[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 250 (Friday, December 29, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67321-67325]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-31351]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 94-CE-28-AD; Amendment 39-9472; AD 95-26-13]
Airworthiness Directives; The New Piper Aircraft, Inc. (Formerly
Piper Aircraft Corporation) PA28 and PA32 Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes Airworthiness Directive (AD) 76-25-
06, which currently requires replacing oil cooler hoses on The New
Piper Aircraft, Inc. (Piper) Model PA28-140 airplanes, and inspecting
for a minimum clearance between the oil cooler hose assemblies and the
front exhaust stacks and adjusting if proper clearance is not obtained.
This action maintains the clearance inspection and oil cooler hose
replacements, requires this inspection and these replacements to be
repetitive, and extends the applicability to include PA32 series and
other PA28 series airplanes. It also provides the option of installing
approved TSO-C53a, Type D oil cooler hose assemblies as terminating
action for the repetitive inspection requirement. Numerous incidents/
accidents caused by oil cooler hose rupture or failure on the affected
airplanes prompted this action. The actions specified by this AD are
intended to prevent these oil cooler hoses from failing or rupturing,
which could result in engine stoppage and subsequent loss of control of
the airplane.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 5, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Information that relates to this AD may be examined at the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Central Region, Office of the
Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket 94-CE-28-AD, Room
1558, 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Juanita Craft-Lloyd, Aerospace
Engineer, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office, Campus Building,
1701 Columbia Avenue, suite 2-160, College Park, Georgia 30337-2748;
telephone (404) 305-7373; facsimile (404) 305-7348.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an AD that would apply
to Piper Model PA28-140 airplanes was published in the Federal Register
on March 8, 1995 (60 FR 12714). The action proposed to supersede AD 76-
25-06, Amendment 39-2788, with a new AD that would retain the clearance
inspection and oil cooler hose replacement for the Piper Model PA28-140
airplanes, and make the inspection and replacement repetitive for these
airplanes as well as other PA28 series and the PA32 series airplanes.
It would also provide the option of installing approved TSO-C53a, Type
D oil cooler hose assemblies as terminating action for the repetitive
inspection requirement.
Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to
the comments received.
One commenter states that the proposal should take into account
that the affected airplanes could have oil cooler hose assemblies
installed other than those manufactured from Piper. The FAA concurs and
has changed the AD to reflect that the AD applies to airplanes with oil
cooler hose assemblies that do not meet TSO-C53a, Type D requirements.
This same commenter points out that paragraph (b)(2) of the
proposed AD contains the words ``oil cooler assembly'' when it should
contain the words ``oil cooler hose assembly''. The FAA concurs and has
changed paragraph (b)(2) of the AD to reflect the above-referenced
language.
This commenter also believes that the cost of the oil cooler hoses
is too low and that the FAA did not take into account that each
airplane has two oil cooler hoses installed. The commenter states that
the price of an oil cooler hose is between $122 and $279, and the FAA
estimates $110. The FAA will change the economic paragraph of the final
rule to incorporate the upper end of the price range for oil cooler
hoses of $279 per hose with two oil cooler hoses per airplane ($558 per
airplane for parts).
A commenter proposes that the FAA clarify whether the date used to
determine the eight-year replacement
[[Page 67322]]
interval is the installation date, rubber cure date, or the pressure
test date. The FAA will specify in the AD that the date used to
determine the eight-year replacement interval is the installation date.
One commenter believes that the FAA should withdraw the notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) because a pilot can inspect these oil cooler
hoses and, therefore, the action does not warrant the expense and
record keeping required by AD action. Another commenter does not
request that the AD be withdrawn, but requests that the FAA include the
provision of allowing the pilot to inspect the oil cooler hoses. The
FAA does not concur with either of these comments. Sections 43.3(g) and
43.7(f) of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 43.3 and 14 CFR
43.7) contain the provision to allow a pilot to perform preventive
maintenance and return the airplane to service. Part 43, Appendix A of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR, part 43, Appendix A) outlines
what is considered preventive maintenance. Inspections of oil cooler
hose assemblies are not authorized as preventive maintenance actions as
detailed in the above-referenced portion of the regulations. The AD is
unchanged as a result of these comments.
