Rule: Airworthiness Directives: Raytheon

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No.
47 / Monday, March 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 10909
underage almond and walnut trees at all PART 457—COMMON CROP DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
coverage levels by ‘‘we agree in writing’’ INSURANCE REGULATIONS
under the current Crop Provisions. Federal Aviation Administration
The commenters state that approved ■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
insurance providers would be faced part 457 continues to read as follows: 14 CFR Part 39
with a difficult and costly task to abide Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1506(l), 1506(p). [Docket No. FAA–2006–25105; Directorate
by all documentation requirements for Identifier 2006–CE–33–AD; Amendment 39–
written agreement submissions within ■ 2. Amend § 457.122 as follows: 14982; AD 2007–06–01]
the standard 15 business days after the ■ A. Revise the first sentence of the
sales closing date and thus result in the RIN 2120–AA64
introductory text.
insured potentially not getting
insurance coverage timely. As a result, ■ B. Revise paragraph 6(d). Airworthiness Directives; Raytheon
the use of the written agreements as a Aircraft Company Beech Models 45
The revisions to § 457.122 read as
means to provide coverage for (YT–34), A45 (T–34A, B–45), and D45
follows: (T–34B) Airplanes
production from underage almond and
walnut trees would be burdensome to § 457.122 Walnut crop insurance AGENCY: Federal Aviation
the producer. provisions.
Administration (FAA), DOT.
The commenters also state that The Walnut Crop Insurance ACTION: Final rule.
producers now have the ability to insure Provisions for the 2008 and succeeding
production from underage almond and crop years are as follows: SUMMARY: We are adopting a new
walnut trees at the catastrophic risk airworthiness directive (AD) that
* * * * *
protection (CAT) level. They claim the supersedes AD 62–24–01, which applies
current proposal would make CAT 6. Insured Crop to all Raytheon Aircraft Company (RAC)
policies ineligible for this insurance Beech Models 45 (YT–34), A45 (T–34A,
* * * * * B45), and D45 (T–34B) airplanes. AD
coverage under the written agreement
criteria, since written agreements are (d) On acreage where at least 90 62–24–01 currently requires you to
not available under CAT coverage. percent of the trees have reached at least repetitively inspect, using the dye
the seventh growing season after being penetrant method, the front and rear
The commenters state that the use of horizontal stabilizer spars for cracks and
set out, unless otherwise provided in
‘‘we agree in writing’’ language allows replace any cracked stabilizer. Since we
the Special Provisions.
the approved insurance providers and issued AD 62–24–01, we determined
RO’s to efficiently process the request to * * * * *
that using the dye penetrant inspection
insure production from underage ■ 3. Amend § 457.123 as follows: method may not detect cracks before the
almond and walnut trees. Any deviation crack grows to a critical length and
from this process would be resisted by ■ A. Revise the first sentence of the
introductory text. causes failure of the horizontal stabilizer
the AIPs, Regional Office, agents and spars. Therefore, we are requiring the
insureds. ■ B. Revise paragraph 6(e).
surface eddy current inspection method
Response: FCIC realized that the The revisions to § 457.123 read as to detect cracks in the horizontal
proposed language would have follows: stabilizer spars. Consequently, this AD
needlessly imposed a heavy burden on retains the actions required in AD 62–
producers, agents, AIPs and ROs. § 457.123 Almond crop insurance 24–01 and changes the required
However, the preamble of the policy provisions.
inspection method from dye penetrant
only allows deviation from the policy The Almond Crop Insurance to surface eddy current. We are issuing
terms if allowed by written agreement. Provisions for the 2008 and succeeding this AD to prevent failure of the front
Therefore, use of the term ‘‘agree in crop years are as follows: and/or rear horizontal stabilizer spars
writing’’ is not a viable solution. caused by fatigue cracks. This failure
* * * * *
Instead, FCIC has amended the language could result in stabilizer separation and
to state coverage on production from 6. Insured Crop loss of control of the airplane.
under-aged trees is allowed if provided DATES: This AD becomes effective on
for in the Special Provisions. This * * * * *
April 16, 2007.
change will provide insurance coverage (e) On acreage where at least 90
ADDRESSES: To view the AD docket, go
for production from under-aged trees percent of the trees have reached at least
to the Docket Management Facility, U.S.
without the need to have a written the sixth growing season after being set
Department of Transportation, 400
agreement. This will also allow coverage out, unless otherwise provided in the
Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building,
to be available at all buy-up coverage Special Provisions. Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590–
levels and at the CAT level of coverage. * * * * * 001 or on the Internet at http://
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 457 Signed in Washington, DC, on March 6, dms.dot.gov. The docket number is
2007. FAA–2006–25105; Directorate Identifier
Crop insurance, Walnut and Almond, 2006–CE–33–AD.
Reporting and record keeping Eldon Gould,
Manager, Federal Crop Insurance FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: T.N.
requirements.
Corporation. Baktha, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
■ Accordingly, as set forth in the Wichita Aircraft Certification Office,
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with RULES
[FR Doc. E7–4333 Filed 3–9–07; 8:45 am]

