
PDT (2 hrs labor).
250-hr inspection (2 hrs labor), installation inspection (2 hrs labor),
detailed inspection (1 hr labor),
PDT (2 hrs labor).
..........................................................
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26,
1979),
(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,
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 AD 81–09–09, Amendment
39–4102 (46 FR 24936, May 4, 1981)
and adding the following new
airworthiness directive (AD):
■
E:\FR\FM\03NOP1.SGM
03NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 213 / Thursday, November 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Meggitt (Troy), Inc.: Docket No. FAA–2014–
0603; Directorate Identifier 2013–CE–
026–AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by December
19, 2016.
(b) Affected ADs
This AD replaces AD 81–09–09,
Amendment 39–4102 (46 FR 24936, May 4,
1981).
(c) Applicability
(1) This AD applies to Meggitt (Troy), Inc.
(previously known as Stewart Warner South
Wind Corporation and as Stewart Warner
South Wind Division) Models (to include all
dash number and model number variants)
921, 930, 937, 940, 944, 945, 977, 978, 979,
8240, 8253, 8259, and 8472 combustion
heaters that:
(i) Are installed on, but not limited to,
certain Beech, Britten-Norman, Cessna
Aircraft Company, and Piper Aircraft, Inc.
airplanes; and
(ii) certificated in any category.
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America
Code 2140; Heating System.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by an airplane
accident and reports we received that the
combustion heater was malfunctioning. We
are issuing this AD to detect and correct a
hazardous condition caused by deterioration
of the combustion heater, which could lead
to ignition of components and result in
smoke and fumes in the cabin.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD by doing one of the
actions in paragraphs (f)(1), (2), or (3) of this
AD at the compliance times indicated, unless
already done. If the hours of combustion
heater operation cannot be determined, use
50 percent of the airplane’s hours time-inservice (TIS):
(1) Perform the actions specified in
paragraphs (g) through (j) of this AD;
(2) Disable the heater following the
instructions in paragraph (k)(1) of this AD; or
(3) Remove the heater following the
instructions in paragraph (k)(2) of this AD.
(g) Inspections and Pressure Decay Test
(PDT) of the Combustion Heater
Within the next 10 hours TIS of the
combustion heater after the effective date of
this AD or the next scheduled 100-hour
inspection, annual inspection, or phase
inspection that occurs 30 days after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs
first, and repetitively thereafter at intervals
not to exceed 250 hours of combustion heater
operation or two years, whichever occurs
first, do the following inspections and PDT
listed in paragraphs (g)(1) through (4) of this
AD. You may do one of the actions in
paragraph (k)(1) or (2) of this AD in lieu of
doing the inspections required by paragraph
(g).
(1) Inspections using the instructions in
paragraph (i)(1) or (j) of this AD, as
applicable.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Nov 02, 2016
Jkt 241001
(2) Inspections using the steps listed in
paragraphs (g)(2)(i) through (v) of this AD:
(i) Inspect the thermostat switch (external
from heater) and upper limit switch (located
on the heater). In cold static condition, both
switches should be in closed position; in
operation (hot) condition, both switches
should regulate their sensed temperatures
within +/¥10 degrees F.
(ii) Inspect the solenoid valve and fuel
pump for fuel leak, corrosion, diaphragm
crack, metal shavings, and excess grease.
(iii) With the heater operating, inspect the
fuel pump output pressure for proper gauge
hook up and pressure range readings.
(iv) Inspect the combustion heater’s fuel
pump operating pressure to assure it is not
affected by other on-board pumps.
(v) Inspect the heater to assure it instantly
responds to the on/off switch.
(3) Installation inspections and checks
using the steps listed in paragraphs (g)(3)(i)
through (iv) of this AD:
(i) Inspect ventilating air and combustion
air inlets and exhaust outlet correcting any
restrictions and ensure attachment security.
(ii) Inspect drain line and ensure it is free
of obstruction.
(iii) Check all fuel lines for security at
joints and shrouds, correcting/replacing
those showing evidence of looseness or
leakage.
(iv) Check all electrical wiring for security
at attachment points, correcting conditions
leading to arcing, chafing or looseness.
(4) Pressure decay test using the
instructions in paragraph (i)(2) or (j) of this
AD, as applicable.
(h) Replacement of the Heater Tube and/or
Correct or Replace Other Assemblies
If any discrepancies are found during any
of the inspections/tests required in
paragraphs (g)(1), (2), (3), and/or (4) of this
AD, before further flight, replace the
defective heater tube and/or correct or
replace other defective assemblies as
necessary. You must use the instructions in
paragraph (i) or (j) of this AD, as applicable,
to do any necessary replacements. This AD
does not allow repair of the combustion tube.
You may do one of the actions in paragraph
(k)(1) or (2) of this AD in lieu of doing the
replacements required by paragraph (h).
(i) Procedures for Inspection, PDT, and
Replacement for Models 8240, 8253, 8259,
and 8472
(1) For the inspections required in
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD and the
replacement(s) that may be required in
paragraph (h) of this AD, use the service
information listed in paragraphs (i)(1)(i)
through (iii) of this AD, as applicable, or do
one of the actions in paragraph (k)(1) or (2)
of this AD.
(i) Stewart-Warner South Wind
Corporation South Wind Service Manual for
Stewart Warner South Wind Aircraft Heaters
8240–A, 8240–C, 8259–A, 8259–C, 8259–DL,
8259–FL1, 8259–GL1, 8259–GL2, Form No.
09–998, revised: December 1969;
(ii) South Wind Division Stewart-Warner
Corporation Beech Aircraft Corporation
Service Manual PM–20688, Part No. 404–
001039 Heater Assy. (SW 8253–B), revised:
April 1965; or
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
76539
(iii) South Wind Division Stewart-Warner
Corporation Service Manual South Wind
Aircraft Heater 8472 Series, Form No. 09–
1015, issued: April 1975.
(2) For the pressure decay test (PDT)
required in paragraph (g)(4) of this AD, use
Meggitt Inspection Procedure, Pressure Decay
Test, Aircraft Heaters, IP–347, dated May 17,
2014, or do one of the actions in paragraph
(k)(1) or (2) of this AD.