A commenter believes the NPRM should be withdrawn because the 20
reported incidents over a 19-year period with no damage reported do not
justify repetitive 100-hour time-in-service (TIS) inspections and 8-
year (or 1,000 hours TIS) repetitive oil cooler hose assembly
replacements. The FAA does not concur. The FAA has received 26
incident/accident occurrences relating to oil cooler hose failure since
1985. In addition, 24 service difficulty reports (SDR) have been filed
on this subject since 1987. The FAA has determined that oil cooler
hoses that fail or rupture could result in engine stoppage and
subsequent loss of control of the airplane. The AD is unchanged as a
result of this comment.
Another commenter requests that the FAA withdraw the NPRM because
the actions are the same as what is listed in the Piper service
manuals. The commenter quotes the following from the FAA Airworthiness
Directive Manual, FAA-AIR-M-8040.1:
An AD should not be issued to assure the use of normal
maintenance practices on a product where individual cases of
improper maintenance or lack of maintenance have contributed to an
unsafe condition. Corrective action in those instances should be
taken through normal Flight Standards maintenance communication
channels, such as General Alerts, Maintenance Bulletins, and
Notices.
The FAA does not consider inspecting oil cooler hoses on the affected
Piper PA28 and PA32 series airplanes a general maintenance action. The
close proximity of the oil cooler hose assemblies to the exhaust stack
causes the oil cooler hoses to rupture instead of developing leaks over
time. A general maintenance action on oil cooler hoses would be to
check for leaks; however, the service history of the affected airplanes
is indicating ruptured oil cooler hoses. For this reason, the FAA has
determined that the close proximity of the oil cooler hose assemblies
to the exhaust stack require special inspections for the oil cooler
hoses through AD action to prevent these hoses from failing or
rupturing. The AD is unchanged as a result of this comment.
One other commenter (an owner of a Piper Model PA28R-201T airplane)
recommends that the NPRM be withdrawn because no corrosion was found on
this commenter's airplane oil cooler hoses when the tanks were removed
and the hoses replaced. In addition, this owner operates the airplane
away from seashores in a dry climate. For these reasons, this commenter
believes the NPRM should be withdrawn. The FAA does not concur. AD's
are issued based on a known ``unsafe condition that could exist or
develop on airplanes of the same type design.'' In this instance, the
owner operates a Piper Model PA28R-201T airplane, which is not affected
by this AD because this particular model does not have external oil
cooler hose assemblies. The AD is unchanged as a result of this
comment.
One commenter feels that the FAA is inferring that Piper airplane
operators are less competent than other operators by only writing the
AD against certain Piper PA28 and PA32 series airplanes. The commenter
states that every reciprocating engine-powered aircraft has oil lines
and hoses and that the AD should be written against all such aircraft.
The FAA does not concur. As stated in the NPRM, ``other airplane models
have shown a history of oil cooler hose problems; however, most of
these have been attributed to leaking oil cooler hoses instead of
ruptured hoses or broken hoses as are detailed in the incident/accident
reports of the affected PA28 and PA32 series airplanes. The close
proximity of the oil cooler hose assemblies to the exhaust stacks in
some of the affected airplanes contributes to the hazardous nature of
these oil cooler hose failures.'' The AD is unchanged as a result of
this comment.
A commenter states that Type D oil cooler hoses are less flexible
than other hoses and, therefore, cannot always be interchanged. This
commenter further explains that this less-flexible hose could kink
during oil cooler hose installation or during flight because of in-
service vibration. This could prevent oil passage and result in engine
stoppage. The FAA concurs that these Type D oil cooler hoses are less
flexible and could kink. The FAA is changing the AD to require a
minimum bend radius of 6.5 inches on oil cooler hose assemblies
incorporating 0.75-inch outer diameter hoses.