preamble, the Federal Crop Insurance 1801 Airport Road, Mid-Continent
BILLING CODE 3410–08–P
Corporation amends 7 CFR part 457, Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209;
Common Crop Insurance Regulations, telephone: (316) 946–4155; fax: (316)
for the 2008 and succeeding crop years 946–4107.
as follows: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:49 Mar 09, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12MRR1.SGM 12MRR1
10910 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 47 / Monday, March 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Discussion Industries supplemental type certificate if requested using the procedures found
On July 24, 2006, we issued a (STC) either be exempt from the in 14 CFR 39.19.
proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal inspections or the inspection interval be We are not changing the final rule AD
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to increased to 1,000 hours TIS. action based on these comments.
include an AD that would apply to all We do not agree with the commenters. Comment Issue No. 4: Surface Eddy
RAC Beech Models 45 (YT–34), A45 (T– In 2005, 148 of the affected airplanes Current Inspection Method
34A, B45), and D45 (T–34B) airplanes. were eddy current inspected. Cracks in Unwarranted
That proposal was published in the the stabilizer spars and/or spar webs
were found on 6 of these airplanes, Dan Thomas, William Beitler, Floyd
Federal Register as a notice of proposed
which required the spars to be replaced. Stilwell, William Mayher, and Mike
rulemaking (NPRM) on July 31, 2006 (71
If no eddy current inspections had been Talbot state that the eddy current
FR 43075). The NPRM proposed to
supersede AD 62–24–01 with a new AD done, those cracks may have grown and inspection method is no better than the
that would retain the actions required in reached critical crack lengths, which dye penetrant method for detecting
AD 62–24–01 and only change the could have compromised the integrity of cracks. The level of safety will not be
inspection procedure from the dye the spar structure. enhanced by changing the inspection
penetrant method to the surface eddy In order to increase the inspection methods. Further, the eddy current
current method. interval or eliminate the spar method could produce false positives
inspections, we need supporting and the frequent inspections could also
Comments engineering analysis data regarding incur damage to the stabilizer spar. The
We provided the public the fatigue life, crack growth rate, etc. We commenters request the method of
opportunity to participate in developing have not received such data for the inspection be at the owner’s/operator’s
this AD. The following presents the spars modified by the Parks Industries option.
comments received on the proposal and STC. We do not agree with the commenters.
FAA’s response to each comment: If we receive engineering analysis The eddy current inspection method is
data that supports increasing the a more sensitive inspection process. The
Comment Issue No. 1: Change the dye penetrant inspection method at
Compliance Time for the Initial inspection intervals or eliminating the
inspections, we may take additional times could completely miss detecting
Inspection the cracks.
rulemaking action at that time.
Larry Bierma, Joe Enzminger, John All inspection methods have some
We are not changing the final rule AD
Aldous, Michael Vadeboncoeur, John inherent drawbacks. Eddy current
action based on these comments.
Rippinger, William E. Mayher, Dan inspection methods detect small surface
Thomas, and Victor Barrett state that the Comment Issue No. 3: Retain the Dye cracks better than dye penetrant
inspection compliance in the proposed Penetrant Inspection From AD 62–24– methods, and eddy current inspection
AD is a duplication of the inspection for 01 methods are also capable of detecting
those who have done the eddy current subsurface cracks. Detection of cracks
Floyd Stilwell, Earle Parks, and
inspection recently as part of early is a definite advantage. Eddy
Terrance Brennan state that the surface
compliance with an alternative method current inspection methods could
eddy current inspection is expensive
of compliance (AMOC) to AD 2004–25– occasionally produce false positives;
and inconvenient. Qualified technicians
51. however, this could be avoided if cracks
The commenters state that requiring to do the surface eddy current
are confirmed by repeatable flaw
another eddy current inspection within inspections have to be brought to the
indications.
6 months after the effective date of this repair station from other parts of the
If the inspections required by this AD
AD would be unnecessary and country, which contributes to the
are carefully done by qualified
economically burdensome for those who expense of doing the eddy current
technicians, any damage to the spars
have already done it. The commenters inspection. The commenters request
could be prevented.
request credit for the last inspection retaining the dye penetrant inspection. The 500-hour TIS repetitive
done in compliance with an AMOC to We do not agree with the commenters. inspection interval is a long interval
AD 2004–25–51 as compliance for the AD 2001–13–18 R1 currently requires between inspections for this type of
initial inspection required in the owners/operators of all Beech Models airplane, which normally will take place
proposed AD. 45 (YT–34), A45 (T–34A, B–45), and once in 5 years or longer in most cases;
We have rewritten the compliance D45 (T–34B) airplanes to do repetitive therefore, we do not consider this
time to give full credit for previously 80-hour TIS eddy current inspections of inspection requirement as frequent.
accomplished eddy current inspections the wing spar assemblies and other We are not changing the final rule AD
done in the area affected by this AD. components following Raytheon action based on this comment.
Aircraft Mandatory Service Bulletin No.
Comment Issue No. 2: AD Is Not SB 57–3329, Part II, Page 3/65, Issued: Conclusion
Necessary February, 2000. If the wing spar and We have carefully reviewed the
Michael Vadeboncoeur, John Aldous, stabilizer spar inspections are properly available data and determined that air
Mike Talbot, Eric Evans, Earle Parks, planned, these two inspections could be safety and the public interest require
Floyd Stilwell, Dan Thomas, Stephen done at the same time. This planning adopting the AD as proposed except for
Baksa, William Beitler, and Terrance would eliminate any extra expenses. minor editorial corrections. We have
Brennan state that, since the time AD We have reason to believe that determined that these minor
62–24–01 was issued, there have not damage tolerance analysis of the corrections:
been any accidents as a result of cracks stabilizer spar is being conducted by • Are consistent with the intent that
in the horizontal stabilizer. The some owners. This may result in was proposed in the NPRM for
commenters request the proposed AD be additional rulemaking action that could correcting the unsafe condition; and
withdrawn. eliminate the inspection or increase the • Do not add any additional burden
The commenters also request that inspection interval. Until that time, upon the public than was already
stabilizer spars modified by Parks AMOCs for this AD may be approved, proposed in the NPRM.
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 47 / Monday, March 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 10911
Costs of Compliance We estimate the following costs to