(j) Procedures for Inspection, PDT, and
Replacement for Models Other Than Models
8240, 8253, 8259, and 8472
This AD does not have referenced service
information associated with the mandatory
requirements of this AD for models other
than Models 8240, 8253, 8259, and 8472. For
the required inspections and PDT specified
in paragraphs (g)(1) and (4) of this AD and,
if necessary, any replacement(s) specified in
paragraph (h) of this AD, you must contact
the manufacturer to obtain FAA-approved
inspection, replacement, and PDT procedures
approved specifically for this AD and
implement those procedures through an
alternative method of compliance (AMOC) or
do one of the actions in paragraph (k)(1) or
(2) of this AD. You may use the contact
information found in paragraph (n)(2) to
contact the manufacturer. Appendix 1 of this
AD contains a listing of service information
that provides specific instructions, for certain
inspections and replacements, that you may
use to apply for an AMOC following
paragraph (m) of this AD. The service
information listed in appendix 1 of this AD
did not meet Office of the Federal Register
regulatory requirements for incorporation by
reference approval due to the condition of
the documents. However, the listing in
appendix 1 to this AD does not include any
instructions for the PDT required in
paragraph (g)(4) because these procedures do
not exist.
(k) Disable or Removal of the Combustion
Heater
As an option to the inspection and
replacement actions specified in paragraphs
(g) and (h) of this AD, within the next 10
hours TIS of the combustion heater after the
effective date of this AD or the next
scheduled 100-hour inspection, annual
inspection, or phase inspection that occurs
30 days after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs first, do one of the
following actions:
(1) Disable the heater by the following
actions:
(i) Disconnect and cap the heater fuel
supply;
(ii) Disconnect circuit breakers;
(iii) Tag the main switch ‘‘Heater
Inoperable’’; and
(iv) The ventilation blower can stay
functional.
(v) If you re-enable the combustion heater,
you must perform one of the actions in
paragraphs (f)(1) through (3) of this AD.
(2) Remove the heater by the following
actions:
(i) Disconnect and cap the heater fuel
supply;
(ii) Disconnect/remove circuit breakers;
(iii) Remove exhaust pipe extension;
E:\FR\FM\03NOP1.SGM
03NOP1
76540
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 213 / Thursday, November 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules
(iv) Cap the exhaust opening;
(v) Remove the heater; and
(vi) Do weight and balance for the aircraft.
(vii) If you install an applicable
combustion heater, you must perform one of
the actions in paragraphs (f)(1) through (3) of
this AD.
(l) Special Flight Permit
Special flight permits are permitted in
accordance with 14 CFR 39.23 with the
following limitation: Use of the heater is not
allowed.
(m) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Chicago 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. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector
or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in
paragraph (o)(1) of this AD.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC,
notify your appropriate principal inspector,
or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office.
(3) AMOCs approved for AD 81–09–09 (46
FR 24936, May 4, 1981) are not approved as
AMOCs for this AD.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
(n) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Chung-Der Young, Aerospace
Engineer, Chicago Aircraft Certification
Office, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate,
2300 East Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, IL
60018–4696; telephone (847) 294–7309; fax
(847) 294–7834 email: chung-der.young@
faa.gov.
(2) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Meggitt Control Systems, 3
Industrial Drive, Troy, Indiana 47588;
telephone: (812) 547–7071; fax: (812) 547–
2488; email: infotroy@meggitt.com; Internet:
www.stewart-warner.com. You may view this
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.
Appendix 1 to Docket No. FAA–2016–0603
The following service information applies
to certain combustion heater models affected
by this AD, but the service information can
not be required by the AD. You may use this
service information for procedural guidance
when applying for an alternative method of
compliance.
—South Wind Service Manual P.M. 35710
Aircraft Heaters 8240–E, 8259–HL1, HL2,
-L, supplements attached HR2.JR2.M;
—South Wind Service Manual PM35710
Aircraft Heaters
—Stewart-Warner Corporation South Wind
Division Service Manual South Wind
Aircraft Heaters Series 921 and 930, Ind506, Revision 4–53;
—Stewart-Warner Corporation South Wind
Division Service Manual SouthWind Series
940 Heater, PM–10035, Revision 3–82;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Nov 02, 2016
Jkt 241001
—Stewart-Warner Corporation South Wind
Division Service Manual South Wind
Model 978 Personal Heater, Form No.
PM6348 (12–56);
—South Wind Service Manual Model 979–B1
Aircraft Heater, South Wind Division of
Stewart-Warner Corporation, (3–51);
—Navion Model 977–B Installation Manual
Section I, Section II, Section III, and
Section IV.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on
October 27, 2016.
Pat Mullen,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–26428 Filed 11–2–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail
address above between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
For service information identified in
this NPRM, contact General Electric
Company, GE Aviation, Room 285, 1
Neumann Way, Cincinnati, OH 45215;
phone: 513–552–3272; email: geae.aoc@
ge.com. You may view this service
information at the FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 1200 District
Avenue, Burlington, MA. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Examining the AD Docket
Federal Aviation Administration
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2015–
0165; 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
(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2015–0165; Directorate
Identifier 2015–NE–02–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; General
Electric Company Turbofan Engines
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
We propose to supersede
airworthiness directive (AD) 2015–15–
03, which applies to all General Electric
Company (GE) GEnx turbofan engine
models. AD 2015–15–03 precludes the
use of certain full authority digital
engine control (FADEC) software on
GEnx turbofan engines. Since we issued
AD 2015–15–03, GE implemented final
design changes that remove the unsafe
condition. This proposed AD would
require removing a specific part and
replacing it with a part eligible for
installation and specifying the FADEC
software version for the affected GEnx
turbofan engines. We are proposing this
AD to prevent engine failure, loss of
thrust control, and damage to the
airplane.
SUMMARY:
We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by January 3, 2017.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, 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
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christopher McGuire, Aerospace
Engineer, Engine Certification Office,
FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate,
1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA
01803; phone: 781–238–7120; fax: 781–
238–7199; email: chris.mcguire@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–2015–0165; Directorate Identifier
2015–NE–02–AD’’ at the beginning of
your comments. We specifically invite
comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy
aspects of this NPRM. We will consider
all comments received by the closing
date and may amend this NPRM
because 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
about this NPRM.