Another commenter requests that the FAA either delete the
repetitive replacement requirement or have the replacement intervals
coincide with every 10th annual inspection. The FAA does not concur.
The close proximity of the oil cooler hose assemblies to the exhaust
stacks causes the heat from the exhaust stacks to affect the life of
the hoses. This also causes the hoses to rupture instead of leak. With
this in mind, the FAA believes that repetitively inspecting the oil
cooler hoses every 100 hours TIS and replacing all hoses every 8 years
will accomplish the intent of eliminating the unsafe condition
addressed in this action. The AD is unchanged as a result of this
comment.
After careful review of all available information related to the
subject presented above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the
public interest require the adoption of the rule as proposed except for
the wording change to limit the applicability to oil cooler hose
assemblies that do not meet TSO-C53a, Type D requirements; the
rewording of ``oil cooler assembly'' to ``oil cooler hose assembly'' in
paragraph (b)(2) of the AD; the change in the economic paragraph to
reflect more accurate oil cooler hose price information; the
clarification that the replacement interval is based on the
installation date; the addition of requiring a minimum bend radius of
6.5 inches on oil cooler hose assemblies requiring a 0.75-inch outer
diameter hose; and minor editorial corrections. The FAA has determined
that the minor addition, changes, corrections, and clarification will
not change the meaning of the AD and will not add any additional burden
upon the public than was already proposed.
The replacement compliance time for this AD is presented in both
hours TIS and calendar time with the prevalent compliance time being
that which occurs first. Deterioration or failure of the oil cooler
hose assemblies could
[[Page 67323]]
occur as a result of normal flight operation or as a result of time.
Therefore, the FAA has determined that this dual replacement compliance
time is needed to assure that the oil cooler hose assemblies are
replaced before they deteriorate and rupture or fail.
The FAA estimates that 25,000 airplanes in the U.S. registry will
be affected by this AD, that it will take approximately 2 workhours (1
workhour per inspection and 1 workhour per replacement) per airplane to
accomplish the required action, and that the average labor rate is
approximately $60 an hour. Parts cost approximately $558 per airplane
($279 per oil cooler hose with two hoses per airplane). Based on these
figures, the total cost impact of the AD on U.S. operators is estimated
to be $16,950,000 or $678 per airplane. This figure does not take into
the account the cost of repetitive inspections or repetitive
replacements. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
repetitive inspections or replacements each owner/operator would incur
over the life of the airplane.
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects 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. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (1) is
not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866;
(2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) will not have a
significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial
number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. A copy of the final evaluation prepared for this
action is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained
by contacting the Rules Docket at the location provided under the
caption ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 USC 106(g), 40101, 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by removing Airworthiness Directive
(AD) 76-25-06, Amendment 39-2788, and by adding a new AD to read as
follows:
95-26-13 The New Piper Aircraft, Inc.: Amendment 39-9472; Docket No.
94-CE-28-AD; Supersedes AD 76-25-06, Amendment 39-2788.
Applicability: The following airplane models (all serial
numbers), certificated in any category, that are equipped with oil
cooler hose assemblies that do not meet TSO-C53a, Type D
requirements:
PA28-140
PA28-180
PA28R-201
PA28-235
PA32S-300
PA32R-301(SP)
PA32-301T
PA28-150
PA28S-180
PA28-151
PA28-236
PA32-301
PA32R-301(HP)
PA28-160
PA28R-180
PA28-161
PA32-260
PA32R-300
PA32RT-300T
PA28S-160
PA28R-200
PA28-181
PA32-300
PA32RT-300
PA32R-301T
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (f) of
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to
address it.
Compliance: Required as indicated in the body of this AD, unless
already accomplished.
To prevent oil cooler hoses from failing or rupturing, which
could result in engine stoppage and subsequent loss of control of
the airplane, accomplish the following:
(a) Within the next 100 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the
effective date of this AD, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed
100 hours TIS, inspect the oil cooler hoses to ensure that the hoses
meet the criteria presented in the paragraphs below.