We estimate that this AD affects 475 accomplish each inspection:
airplanes in the U.S. registry.
Total cost per Total cost on

Labor cost Parts cost airplane U.S. operators
8 work-hours × $80 per hour = $640 ........................................................ Not applicable .................................. $640 $304,000
We estimate the following costs to do on the results of the inspection. We of airplanes that may need this
any necessary horizontal stabilizer have no way of determining the number replacement:
replacements that will be required based
Total cost per

Labor cost Parts cost airplane
4 work-hours × $80 per hour = $320 ............................................................................................ $3,500 $3,820
Cost Difference Between This AD and For the reasons discussed above, I 2006–25105; Directorate Identifier 2006–CE–
AD 62–24–01 certify that this AD: 33–AD.
The only difference between this AD 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory Effective Date
and AD 62–24–01 is the change of action’’ under Executive Order 12866;
2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the (a) This AD becomes effective on
inspection method. There may be some
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures April 16, 2007.
minimal additional cost involved in
doing the eddy current inspection (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and Affected ADs
because of possible equipment rentals 3. Will not have a significant
economic impact, positive or negative, (b) This AD supersedes AD 62–24–01,
necessary. No additional actions are Amendment 39–508.
being required. We have determined on a substantial number of small entities
that this AD action does not increase the under the criteria of the Regulatory Applicability
cost impact over that already required Flexibility Act.
(c) This AD affects the following
by AD 62–24–01. We prepared a summary of the costs airplane models and serial numbers that
to comply with this AD (and other are certificated in any category:
Authority for This Rulemaking information as included in the
Title 49 of the United States Code Regulatory Evaluation) and placed it in Serial
specifies the FAA’s authority to issue the AD Docket. You may get a copy of Model numbers
rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, this summary by sending a request to us
Section 106 describes the authority of at the address listed under ADDRESSES. Beech 45 (YT–34) ................ All
the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2006–25105; Beech A45 (T34A, B–45) ..... All
Directorate Identifier 2006–CE–33–AD’’ Beech D45 (T–34B) .............. All
Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the agency’s in your request.
authority. Unsafe Condition
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
We are issuing this rulemaking under (d) This AD results from our
the authority described in Subtitle VII, Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation determination that the surface eddy
Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, safety, Safety. current inspection method should be
‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that Adoption of the Amendment used in place of the dye penetrant
section, Congress charges the FAA with inspection method currently required in
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in ■ Accordingly, under the authority AD 62–24–01. We are issuing this AD to
air commerce by prescribing regulations delegated to me by the Administrator, prevent failure of the front and/or rear
for practices, methods, and procedures the Federal Aviation Administration horizontal stabilizer spars caused by
the Administrator finds necessary for amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation fatigue cracks. This failure could result
safety in air commerce. This regulation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows: in stabilizer separation and loss of
is within the scope of that authority control of the airplane.
because it addresses an unsafe condition PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES Compliance
that is likely to exist or develop on
products identified in this AD. (e) Using the surface eddy current
■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 inspection procedures outlined in the
Regulatory Findings continues to read as follows: appendix of this AD, inspect the front
We have determined that this AD will Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. and rear horizontal stabilizer spars
not have federalism implications under between the butt rib and the inboard
Executive Order 13132. This AD will § 39.13 [Amended] end for cracks, unless already done, as
not have a substantial direct effect on ■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by follows:
the States, on the relationship between removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) (1) If the last inspection of the front
the national government and the States, 62–24–01, Amendment 39–508, and and rear horizontal stabilizer spars was
or on the distribution of power and adding the following new AD: done using the surface eddy current
responsibilities among the various 2007–06–01 Raytheon Aircraft Company: method (or FAA-approved equivalent
levels of government. Amendment 39–14982; Docket No. FAA– method) to show compliance with
AD 62–24–01 and/or to show If Then solvent (acetone or equivalent) as required