E:\FR\FM\03NOP1.SGM
03NOP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 213 (Thursday, November 3, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 76532-76540]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-26428]
========================================================================
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. 81, No. 213 / Thursday, November 3, 2016 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 76532]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2014-0603; Directorate Identifier 2013-CE-026-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Meggitt (Troy), Inc. Combustion Heaters
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM); reopening
of comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are revising a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for
certain Meggitt (Troy), Inc. (previously known as Stewart Warner South
Wind Corporation and as Stewart Warner South Wind Division) Model
Series (to include all the variants) 921, 930, 937, 940, 944, 945, 977,
978, 979, 8240, 8253, 8259, and 8472 combustion heaters that proposed
to supersede airworthiness directive (AD) 81-09-09. The NPRM proposed
to retain most actions from AD 81-09-09, add a calendar time to the
repetitive inspections, add more detailed actions to the inspections,
and add a pressure decay test. The NPRM was prompted by an airplane
accident and reports we received of the heater malfunctioning. This
action revises the NPRM by adding combustion heater models series to
the applicability and modifying the compliance times. We are proposing
this SNPRM to correct the unsafe condition on these products. Since
these actions impose an additional burden over that proposed in the
NPRM, we are reopening the comment period to allow the public the
chance to comment on these proposed changes.
DATES: The comment period for the NPRM published in the Federal
Register on August 20, 2014 (79 FR 49249) is reopened. We must receive
comments on this SNPRM by December 19, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, 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
Meggitt Control Systems, 3 Industrial Drive, Troy, Indiana 47588;
telephone: (812) 547-7071; fax: (812) 547-2488; email:
infotroy@meggitt.com; Internet: www.stewart-warner.com. You may view
this 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 by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-
0603; 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 (phone: 800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chung-Der Young, Aerospace Engineer,
Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate,
2300 East Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, IL 60018-4696; telephone (847)
294-7309; fax (847) 294-7834 email: chung-der.young@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-2014-0603;
Directorate Identifier 2013-CE-026-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://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.
Discussion
On April 16, 1981, we issued AD 81-09-09, Amendment 39-4102 (46 FR
24936, May 4, 1981) (``AD 81-09-09''), for certain Meggitt (Troy), Inc.
(previously known as Stewart Warner South Wind Corporation and as
Stewart Warner South Wind Division) Model Series 8240, 8253, 8259, and
8472 combustion heaters. AD 81-09-09 resulted from a hazardous
condition caused by deterioration of the combustion heater. AD 81-09-09
currently requires repetitive inspections of the combustion heater;
repetitive installation inspections of the combustion heater; and, for
combustion heaters having 1,000 hours or more time-in-service (TIS),
overhaul of the combustion heater.
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to supersede AD
81-09-09 on August 13, 2014, which published in the Federal Register on
August 20, 2014 (79 FR 49249). The NPRM was prompted by an airplane
accident and reports we received of the heater malfunctioning. The NPRM
proposed to retain most actions from AD 81-09-09, add a calendar time
to the repetitive inspections, add more detailed actions to the
inspections, and add a pressure decay test.
Actions Since the NPRM Was Issued
Since we issued the NPRM, we received comments from the public
during the comment period that resulted
[[Page 76533]]
in our decision to issue this SNPRM. This SNPRM proposes to increase
the applicability and modify the compliance time. We also completed an
initial regulatory flexibility analysis to determine the impact of the
proposed AD on small entities (this was at the request of one of the
comments received on the NPRM). Adopted on September 5, 2014, the
National Transportation Safety Board issued the probable cause for the
airplane accident that initiated this investigation. The probable cause
was identified as malfunction of the cabin heater, which resulted in an
inflight fire and smoke in the airplane.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to comment on the NPRM. The
following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's
response to each comment.
Request To Allow Repair of the Combustion Tube
James W. Tarter Jr. from Meggitt (Troy), Inc. identified that the
Meggitt Inspection Procedure, Document No. IP-347, dated May 17, 2014,
allows repair of combustion tubes that do not pass the pressure decay
test (PDT); however, the proposed AD required a combustion tube
replacement. We infer that the commenter wants to allow the repair of
the combustion tube when it fails the PDT.
We disagree with allowing repair of the combustion tube when it
fails the PDT. The cracked combustion tube metal wall becomes oxidized
and the cross-section of the crack is contaminated by combusted fuel
residuals; therefore, there is no way to make a reliable repair. The
welding will crack again in an unpredictable period of service time.
We did not make any changes to this SNPRM as a result to this
comment.
Request To Delay Issuance of AD Until PDT Procedure Is Publically
Available
Anthony Saxton requested we delay the issuance of the final rule
until the PDT procedure is publicly available. He stated that he had a
difficult time getting a copy of the procedure.
We do not agree with the commenter about delaying the rule. By
policy, the FAA cannot post to the public docket service information
that is part of the proposed action until the publication of the final
rule unless there is written permission from the design approval
holder. The FAA does not currently have such written permission. We
encourage the commenter to obtain a copy of this document from the
design approval holder. After the final rule is published in the
Federal Register, the PDT procedure will be readily available to the
public in the docket.
We did not make changes to this SNPRM based on this comment.
Request To Change Number of Airplanes Affected and Number of Labor
Hours Required To Comply
Anthony Saxton commented that the number of airplanes affected was
too low and the labor cost was too low.
We partially agree with the commenter. We agree the number of
airplanes affected was not complete, but was the FAA's best estimate at
the time. We obtained our initial information from the FAA aircraft
registry, and the registry does not identify which airplanes have
combustion heaters. An FAA economist has completed a more complete
assessment of the number of affected aircraft during the development of
the initial regulatory flexibility analysis. The estimated number of
affected airplanes has been modified based on the initial regulatory
flexability analysis.
We disagree with modifying the labor hours to perform the labor
without more substantive information to support a different number.
Request To Withdraw the NPRM
William West commented that AD action is not needed. He requested
we withdraw the NPRM and provide guidance to owners/operators reminding
them that if the heater malfunctions to not use it until it has been
properly inspected.
We disagree with this comment. We completed a review of the
accident/incident data as well as service difficulty reports over
several years. The level of risk identified in the data review shows
that we should address this unsafe condition through mandatory action
rather than guidance. This proposed AD action is consistent with AD
actions taken against other similar products. We have no way of
assuring that the unsafe condition has been mitigated through voluntary
guidance action.
We did not make changes to this SNPRM based on this comment.
Request To Allow Limited Decay in the PDT
Harold Haskins commented that we should do a PDT that allows some
leakage as per AD 2004-21-05 (69 FR 61993, October 22, 2004). He
commented that the test identified in the Meggitt (Troy), Inc.
procedure is not really a pressure decay test because no decay is
allowed. Allowing a certain amount of decay/leakage is consistent with
other AD actions.