(1) For airplanes that have any oil cooler hose assembly mounted
at the front or back of the airplane, or both, the fire sleeve of
the hose should not be soaked with oil or have a brownish or whitish
color, and there should be no evidence of deterioration as a result
of heat, brittleness, or oil seepage. Prior to further flight,
replace any hose that is soaked with oil, has a brownish or whitish
color, or has evidence of deterioration.
(2) On airplanes that have any oil cooler hose assembly mounted
in the front of the airplane, ensure that the following exists, and,
prior to further flight, adjust accordingly:
(i) The hose passes underneath and behind the electrical ground
cable and in front of the lower of the two engine mount struts when
the hose is routed to the rear of the engine; and
(ii) The hose is tied to the engine mount strut and a clearance
of at least 2 inches exists between the oil hose and exhaust stack.
Note 2: Figure 1 of this AD relates to the conditions specified
in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (a)(2)(ii) of this AD.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
[[Page 67324]]
[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TR29DE95.010
BILLING CODE 4910-13-C
[[Page 67325]]
(b) Upon the accumulation of 8 years or 1,000 hours TIS after
installation of each oil cooler assembly, whichever occurs first,
and thereafter every 8 years or 1,000 hours TIS (whichever occurs
first), accomplish one of the following:
(1) Replace each oil cooler hose assembly with a part number
specified in the APPLICABILITY section of this AD, and reinspect in
accordance with paragraph (a) of this AD at intervals not to exceed
100 hours TIS; or
(2) Replace each oil cooler hose assembly with an approved TSO-
C53a, Type D, hose assembly ensuring that there is a minimum of 2
inches between the oil cooler hoses and exhaust stacks (as
applicable) upon installation. Ensure that there is a minimum bend
radius of 6.5 inches on oil cooler assemblies incorporating 0.75-
inch outer diameter hoses.
(c) The replacement specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this AD may
be accomplished at any time prior to the 8-year or 1,000-hour
compliance time as terminating action for the 100-hour TIS
repetitive inspection requirement of this AD.
(d) After adjusting or installing oil cooler hoses, prior to
further flight, run the engine for 5 minutes to ensure that there
are no oil leaks and that the 2-inch clearance is maintained (as
applicable) when the engine is warm. Prior to further flight,
replace any leaking oil cooler hoses and adjust the clearance
accordingly.
Note 3: Although not required by this AD, the FAA recommends
that an oil cooler hose flexibility test be accomplished at each
100-hour TIS inspection interval. Oil cooler hose flexibility may be
determined by gently lifting the hose in several places from the
bottom of its downward arc to the oil cooler. If the oil cooler hose
moves slightly either from side-to-side or upward with the hand at
the center of an even arc, then some flexibility remains. If the oil
cooler hose appears hardened or inflexible, replacement is
recommended.
(e) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
(f) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
initial or repetitive compliance times that provides an equivalent
level of safety may be approved by the Manager, Atlanta Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), Campus Building, 1701 Columbia Avenue,
suite 2-160, College Park, Georgia 30337-2748. The request shall be
forwarded through an appropriate FAA Maintenance Inspector, who may
add comments and then send it to the Manager, Atlanta ACO.
Note 4: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Atlanta ACO.
Note 5: Alternative methods of compliance approved in accordance
with AD 76-25-06 (superseded by this action) are not considered
approved as alternative methods of compliance with this AD.
(g) Figure 1 of this AD may be obtained from the Atlanta ACO at
the address specified in paragraph (f) of this AD. This document or
any other information that relates to this AD may be inspected at
the FAA, Central Region, Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, Room
1558, 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri.
(h) This amendment (39-9472) supersedes AD 76-25-06, Amendment
39-2788.
(i) This amendment (39-9472) becomes effective on February 5,
1996.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on December 19, 1995.
Dwight A. Young,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 95-31351 Filed 12-28-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