compliance with the alternative method until no signs of dirt, grime, or oil remain on
of compliance (AMOC) to AD 2004–25– (iii) If paragraph Inspect within the the front and rear spars from the closeout
(e)(2)(ii) results in next 30 days after former inboard on the forward and aft
51: Repetitively inspect thereafter at
the initial surface April 16, 2007. (the surfaces of the spars.
intervals not to exceed 500 hours time- eddy current in- effective date of Surfaces to be inspected should be smooth
in-service (TIS). spection becoming this AD). and corrosion-free. Any loss of thickness due
(2) If the last inspection of the front mandatory within to corrosion below material thickness
30 days after the tolerance is cause for rejection of the
and rear horizontal stabilizer spars
effective date of structure. An ultrasonic tester may be used
required by AD 62–24–01 was done this AD: to determine if material thickness has been
using the dye penetrant method: Inspect compromised.
initially as presented in the table below Alternative Methods of Compliance Equipment Requirements: Nortec Stavely
and repetitively thereafter at intervals (AMOCs) 2000D Eddy Current Tester or equivalent.
not to exceed 500 hours TIS: Probe: 50–500 KHz, shielded, absolute,
(f) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft 0.071’’ diameter (0.090 max. diameter), right
If Then Certification Office, FAA, ATTN: T.N. angle, pencil style, surface probe, 5 long, 1⁄2″
Baktha, Aerospace Engineer, 1801 drop or equivalent. Use 0.025″ notch (beyond
(i) Less than 200 Inspect at whichever Airport Road, Mid-Continent Airport, head) for calibration
hours TIS have of the following oc- Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone: (316) Personal Requirements: Technicians with
passed since the curs later: 946–4155; fax: (316) 946–4107, has the Eddy Current, Level II or Level III per one of
last inspection re- authority to approve AMOCs for this the following specifications: ATA
quired by AD 62– AD, if requested using the procedures specification 105, SNT–TC–1A, or NAS–410
24–01: (MIL–std 410E).
found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(A) Upon accumu- Methods: Typical Set-up Parameters:
lating 200 hours (g) AMOCs approved for AD 62–24–
Frequency–350 KHz, Gain Vertical–75 dB,
TIS since the last 01 are approved for this AD. Horizontal–69 dB, Drive-Mid, Filters– Lo
inspection required Appendix to AD 2007–06–01 Pass–30, Hi Pass–0, Lift off-Horizontal to the
by AD 62–24–01; left, adjust as required. The most reliable
or Surface Eddy Current Inspection Procedure indication (minimum of 11⁄2 to 2 graticules)
(B) Within the next 6 of the smallest observable flaw in the coupon
Note: This surface eddy current inspection
months after April (see the attached Figures) occurs from the
procedure is based on T–34 Spar Corporation
16, 2007. (the ef- notch extending 0.025″ past the edge of the
fective date of this TSC 3506, Rev C, dated May 10, 2005. The
T–34 Spar Corporation is allowing the use of nominal fastener head (total notch length of
AD). 0.100″ from the edge of the nominal hole).
this procedure to be included in this
(ii) If 200 hours TIS or Inspect at whichever Install appropriate aluminum guide pin into
more have passed of the following oc- Airworthiness Directive. Alternative methods
of compliance procedures will be allowed, if bushing such that the edge of the guide pin
since the last in- curs first, unless is flush with the edge of the bushing. Using
spection required paragraph (e)(2)(iii) approved by the Wichita Aircraft
Certification Office and requested using the the pin (see the attached Figures) as a guide,
by AD–24–01: of this AD applies,
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. circle the area surrounding the steel bushing
as specified below:
with the probe and adjacent area
(A) At the next repet- Purpose: This procedure is to be used to
(approximately 1⁄4’’) to inspect for cracks.
itive inspection re- detect cracks in the inner and outer spars of
Inspect forward and aft surfaces surrounding
quired by AD 62– the front and rear spar assemblies of
bushings of each spar.
24–01; or Raytheon Aircraft Company Beech Models 45
(B) Within the next 6 (YT–34), A45 (T–34A, B–45), and D45 (T– Note: T–34 Spar Corporation, 2800 Airport