We agree with the commenter that there are other ADs where the
required pressure decay tests allow a certain amount of leakage;
however, we disagree with modifying the SNPRM because Meggitt (Troy),
Inc., as the design approval holder, has the responsibility to develop
what they believe is appropriate procedures to maintain their
combustion heaters. Owners/operators may provide substantiating data
and request approval of an alternative method of compliance (AMOC)
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 and specified in paragraph
(m) of this SNPRM.
We did not make changes to this SNPRM based on this comment.
Request To Change the Listing of the Part Numbers or Model Numbers
Affected
Sin Kwong Chew, Anthony Saxton, and the National Transportation
Safety Board (NTSB) commented that we should use the part numbers or
more detailed model numbers for the affected heaters. Another commenter
suggested we use the four upper level model series number.
We agree with changing how the model and series numbers are listed
in the Applicability, paragraph (c) of this proposed AD. We want to
ensure that the applicability of the proposed AD will address all
affected model/part number heaters.
We modified the Applicability, paragraph (c) of this proposed AD,
to state the upper level model number of the heaters and to specify
that all the part number heaters and dash numbers are included under
that higher level designation.
Request Change to Procedures
William Sandmann requested we change the heater disconnect
procedures to cap off the fuel supply as near to the fuel source as
possible to reduce the possibility that fuel may leak from the fuel
line.
We disagree with this comment. The manufacturer's instructions are
FAA approved and acceptable. The commenter's suggestion may be an
improvement on the manufacturer's instructions, but it is not required
and is too detailed a level to include in this proposed AD.
We did not make changes to this SNPRM as a result of this comment.
Request Change to Credit for Previous Inspections
Chris (no last name or company affiliation given) requested we
allow
[[Page 76534]]
credit for PDTs previously done using the manufacturer's instructions
within the last 2 years/250 hours. The commenter also requested that we
do not allow credit for the general inspection of the combustion heater
because previous instructions are not sufficient to meet the new
inspection criteria.
We agree with the commenter's suggestions. The proposed AD contains
the language ``unless already done'' in paragraph (f) Compliance. That
language allows credit for any of the actions required by the AD that
were performed before the effective date of the AD using the
instructions required by the AD. That language does not allow credit
for the previous instructions in AD 81-09-09 since we agree that they
are not sufficient to meet the inspection criteria.
We did not make changes to the SNPRM based on this comment.
Request Replacement of Combustion Heater Instead of Overhaul
Anthony Saxton and the Aircraft Owners and Pilot's Association
(AOPA) requested we require replacement of the combustion heater tube
instead of an overhaul of the combustion heater if a combustion heater
fails the PDT. An overhaul is a costly requirement that adds no
additional safety benefit.
We agree with the commenters' suggestion. Additional inspections in
the proposed AD would require inspection and possible replacement of
individual components of the combustion heater. Therefore, if the
heater fails the PDT, replacement of the combustion heater tube would
be a better option rather than heater overhaul.
We have modified the corrective action language for a PDT failure
to replacement, disable, or remove the combustion heater.
Request Removal of Combustion Heater Model 8248
Harold Haskins and William Sandmann commented they were unaware of
a Model 8248 combustion heater.
We agree with this comment. The Model 8248 was included based on
the FAA technical standard order (TSO) database. After further
research, Meggitt (Troy), Inc. verified that the Model 8248 was
included in the database in error and did not exist.
We have removed the Model 8248 combustion heater from the
Applicability, paragraph (c) of this proposed AD.
Request the Addition of Service Information
Harold Haskins requested we add the service information for the
Model 8240 and 8259 combustion heaters.
We agree with the commenter's suggestion.
We have added South Wind Service Manual for Stewart Warner South
Wind Aircraft Heaters 8240-A, 8240-C, 8259-A, 8259-C, 8259-DL, 8259-
FL1, 8259-GL1, 8259-GL2, Form No. 09-998 (Rev. 12-69) to the service
information required for this proposed AD.
Request To Delete Piper From Possible Combustion Heater Installation
Harold Haskins requested that we delete Piper Aircraft, Inc.
(Piper) airplanes from possible airplanes that may have the affected
combustion heaters installed. He does not know of any Piper airplanes
that have the affected heaters installed.
We disagree with this comment. The proposed AD addressed the
combustion heaters at the component level, and they have the potential
for installation on various airplanes. Also, this AD as proposed in
this SNPRM would expand the applicability to include combustion heaters
that are installed on Piper airplanes as well as any other airplanes
not listed, thus the reason for the phrase ``are installed on, but not
limited to'' in the applicability.
Request Increasing the Time Allowed for Initial Compliance Time
Anthony Saxton and AOPA requested modifying the initial compliance
time to provide a longer period of time to comply. Two commenters
suggested modifing the compliance time to better coincide with a normal
maintenance schedule--within the next 10 hours of time-in-service of
the combustion heater or at the next scheduled 100-hour inspection,
annual inspection, or phase inspection. This would allow maintenance
shops to better accommodate owners/operators in complying with the AD.
We agree with the commenters. Since the NPRM, this SNPRM adds
combustion heater models to the Applicability, paragraph (c) of this
proposed AD. It would be appropriate to allow more time to assure that
maintenance facilities are able to support doing the work required by
the AD.
We have modified the wording for the initial inspection compliance
times for the combustion heater inspection, combustion heater
installation inspection, and the PDT to better coincide with regularly
scheduled maintenance.
Request Adding Document Number to Service Information
James W. Tartar Jr. and Meggitt (Troy), Inc. requested adding the
document number for the Meggitt (Troy), Inc. inspection procedure for
the PDT for clarity.
We agree with this comment. In this proposed AD, we cite the
Meggitt (Troy), Inc. inspection procedure for the PDT as Meggitt
Inspection Procedure, Document No. IP-347, dated May 17, 2014.
Request the AD Include an Analysis of the Impact on Small Businesses
Anthony Saxton requested that we include in the AD an analysis of
the AD's impact on small businesses. The commenter stated they are
aware of a number of small businesses that operate the affected
airplanes.
We agree with this comment. The commenter has a good understanding
of the usage of the airplanes affected by this SNPRM. Also, this
proposed AD adds combustion heater models to the Applicability,
paragraph (c) of this proposed, that will affect additional airplanes
over that affected in the proposed rule.
