[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 63 (Monday, April 1, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14275-14277]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-7853]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 95-NM-170-AD]
Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Model F28 Series Airplanes
(Excluding Model F28 Mark 0100 Series Airplanes)
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document proposes the adoption of a new airworthiness
directive (AD) that is applicable to certain Fokker Model F28 series
airplanes. This proposal would require a one-time detailed visual
inspection to detect cracking of the elevator gust lock housing and the
gust lock support structure, and repair or replacement of cracked
parts. This proposal is prompted by a report of failure of an elevator
gust lock housing due to fatigue cracking. The actions specified by the
proposed AD are intended to prevent fatigue cracking of the elevator
gust lock housing and the gust lock support structure, which could
result in loss of the elevator and the support structure, and
subsequent possible loss of primary pitch control.
DATES: Comments must be received by May 9, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-103,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 95-NM-170-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington 98055-4056. Comments may be inspected at this location
between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
The service information referenced in the proposed rule may be
obtained from Fokker Aircraft USA, Inc., 1199 North Fairfax Street,
Alexandria, Virginia 22314. This information may be examined at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Connie Beane, Aerospace Engineer,
Standardization Branch, ANM-113, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (206)
227-2796; fax (206) 227-1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the
proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as
they may desire. Communications shall
[[Page 14276]]
identify the Rules Docket number and be submitted in triplicate to the
address specified above. All communications received on or before the
closing date for comments, specified above, will be considered before
taking action on the proposed rule. The proposals contained in this
notice may be changed in light of the comments received.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All
comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing
date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested
persons. A report summarizing each FAA-public contact concerned with
the substance of this proposal will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this notice must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket Number 95-NM-170-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
Availability of NPRMs -
Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request
to the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-103, Attention: Rules
Docket No. 95-NM-170-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98055-4056.
Discussion -
The Rijksluchtvaartdienst (RLD), which is the airworthiness
authority for the Netherlands, recently notified the FAA that an unsafe
condition may exist on certain Fokker Model F28 series airplanes. The
RLD advises that it received a report indicating that the elevator gust
lock housing on a Model F28 series airplane failed during maintenance.
This failure occurred after the cockpit control column was moved with
the gust lock in the ``ON'' position and the hydraulic system
activated. After the gust lock was disengaged, the elevator appeared to
be obstructed. Results of a subsequent investigation revealed that the
two upper legs of the gust lock housing had broken off, while the
housing was bent towards the tension regulator quadrant. The gust lock
support structure on which the two lower legs were mounted also was
damaged. The cause of breakage of the gust lock housing and damage to
the support structure has been attributed to fatigue cracking. Fatigue
cracking of the elevator gust lock housing and the gust lock support
structure, if not detected and corrected in a timely manner, could
result in loss of the elevator and the support structure, and
subsequent possible loss of primary pitch control. -
Fokker has issued Service Bulletin F28/55-30, Revision 1, dated
January 4, 1993, which describes procedures for a one-time detailed
visual inspection to detect cracking of the elevator gust lock housing
and the gust lock support structure, and repair or replacement of
cracked parts with new or serviceable parts. The service bulletin
permits further flight with cracking of the gust lock support
structure, provided that cracking is within certain limits, until the
structure is replaced or repaired. However, the service bulletin
specifies that inspections to detect further cracking should be
accomplished in the interim. The service bulletin also specifies that,
if any cracking is found, use of the gust lock system is prohibited
until the cracked part is replaced. The RLD classified this service
bulletin as mandatory and issued Dutch airworthiness directive BLA 92-
101/4 (A), dated January 28, 1994, in order to assure the continued
airworthiness of these airplanes in the Netherlands. -
These airplane models are manufactured in the Netherlands and are
type certificated for operation in the United States under the
provisions of section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR
21.29) and the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Pursuant
to this bilateral airworthiness agreement, the RLD has kept the FAA
informed of the situation described above. The FAA has examined the
findings of the RLD, reviewed all available information, and determined
that AD action is necessary for products of this type design that are
certificated for operation in the United States. -
Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to
exist or develop on other airplanes of the same type design, the
proposed AD would require a one-time detailed visual inspection to
detect cracking of the elevator gust lock housing and the gust lock
support structure, and repair or replacement of cracked parts with new
or serviceable parts. For airplanes on which cracking is found, the
proposed AD also would prohibit use of the gust lock system until
cracked parts are replaced. The actions would be required to be
accomplished in accordance with the service bulletin described
previously. -
Operators should note that, unlike the procedures described in the
referenced service bulletin, this proposed AD would not permit further
flight with cracking detected in the gust lock support structure. The
FAA has determined that, due to the safety implications and
consequences associated with such cracking, all structure that is found
to be cracked must be replaced or repaired prior to further flight.
The FAA estimates that 43 airplanes of U.S. registry would be
affected by this proposed AD, that it would take approximately 2 work
hours per airplane to accomplish the proposed actions, and that the
average labor rate is $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the
cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be
$5,160, or $120 per airplane. -
The cost impact figure discussed above is based on assumptions that
no operator has yet accomplished any of the proposed requirements of
this AD action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in
the future if this AD were not adopted. -
The regulations proposed herein would 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
proposal would not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant
the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. -
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that 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);
and (3) if promulgated, 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 draft
regulatory 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.
The Proposed Amendment -
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend
part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as
follows:
[[Page 14277]]
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:
Fokker: Docket 95-NM-170-AD.
-Applicability: Model F28 series airplanes, excluding Model F28
Mark 0100 series airplanes, 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 request approval for an
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (c) 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, unless accomplished
previously. -
To prevent fatigue cracking of the elevator gust lock housing
and the gust lock support structure, which could result in loss of
the elevator and the support structure, and subsequent possible loss
of primary pitch control, accomplish the following: -
(a) Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, perform
a one-time detailed visual inspection to detect cracking of the
elevator gust lock housing and the gust lock support structure, in
accordance with Fokker Service Bulletin F28/55-30, Revision 1, dated
January 4, 1993. -
(b) If any cracking is found, prior to further flight, repair or
replace the cracked elevator gust lock housing or gust lock support
structure with a new or serviceable part in accordance with Fokker
Service Bulletin F28/55-30, Revision 1, dated January 4, 1993. Use
of the elevator gust lock system is prohibited until cracked parts
are replaced with new or serviceable parts. -
(c) 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, Standardization Branch, ANM-113,
FAA, Transport 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,
Standardization Branch, ANM-113.
-Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Standardization Branch, ANM-113.
-(d) 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.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 26, 1996.
Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-7853 Filed 3-29-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
