96-1521. Airworthiness Directives; Beech Model 400, 400A, and MU-300-10 Airplanes  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 29 (Monday, February 12, 1996)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 5275-5277]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-1521]
    
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
    
    Federal Aviation Administration
    
    14 CFR Part 39
    
    [Docket No. 94-NM-162-AD; Amendment 39-9504; AD 96-03-07]
    
    
    Airworthiness Directives; Beech Model 400, 400A, and MU-300-10 
    Airplanes
    
    AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
    
    ACTION: Final rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), 
    applicable to certain Beech Model 400, 400A, and MU-300-10 airplanes, 
    that requires installation of an improved adjustment mechanism on the 
    flightcrew seats and replacement of the existing aluminum seat 
    reinforcement assemblies with steel assemblies. This amendment is 
    prompted by reports of incomplete latching of the existing adjustment 
    mechanism and cracked reinforcement assemblies, which could result in 
    sudden shifting of a flightcrew seat. The actions specified by this AD 
    are intended to prevent such shifting of a flightcrew seat, which could 
    impair the flightcrew's ability to control the airplane.
    
    DATES: Effective March 13, 1996.
        The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in 
    the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as 
    of March 13, 1996.
    
    ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be 
    obtained from Raytheon Aircraft Company, P.O. Box 85, Wichita, Kansas 
    67201-0085. This information may be examined at the Federal Aviation 
    Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket, 
    1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, Small Airplane 
    Directorate, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, 1801 Airport Road, 
    Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas; or at the Office of 
    the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street NW., suite 700, 
    Washington, DC.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Engler, Aerospace Engineer, 
    Airframe Branch, ACE-118W, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, Wichita 
    Aircraft Certification Office, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-
    Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone (316) 946-4122; fax 
    (316) 946-4407.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal 
    Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness 
    directive (AD) that is applicable to certain Beech Model 400, 400A, and 
    MU-300-10 airplanes was published in the Federal Register on May 25, 
    1995 (60 FR 27705). That action proposed to require installing an 
    improved adjustment mechanism on the flightcrew seats, and replacing 
    the existing aluminum seat reinforcement assemblies with steel 
    assemblies.
        Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate 
    in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to 
    the single comment received.
        The commenter suggests that the corrective action for this proposed 
    AD is much simpler than that specified in the proposal. The commenter 
    perceives the problem to be that some pilots may not carefully check 
    the security and locking of their seats after making an adjustment. 
    Therefore, the seat can slide during taxi, climb out, or turning. The 
    commenter believes the corrective action involves flightcrew awareness; 
    the flightcrew should be responsible in determining if the seat is 
    locked into position by attempting to make the seat slide out of 
    position by rocking the seat fore and aft. The commenter suggests that, 
    if this method were employed, the costs associated with the 
    accomplishment of the actions specified in this proposed AD would not 
    be necessary. The commenter agrees that if the seat locking pins are 
    worn or the mechanism bent, those parts should be repaired.
        The FAA does not concur with the commenter's suggestion that 
    attempting to make the seat slide out of position by rocking the seat 
    fore and aft sufficiently addresses the unsafe condition. In this case, 
    the FAA has received several reports of incomplete latching of the 
    existing adjustment mechanism, and cracking of the aluminum seat 
    reinforcement assemblies. Cracking of the aluminum seat reinforcement 
    assemblies is an indicator of a 
    