We have completed an initial regulatory flexability analysis that
we have included in its entirety in this SNPRM.
Support of Proposed AD
AOPA, NTSB, William Sandmann, and Anthony Saxton all supported the
general intent of the proposed AD action.
Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51
We reviewed the following service information that applies to this
proposed AD:
--Stewart-Warner South Wind Corporation South Wind Service Manual for
Stewart Warner South Wind Aircraft Heaters 8240-A, 8240-C, 8259-A,
8259-C, 8259-DL, 8259-FL1, 8259-GL1, 8259-GL2, Form No. 09-998,
revised: December 1969;
--South Wind Division Stewart-Warner Corporation Service Manual Beech
Aircraft Corporation PM-20688, Part No. 404-001039 Heater Assy. (SW
8253-B), revised: April 1965;
--South Wind Division Stewart-Warner Corporation Service Manual South
Wind Aircraft Heater 8472 Series, Form No. 09-1015, issued: April 1975;
and
The service information above describes procedures for inspection
of the combustion heater and inspection of the installation of the
combustion heater for the applicable heater models.
[[Page 76535]]
We also reviewed Meggitt Inspection Procedure, Pressure Decay Test,
Aircraft Heaters, dated May 17, 2014. This service information
describes procedures for the PDT for airplane combustion heaters for
all heater models.
This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.
FAA's Determination
We are proposing this SNPRM because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.
Certain changes described above expand the scope of this rulemaking. As
a result, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment
period to provide additional opportunity for the public to comment on
this SNPRM.
Proposed Requirements of This SNPRM
This SNPRM would require repetitive inspections of the combustion
heater and repetitive general inspections of the combustion heater
installation, replacing any parts or components as necessary. This
SNPRM would also require repetitive PDTs, with replacement of the
combustion heater tube, disabling, or removal of the combustion heater
in the event of PDT failure. This SNPRM also modifies the inspection
and PDT compliance times allowing for the inspections to coincide with
regularly scheduled maintenance. This SNPRM would not allow repair of
the combustion heater tube.
For combustion heater models other than Models 8240, 8253, 8259,
and 8472, this SNPRM does not have referenced service information
associated with certain required inspections and the PDT and, if
necessary, any replacement(s) that may be required. Appendix 1 of this
SNPRM contains a listing of service information that provides specific
instructions, for certain inspections and replacements, that may be
used to apply for an AMOC. However, the listing in appendix 1 to this
SNPRM does not include any instructions for the required PDT because
these procedures do not exist. If you are unable to obtain instructions
for the PDT, you must disable or remove the combustion heater.
The service information listed in appendix 1 of this SNPRM did not
meet Office of the Federal Register regulatory requirements for
incorporation by reference approval due to the condition of the
documents.
We are evaluating the actions required in AD 69-13-03 (38 FR 33765,
December 7, 1973) and may take further AD action in the future.
Differences Between This SNPRM and the Service Information
The proposed AD would prohibit repair of any defective combustion
tube while the service information does not specify this.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD affects 6,300 combustion heaters
installed on, but not limited to, certain Beech, Britten-Norman, Cessna
Aircraft Company, and Piper Aircraft, Inc. airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:
Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost per Cost on U.S.
Action Labor cost Parts cost product operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspections and pressure decay 7 work-hours x $85 Not applicable....... $595 $3,748,500
test of the combustion heater. per hour = $595.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We estimate the following costs to do any necessary combustion
heater disable/removal/related replacement that would be required based
on the results of the proposed inspections/test. We have no way of
determining the number of aircraft that might need a combustion heater
disable/removal/related replacement:
On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost per
Action Labor cost Parts cost product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace combustion heater tube........ 8 work-hours x $85 per hour = $3,900.................. $4,580
$680.
Replace temperature switches.......... 1 work-hour x $85 per hour = $320.................... 405
$85.
Repair pump........................... 2 work-hours x $85 per hour = $470.................... 640
$170.
Disable heater........................ 2 work-hours x $85 per hour = Not Applicable.......... 170
$170.
Remove heater......................... 3 work-hours x $85 per hour = Not Applicable.......... 255
$255.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
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.
[[Page 76536]]
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 initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) as described
in the RFA. The FAA finds that the proposed AD would have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Accordingly,
in the following sections we discuss the compliance requirements of the
proposed AD, the cost of compliance, and the economic impact on small
entities.
Section 603(a) of the RFA requires that each initial regulatory
flexibility analysis contain:
--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; and 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.
1. 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 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 the airplanes identified in this
proposed AD.
2. A Description of the Reasons Action by the Agency Is Being
Considered
This proposed AD stems from the crash of a Cessna 401 near Chanute,
Kansas, on May 11, 2012, killing the pilot and three of the four
passengers aboard, and seriously injuring the fourth passenger.
According to the NTSB report, the crash occurred after dark smoke
emanated from the cabin heater and entered the cabin obscuring the
occupants' vision. According to the Report: ``The smoke likely
interfered with the pilot's ability to identify a safe landing site.''
When the pilot attempted an emergency landing in a field, the
airplane's wing contacted the ground and the airplane cartwheeled.
The NTSB determined the probable cause of the accident to be:
The malfunction of the cabin heater, which resulted in an inflight
fire and smoke in the airplane. Contributing to the accident was the
pilot's lack of understanding concerning the status of the
airplane's heater system following an earlier overheat event and the
risk of its continued use. Also contributing were the inadequate
inspection criteria for the cabin heater.
As result of this accident, the FAA is proposing this AD to detect
and correct a hazardous condition caused by deterioration of the
combustion heater, a condition that could lead to ignition of heater
components and result in smoke and fumes in the airplane cabin.
3. A Description of and an Estimate of the Number of Small Entities To
Which the Proposed Rule Will Apply
This proposed AD would supersede AD 81-09-09, which applies to 8000
series Meggitt combustion heaters installed on certain twin-engine
piston airplanes, primarily Cessna 300 and 400 series airplanes, but
also installed on the Beech D18S twin-engine airplane and some Britten
Norman twin-engine piston airplanes. The proposed AD would extend
applicability to 900 series Meggitt combustion heaters installed on
certain Cessna single-engine piston airplanes, Cessna 310 twin-engine
airplanes, Lake LA-4 and LA-250 airplanes, certain Ryan Navion single-
engine piston airplanes and certain Piper PA-23 and PA-30 airplanes.