months after April 34B) airplane stabilizers outside of the steel Road, Hanger A, Ada, Oklahoma, 74820 is a
16, 2007 (the effec- bushings in the attach holes. source for these coupons and pin.
tive date of this Area To Be Inspected: To access the area Accept/Reject Criteria: Any repeatable flaw
AD). of inspection, remove the stabilizer from the indication is cause for rejection in
airplane. The areas to be inspected include accordance with the procedure. In the event
the forward and aft surfaces of the inner and that any crack is detected, describe the flaw
outer front and rear spars of the horizontal in detail providing sketch as needed and
stabilizers in the areas surrounding each of send the information to the Wichita ACO.
the attach holes. Documentation Requirements: Record
Preparing the Area for Inspection: inspection findings in the aircraft logbook.
Thoroughly clean area to be inspected with BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
ER12mr07.003</GPH>
ER12mr07.004</GPH>
ER12mr07.005</GPH>
ER12mr07.006</GPH>
ER12mr07.007</GPH>
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on March Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, additional inspections. We consider a
5, 2007. SW., Washington, DC. visual inspection the best method to
Kim Smith, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry detect abnormal surface wear. We don’t
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Robinette, Senior Engineer, Propulsion, have any requirement for
Certification Service. Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office, nondestructive testing because we have
[FR Doc. 07–1106 Filed 3–9–07; 8:45 am] FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, One no indication of subsurface
BILLING CODE 4910–13–C Crown Center, 1895 Phoenix Blvd., deterioration. We didn’t change the AD.
Suite 450, Atlanta, GA 30349; Request To Perform Additional
telephone: (770) 703–6096, Economic Assessment
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION fax: (770) 703–6097.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA One commenter asks us to perform
Federal Aviation Administration proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 with additional economic assessment. The
a proposed AD. The proposed AD commenter states we didn’t consider the
14 CFR Part 39 applies to TCM GTSIO–520 series economic effects on other small entities.
[Docket No. FAA–2005–20850; Directorate reciprocating engines. We published the We don’t agree. We used our current
Identifier 2005–NE–05–AD; Amendment 39– proposed AD in the Federal Register on procedures to consider the economic
14976; AD 2007–05–15] October 26, 2006, (71 FR 62570). That effects of this action. We didn’t change
action proposed to require performing the AD.
RIN 2120–AA64
the inspection ordered in paragraph (h) Editorial Changes To Improve Clarity
Airworthiness Directives; Teledyne of AD 2005–20–04 every 100 hours and Correct an Omission
Continental Motors GTSIO–520 Series time-in-service (TIS), or annually to
correct an error that required the We changed paragraph (f) of this AD
Reciprocating Engines from ‘‘If, during an inspection * * *
inspection at every 100-hour inspection.
AGENCY: Federal Aviation crankcase, replace it with a serviceable
Administration (FAA), Department of Examining the AD Docket bushing before reassembling
Transportation (DOT). You may examine the docket that components’’ to ‘‘(f) If, during an
ACTION: Final rule. contains the AD, any comments inspection required by paragraph (g),
received, and any final disposition in (h), (i), or (j) of this AD, you find needle
SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an person at the Docket Management bearing, part number (P/N) 537721,
existing airworthiness directive (AD) for Facility Docket Office between 9 a.m. installed in the crankcase, replace it
Teledyne Continental Motors (TCM) and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, with a serviceable bushing, P/N 654472
GTSIO–520 series reciprocating engines. except Federal holidays. The Docket or equivalent FAA approved bearing,
That AD currently requires initial and Office (telephone (800) 647–5227) is before reassembling components’’ to