    [[Page 5276]]
    structurally weak design, and this is the unsafe condition the FAA is 
    addressing in this AD action. The FAA has the authority to issue an AD 
    when it is found that an unsafe condition is likely to exist or develop 
    on other products of the same type design. The FAA finds that 
    installing an improved seat tracking adjustment mechanism and replacing 
    the aluminum seat reinforcement assemblies with steel assemblies 
    adequately, and appropriately, addresses this unsafe condition.
        This same commenter also questions the FAA's original certification 
    basis of the subject airplane relative to the seat mechanism. The 
    commenter asks whether the FAA ``made a mistake'' by certifying the 
    airplane with these seat mechanisms installed.
        In response to this, the FAA points out that an airplane's type 
    design is approved only after the FAA makes a determination that it 
    complies with all applicable airworthiness requirements. In adopting 
    and maintaining those requirements, the FAA has made the determination 
    that they establish an appropriate level of safety. However, actual in-
    service experience (as well as other factors, such as manufacturers' 
    fatigue testing, etc.) may reveal problems in an airplane or its 
    components that were not envisioned or predictable at the time of its 
    type certification. When these problems create an unsafe condition, 
    this means that the original level of safety is no longer being 
    achieved. When actions or procedures are identified that will 
    positively correct the unsafe condition and restore the airplane to its 
    original level of safety, an AD is the appropriate vehicle for 
    mandating that such actions be accomplished.
        After careful review of the available data, including the comments 
    noted above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public 
    interest require the adoption of the rule as proposed.
        There are approximately 169 Beech Model 400, 400A, and MU-300-10 
    airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA 
    estimates that 121 airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected by this 
    AD, that it will take approximately 24 work hours per airplane to 
    accomplish the required actions, and that the average labor rate is $60 
    per work hour. Required parts will cost approximately $700 per 
    airplane. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the AD on U.S. 
    operators is estimated to be $258,940, or $2,140 per airplane.
        The cost impact figure discussed above is based on assumptions that 
    no operator has yet accomplished any of the requirements of this AD 
    action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in the 
    future if this AD were not adopted.
        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 final evaluation has been prepared for this action 
    and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained 
    from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption 
    ADDRESSES.
    
    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
    
        Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by 
    reference, 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), 40113, 44701.
    
    
    Sec. 39.13  [Amended]
    
        2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new 
    airworthiness directive:
    
    96-03-07  Beech Aircraft Corporation: Amendment 39-9504. Docket 94-
    NM-162-AD.
    
        Applicability: Model 400 airplanes, serial numbers RJ-1 through 
    RJ-65 inclusive; Model 400A airplanes, serial numbers RK-1 through 
    RK-93 inclusive; and Model MU-300-10 airplanes, serial numbers 
    A1001SA through A1011SA inclusive; certificated in any category.
    
        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 use the authority 
    provided in paragraph (b) of this AD to request approval from the 
    FAA. This approval may address either no action, if the current 
    configuration eliminates the unsafe condition; or different actions 
    necessary to address the unsafe condition described in this AD. Such 
    a request should include an assessment of the effect of the changed 
    configuration on the unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no 
    case does the presence of any modification, alteration, or repair 
    remove any airplane from the applicability of this AD.
    
        Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished 
    previously.
        To prevent reduced controllability of the airplane due to a 
    shifting of the flightcrew seat during flight, accomplish the 
    following:
        (a) Within 200 hours time-in-service after the effective date of 
    this AD, install an improved adjustment mechanism on the flightcrew 
    seat, and replace the existing aluminum seat reinforcement 
    assemblies with steel assemblies, in accordance with Beechcraft 
    Service Bulletin No. 2536, Revision 1, dated April 1995.
        (b) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the 
    compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be 
    used if approved by the Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification 
    Office (ACO), FAA, Small Airplane Directorate. Operators shall 
    submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal 
    Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the 
    Manager, Wichita ACO.
    
        Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved 
    alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be 
    obtained from the Wichita ACO.
    
        (c) 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.
        (d) The installation and replacement shall be done in accordance 
    with Beechcraft Service Bulletin No. 2536, Revision 1, dated April 
    1995. (NOTE: The issue date of Service Bulletin No. 2536 is 
    indicated only on page 1; no other page of the document is dated.) 
    This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the 
    Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 
    51. Copies may be obtained from Raytheon Aircraft Company, P. O. Box 
    85, Wichita, Kansas 67201-0085. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, 
    Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 
    Washington; or at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, Wichita 
    Aircraft Certification Office, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-
    Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas; or at the Office of the Federal 
    Register, 800 North Capitol Street NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.
        (e) This amendment becomes effective on March 13, 1996.
    
    
    [[Page 5277]]
    
        Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 23, 1996.
    Darrell M. Pederson,
     Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
    Service.
    [FR Doc. 96-1521 Filed 2-9-96; 8:45am]
    BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
3/13/1996
Published:
02/12/1996
Department:
Federal Aviation Administration
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Final rule.
Document Number:
96-1521
Dates:
Effective March 13, 1996.
Pages:
5275-5277 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket No. 94-NM-162-AD, Amendment 39-9504, AD 96-03-07
PDF File:
96-1521.pdf
CFR: (1)
14 CFR 39.13