The FAA estimates that there are 4,121 airplanes equipped with 8000
series Meggitt combustion heaters, and 2,123 airplanes equipped with
900 series Meggitt combustion heaters. Since many of these airplanes
are registered to Limited Liability Companies (LLCs), Limited Liability
Partnerships (LLPs) and other company forms typically suited for single
proprietors, small partnerships, etc., we conclude that the proposed
rule would affect a substantial number of small entities.
4. Duplicative, Overlapping or Conflicting Federal Rules
The FAA is unaware of any Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with this proposed AD.
5. 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.
The FAA considered allowing more flight hours or calendar time
before requiring compliance, but this alternative would increase the
risk of another fatal accident. This proposed AD allows the combustion
heater to be disconnected or removed, but, as noted above, operating
without a heater is unlikely to be viable.
6. Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements of the
Proposed Rule
Small entities would incur no new reporting and recordkeeping
requirements as a result of this rule.
Compliance Requirements
This proposed AD would carry over the following requirements from
AD 81-09-09:
--Conduction of the 250-hour heater inspection every 250 hours of
heater operation, in accordance with the manufacturer's service manual.
We estimate the labor cost of this action to be 2 hours x $85 = $170.
[[Page 76537]]
--General inspection of the heater installation at the same time as the
250-hour inspection. We estimate the labor cost of this action to also
be 2 hours x $85 = $170.
Since the proposed rule would extend applicability to 900 series
heaters Meggitt combustion heaters, which are installed on certain
airplanes, there is an incremental cost associated with the existing
requirement for these two inspections. There is no incremental cost
associated with applicability to 8000 series heaters, installed on
certain airplanes, as the current rule already applies to these
heaters.
This proposed AD would add the following new provisions, which will
apply to both 900 and 8000 series heaters installed on certain
airplanes:
--During each 250-hour inspection more detailed actions would be
required, namely inspection of the thermostat and upper limit switches,
and inspection of the solenoid valve and fuel pump. In conjunction with
the 250-hour and installation inspections already required, the labor
cost of these more detailed actions would be one hour of labor at $85.
``On-condition'' costs to replace the temperature switches would be an
additional hour of labor ($85) and $320 in materials cost, for a total
of $405. On-condition costs to repair/overhaul the pump would be an
additional two hours of labor ($170) and $470 in materials cost for a
total of $640.
--Operators would be required to replace defective combustion tubes
with new tubes as repair of combustion tubes would be prohibited. We
estimate the cost of prohibiting repair of combustion tubes to be
minimal as industry reports that the Meggitt heater combustion tubes
are effectively non-repairable.
--At the same time as the 250-hour and installation inspection, a
combustion heater pressure decay test (PDT) would be required. The PDT
would cost $170. If the combustion heater fails the PDT, the operator
would be required to replace the combustion tube at an installed cost
of $4,580.
--Operators have the options of disabling the heater at an estimated
cost of $170 or removing it at estimated cost of $255.
Cost of Compliance
In calculating the cost of compliance, we assume that operating
without a heater is unlikely to be viable. We estimate the ten-year
cost of the proposed rule. Based on data in the 2014 GA Survey, we can
somewhat conservatively assume that average flight hours per airplane
per year are about 100 hours. We estimate heater time to be 50 percent
of airplane flight hours so, on average, flight hours will accumulate
to about 1,000 hours in ten years and heater time will accumulate to
about 500 hours. Since requirements for inspection internals are ``250
hours of combustion heater operations or two years, whichever occurs
first,'' we expect inspections to usually occur every two years. As
will be seen below, compliance costs are dominated by the almost
immediate requirement for the PDT test.
Pressure Decay Test
The FAA estimates that 90 percent of combustion tubes tested will
fail the first PDT test. Since replacing the combustion tube, like an
overhaul, requires complete disassembly of the combustion heater, we
somewhat conservatively assume that operators will overhaul their
combustion heaters at $4,580, rather than simply replace the combustion
tube, at $4,900. Major components such as the combustion tube, fuel
pump, and temperature switches that are typically replaced or
overhauled in a combustion heater overhaul have service lives of 750
heater hours, equivalent to about 1,500 flight hours or 15 years.
Therefore, we assume that once replaced or overhauled, these components
will not need to be replaced during our 10-year period of cost
estimation. So aside from the initial tube replacement, we estimate
that, for inspections required by this proposed AD, ``on-condition''
costs would be minimal.
Table 1 below shows our calculation of compliance cost for
airplanes with the affected Meggitt combustion heaters. We assume the
rule to be effective in 2017 and, as discussed above, in the first year
we assume the combustion heater fails the PDT resulting in a subsequent
overhaul. For the 8000 series heaters note that the $935 labor cost for
2017 includes three hours of labor ($255) for the detailed inspection
and the PDT in addition to eight hours of labor for the overhaul
($680).
As the table shows, we estimate the present value cost of
compliance to be $6,020 for airplanes equipped with 8000 series Meggitt
combustion heaters and $7,514 for airplanes equipped with 900 series
Meggitt combustion heaters. The lower cost for airplanes with 8000
series combustion heaters reflects the previously noted fact that 8000
series heaters are currently subject to the 250-hour inspection and
installation inspection requirements, and, therefore, the incremental
cost would be correspondingly less for airplanes with 8000 series
combustion heaters compared to airplanes with 900 series heaters.
Economic Impact on Small Entities
If the cost of compliance is greater than 2 percent of the value of
an operator's airplane, the FAA considers the cost impact to be
significant. So if the value of an airplane equipped with an affected
Meggitt combustion heater is less than 50 times the cost of compliance,
we consider that the operator of the airplane would incur a substantial
economic impact. With a present value cost of about $6,000 for
airplanes equipped with 8000 series Meggitt combustion heaters, the FAA
considers the cost impact to be significant for all such airplanes with
values below about $300,000. With a present value cost of about $7,500
for airplanes equipped with 900 series Meggitt combustion heaters, the
FAA considers the cost impact to be significant for all such airplanes
with values below about $350,000. The airplanes equipped with the
affected heaters are single- and twin-engine piston airplanes that, for
the most part, were manufactured from the 1940s to the 1980s, and range
in price from about $350,000 for a Cessna 221C Golden Eagle down to a
price as low as $30,000 for a Piper 23-150 Apache. Accordingly, most of
the 6,244 airplanes equipped with Meggitt combustion heaters have
values low enough to consider that the airplane operators would incur a
significant economic impact. As noted above, many of these airplanes
are registered to LLCs and other small companies.