repetitive visual inspections of the located on the plaza level of the clarify the intent of that requirement.
starter adapter assembly and crankshaft Department of Transportation Nassif We also added paragraph (h)(3) to
gear and unscheduled visual Building at the street address stated in make the compliance times in that
inspections of the starter adapter ADDRESSES. Comments will be available requirement consistent with paragraph
assembly and crankshaft gear due to a in the AD docket shortly after the DMS (i)(3).
rough-running engine. That AD also receives them. Conclusion
requires replacement of the starter
Comments We have carefully reviewed the
adapter shaft gear needle bearing with a
certain bushing and installation of a We provided the public the available data, including the comments
certain TCM service kit at the next opportunity to participate in the received, and determined that air safety
engine overhaul, or at the next starter development of this AD. We have and the public interest require adopting
adapter replacement, whichever occurs considered the comment[s] received. the AD with the changes described
first. This AD requires performing the previously. We have determined that
Remove the Requirement for a Placard these changes will neither increase the
inspection ordered in paragraph (h) of
this AD every 100 hours time-in-service Two commenters propose dropping economic burden on any operator nor
(TIS), or annually. This proposed AD the placard from the requirements of the increase the scope of the AD.
results from an error discovered in AD proposed AD. The commenters do not
Costs of Compliance
2005–20–04. We are issuing this AD to believe the placard is necessary. We
agree. It appears the commenters are We estimate that this AD will affect
failure of the starter adapter assembly 4,240 engines installed on airplanes of
and or crankshaft gear, resulting in basing their comment on the original
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) U.S. registry. We also estimate that it
failure of the engine and possible forced will take about one work-hour per
landing. that we issued on April 6, 2005, not the
current NPRM. We received comments engine to perform the inspection, about
DATES: This AD becomes effective April one work-hour per engine to perform
to the original NPRM similar to these
16, 2007. The Director of the Federal comments and removed the requirement the proposed bushing installation and
Register approved the incorporation by to add a placard before we issued AD about six work-hours per engine to
reference of certain publications listed 2005–20–05. We didn’t change this AD. install the TCM service kit. The average
in the regulations as of April 16, 2007. labor rate is $80 per work-hour. We
ADDRESSES: You can get the service Request to Change the Required estimate that about 25 percent of the
information identified in this AD from Inspection engines will require an unscheduled
Teledyne Continental Motors, Inc., PO The same two commenters request we (rough-running engine) inspection and
Box 90, Mobile, AL 36601; telephone mandate a more detailed inspection for about half of the engines will require the
(251) 438–3411. the components. The commenters state bushing and TCM service kit. Required
You may examine the AD docket on that a visual inspection might not be bushings would cost about $16 per
the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov or in sufficient. We don’t agree. The engine and service kits about $800 per
Room PL–401 on the plaza level of the commenters didn’t specify any engine. Based on these figures, we

Rule: Airworthiness Directives: Raytheon

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rule: Airworthiness Directives: Raytheon

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No.

47 / Monday, March 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 10909

[FR Doc. E7–4333 Filed 3–9–07; 8:45 am]

Costs of Compliance We estimate the following costs to

Total cost per Total cost on

Total cost per

4 work-hours × $80 per hour = $320 ............................................................................................ $3,500 $3,820

AD 62–24–01 and/or to show If Then solvent (acetone or equivalent) as required

You might also like