The FAA therefore concludes that this proposed AD would have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
[[Page 76538]]
Table 1--Costs of Compliance
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mtls + labor Discount
Year Materials cost Labor cost cost Actions factor (@7%) PV Cost
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airplanes with 8000 Series Meggitt Combustion Heaters
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017.................................... $4,220 $935 $5,155 Detailed inspection (1 hr 1.000 $5,155
labor), PDT (2 hrs labor)--
Overhaul after assumed
failure (8 hrs labor, $4,220
materials).
2019.................................... .............. 255 255 Detailed inspection (1 hr 0.873 223
labor), PDT inspection (2 hrs
labor).
2021.................................... .............. 255 255 Detailed inspection (1 hr 0.763 195
labor), PDT inspection (2 hrs
labor).
2023.................................... .............. 255 255 Detailed inspection (1 hr 0.666 170
labor), PDT inspection (2 hrs
labor).
2025.................................... .............. 255 255 Detailed inspection (1 hr 0.582 148
labor), PDT inspection (2 hrs
labor).
2027.................................... .............. 255 255 Detailed inspection (1 hr 0.508 130
labor), PDT inspection (2 hrs
labor).
------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------
Total PV Cost....................... .............. .............. .............. .............................. .............. 6,020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airplanes with 900 Series Combustion Meggitt Heaters
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017.................................... 4,220 1,275 5,495 250-hr inspection (2 hrs 1.000 5,495
labor), installation
inspection (2 hrs labor),
detailed inspection (1 hr
labor), PDT (2 hrs labor)--
Overhaul after assumed
failure (8 hrs labor, 4,220
materials).
2019.................................... .............. 595 595 250-hr inspection (2 hrs 0.873 520
labor), installation
inspection (2 hrs labor),
detailed inspection (1 hr
labor), PDT (2 hrs labor).
2021.................................... .............. 595 595 250-hr inspection (2 hrs 0.763 454
labor), installation
inspection (2 hrs labor),
detailed inspection (1 hr
labor), PDT (2 hrs labor).
2023.................................... .............. 595 595 250-hr inspection (2 hrs 0.666 396
labor), installation
inspection (2 hrs labor),
detailed inspection (1 hr
labor), PDT (2 hrs labor).
2025.................................... .............. 595 595 250-hr inspection (2 hrs 0.582 346
labor), installation
inspection (2 hrs labor),
detailed inspection (1 hr
labor), PDT (2 hrs labor).
2027.................................... .............. 595 595 250-hr inspection (2 hrs 0.508 302
labor), installation
inspection (2 hrs labor),
detailed inspection (1 hr
labor), PDT (2 hrs labor).
------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------
Total PV Cost....................... .............. .............. .............. .............................. .............. 7,514
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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),
(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
0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
0
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by removing AD 81-09-09, Amendment 39-
4102 (46 FR 24936, May 4, 1981) and adding the following new
airworthiness directive (AD):
[[Page 76539]]
Meggitt (Troy), Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2014-0603; Directorate
Identifier 2013-CE-026-AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by December 19, 2016.
(b) Affected ADs
This AD replaces AD 81-09-09, Amendment 39-4102 (46 FR 24936,
May 4, 1981).
(c) Applicability
(1) This AD applies to Meggitt (Troy), Inc. (previously known as
Stewart Warner South Wind Corporation and as Stewart Warner South
Wind Division) Models (to include all dash number and model number
variants) 921, 930, 937, 940, 944, 945, 977, 978, 979, 8240, 8253,
8259, and 8472 combustion heaters that:
(i) Are installed on, but not limited to, certain Beech,
Britten-Norman, Cessna Aircraft Company, and Piper Aircraft, Inc.
airplanes; and
(ii) certificated in any category.
(d) Subject
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 2140; Heating System.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by an airplane accident and reports we
received that the combustion heater was malfunctioning. We are
issuing this AD to detect and correct a hazardous condition caused
by deterioration of the combustion heater, which could lead to
ignition of components and result in smoke and fumes in the cabin.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD by doing one of the actions in paragraphs
(f)(1), (2), or (3) of this AD at the compliance times indicated,
unless already done. If the hours of combustion heater operation
cannot be determined, use 50 percent of the airplane's hours time-
in-service (TIS):
(1) Perform the actions specified in paragraphs (g) through (j)
of this AD;
(2) Disable the heater following the instructions in paragraph
(k)(1) of this AD; or
(3) Remove the heater following the instructions in paragraph
(k)(2) of this AD.
(g) Inspections and Pressure Decay Test (PDT) of the Combustion Heater
Within the next 10 hours TIS of the combustion heater after the
effective date of this AD or the next scheduled 100-hour inspection,
annual inspection, or phase inspection that occurs 30 days after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, and repetitively
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 250 hours of combustion heater
operation or two years, whichever occurs first, do the following
inspections and PDT listed in paragraphs (g)(1) through (4) of this
AD. You may do one of the actions in paragraph (k)(1) or (2) of this
AD in lieu of doing the inspections required by paragraph (g).
(1) Inspections using the instructions in paragraph (i)(1) or
(j) of this AD, as applicable.
(2) Inspections using the steps listed in paragraphs (g)(2)(i)
through (v) of this AD:
(i) Inspect the thermostat switch (external from heater) and
upper limit switch (located on the heater). In cold static
condition, both switches should be in closed position; in operation
(hot) condition, both switches should regulate their sensed
temperatures within +/-10 degrees F.
(ii) Inspect the solenoid valve and fuel pump for fuel leak,
corrosion, diaphragm crack, metal shavings, and excess grease.
(iii) With the heater operating, inspect the fuel pump output
pressure for proper gauge hook up and pressure range readings.
(iv) Inspect the combustion heater's fuel pump operating
pressure to assure it is not affected by other on-board pumps.
(v) Inspect the heater to assure it instantly responds to the
on/off switch.
(3) Installation inspections and checks using the steps listed
in paragraphs (g)(3)(i) through (iv) of this AD:
(i) Inspect ventilating air and combustion air inlets and
exhaust outlet correcting any restrictions and ensure attachment
security.
(ii) Inspect drain line and ensure it is free of obstruction.
(iii) Check all fuel lines for security at joints and shrouds,
correcting/replacing those showing evidence of looseness or leakage.
(iv) Check all electrical wiring for security at attachment
points, correcting conditions leading to arcing, chafing or
looseness.
(4) Pressure decay test using the instructions in paragraph
(i)(2) or (j) of this AD, as applicable.
(h) Replacement of the Heater Tube and/or Correct or Replace Other
Assemblies
If any discrepancies are found during any of the inspections/
tests required in paragraphs (g)(1), (2), (3), and/or (4) of this
AD, before further flight, replace the defective heater tube and/or
correct or replace other defective assemblies as necessary. You must
use the instructions in paragraph (i) or (j) of this AD, as
applicable, to do any necessary replacements. This AD does not allow
repair of the combustion tube. You may do one of the actions in
paragraph (k)(1) or (2) of this AD in lieu of doing the replacements
required by paragraph (h).
(i) Procedures for Inspection, PDT, and Replacement for Models 8240,
8253, 8259, and 8472
(1) For the inspections required in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD
and the replacement(s) that may be required in paragraph (h) of this
AD, use the service information listed in paragraphs (i)(1)(i)
through (iii) of this AD, as applicable, or do one of the actions in
paragraph (k)(1) or (2) of this AD.
(i) Stewart-Warner South Wind Corporation South Wind Service
Manual for Stewart Warner South Wind Aircraft Heaters 8240-A, 8240-
C, 8259-A, 8259-C, 8259-DL, 8259-FL1, 8259-GL1, 8259-GL2, Form No.
09-998, revised: December 1969;
(ii) South Wind Division Stewart-Warner Corporation Beech
Aircraft Corporation Service Manual PM-20688, Part No. 404-001039
Heater Assy. (SW 8253-B), revised: April 1965; or
(iii) South Wind Division Stewart-Warner Corporation Service
Manual South Wind Aircraft Heater 8472 Series, Form No. 09-1015,
issued: April 1975.
(2) For the pressure decay test (PDT) required in paragraph
(g)(4) of this AD, use Meggitt Inspection Procedure, Pressure Decay
Test, Aircraft Heaters, IP-347, dated May 17, 2014, or do one of the
actions in paragraph (k)(1) or (2) of this AD.
(j) Procedures for Inspection, PDT, and Replacement for Models Other
Than Models 8240, 8253, 8259, and 8472
This AD does not have referenced service information associated
with the mandatory requirements of this AD for models other than
Models 8240, 8253, 8259, and 8472. For the required inspections and
PDT specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (4) of this AD and, if
necessary, any replacement(s) specified in paragraph (h) of this AD,
you must contact the manufacturer to obtain FAA-approved inspection,
replacement, and PDT procedures approved specifically for this AD
and implement those procedures through an alternative method of
compliance (AMOC) or do one of the actions in paragraph (k)(1) or
(2) of this AD. You may use the contact information found in
paragraph (n)(2) to contact the manufacturer. Appendix 1 of this AD
contains a listing of service information that provides specific
instructions, for certain inspections and replacements, that you may
use to apply for an AMOC following paragraph (m) of this AD. The
service information listed in appendix 1 of this AD did not meet
Office of the Federal Register regulatory requirements for
incorporation by reference approval due to the condition of the
documents. However, the listing in appendix 1 to this AD does not
include any instructions for the PDT required in paragraph (g)(4)
because these procedures do not exist.
(k) Disable or Removal of the Combustion Heater
As an option to the inspection and replacement actions specified
in paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, within the next 10 hours TIS
of the combustion heater after the effective date of this AD or the
next scheduled 100-hour inspection, annual inspection, or phase
inspection that occurs 30 days after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs first, do one of the following actions:
(1) Disable the heater by the following actions:
(i) Disconnect and cap the heater fuel supply;
(ii) Disconnect circuit breakers;
(iii) Tag the main switch ``Heater Inoperable''; and
(iv) The ventilation blower can stay functional.
(v) If you re-enable the combustion heater, you must perform one
of the actions in paragraphs (f)(1) through (3) of this AD.
(2) Remove the heater by the following actions:
(i) Disconnect and cap the heater fuel supply;
(ii) Disconnect/remove circuit breakers;
(iii) Remove exhaust pipe extension;
[[Page 76540]]
(iv) Cap the exhaust opening;
(v) Remove the heater; and
(vi) Do weight and balance for the aircraft.
(vii) If you install an applicable combustion heater, you must
perform one of the actions in paragraphs (f)(1) through (3) of this
AD.
(l) Special Flight Permit
Special flight permits are permitted in accordance with 14 CFR
39.23 with the following limitation: Use of the heater is not
allowed.
(m) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Chicago 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. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (o)(1) of this AD.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
(3) AMOCs approved for AD 81-09-09 (46 FR 24936, May 4, 1981)
are not approved as AMOCs for this AD.
(n) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD, contact Chung-Der Young,
Aerospace Engineer, Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, FAA,
Small Airplane Directorate, 2300 East Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, IL
60018-4696; telephone (847) 294-7309; fax (847) 294-7834 email:
chung-der.young@faa.gov.
(2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Meggitt Control Systems, 3 Industrial Drive, Troy, Indiana 47588;
telephone: (812) 547-7071; fax: (812) 547-2488; email:
infotroy@meggitt.com; Internet: www.stewart-warner.com. You may view
this 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.
Appendix 1 to Docket No. FAA-2016-0603
The following service information applies to certain combustion
heater models affected by this AD, but the service information can
not be required by the AD. You may use this service information for
procedural guidance when applying for an alternative method of
compliance.
--South Wind Service Manual P.M. 35710 Aircraft Heaters 8240-E,
8259-HL1, HL2, -L, supplements attached HR2.JR2.M;
--South Wind Service Manual PM35710 Aircraft Heaters
--Stewart-Warner Corporation South Wind Division Service Manual
South Wind Aircraft Heaters Series 921 and 930, Ind-506, Revision 4-
53;
--Stewart-Warner Corporation South Wind Division Service Manual
SouthWind Series 940 Heater, PM-10035, Revision 3-82;
--Stewart-Warner Corporation South Wind Division Service Manual
South Wind Model 978 Personal Heater, Form No. PM6348 (12-56);
--South Wind Service Manual Model 979-B1 Aircraft Heater, South Wind
Division of Stewart-Warner Corporation, (3-51);
--Navion Model 977-B Installation Manual Section I, Section II,
Section III, and Section IV.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on October 27, 2016.
Pat Mullen,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-26428 Filed 11-2-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P