[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 206 (Wednesday, October 24, 2001)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53741-53743]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-26714]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99-CE-86-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Aerostar Aircraft Corporation Models 
PA-60-601 (Aerostar 601), PA-60-601P (Aerostar 601P), PA-60-602P 
(Aerostar 602P), and PA-60-700P (Aerostar 700P) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive 
(AD) that would apply to certain Aerostar Aircraft Corporation 
(Aerostar) Models 601, 601P, 602P, and 700P airplanes. The proposed AD 
would require you to replace Roto-Master and Rajay scavenge pumps with 
Aerostar scavenge pumps. The proposed action is the result of failures 
of the existing Roto-Master and Rajay scavenge pump found during 
regular maintenance inspections. The actions specified by this proposed 
AD are intended to prevent failure of the oil scavenge pumps, which 
could result in loss of engine oil and possible loss of engine power.

DATES: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must receive any 
comments on this proposed rule on or before January 2, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to the Federal Aviation Administration 
(FAA), Central Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, Attention: Rules 
Docket No. 99-CE-86-AD, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri 
64106. You may look at comments at this location between 8 a.m. and 4 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    You may get service information that applies to this proposed AD 
from Aerostar Aircraft Corporation, 10555 Airport Drive, Coeur d'Alene 
Airport, Hayden Lake, Idaho 83835-8742; Telephone: (208) 762-0338; 
facsimile: (208) 762-8349. You may also view this information at the 
Rules Docket at the address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Simonson, Aerospace Engineer, 
FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 
Renton, Washington 98055; telephone: (425) 227-2597; facsimile: (425) 
227-1181.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

How Do I Comment on This Proposed AD?

    The FAA invites comments on this proposed rule. You may submit 
whatever written data, views, or arguments you choose. You need to 
include the rule's docket number and submit your comments to the 
address specified under the caption ADDRESSES. We will consider all 
comments received on or before the closing date. We may amend this 
proposed rule in light of comments received. Factual information that 
supports your ideas and suggestions is extremely helpful in evaluating 
the effectiveness of this proposed AD action and determining whether we 
need to take additional rulemaking action.

Are There Any Specific Portions of This Proposed AD I Should Pay 
Attention to?

    The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed rule that 
might suggest a need to modify the rule. You may view all comments we 
receive before and after the closing date of the rule in the Rules 
Docket. We will file a report in the Rules Docket that

[[Page 53742]]

summarizes each contact we have with the public that concerns the 
substantive parts of this proposed AD.

How Can I Be Sure FAA Receives My Comment?

    If you want FAA to acknowledge the receipt of your comments, you 
must include a self-addressed, stamped postcard. On the postcard, write 
``Comments Docket No. 99-CE-86-AD.'' We will date stamp and mail the 
postcard back to you.

Discussion

What Events Have Caused This Proposed AD?

    The FAA has received several reports of excessive internal pump 
wear found during normal maintenance inspections on Aerostar Models 
601, 601P, 602P, and 700P airplanes. Analysis of these incidents 
reveals that inadequate retention of the existing oil scavenge pump 
rotor allows the rotor to machine its way through the end plate.

What Are the Consequences if the Condition Is Not Corrected?

    This condition, if not corrected, could result in loss of engine 
oil and possible loss of engine power.

Is There Service Information That Applies to This Subject?

    Aerostar has issued Mandatory Service Bulletin SB SB600-131A, dated 
January 10, 1998.

What Are the Provisions of This Service Bulletin?

    The service bulletin describes procedures for replacing the Roto-
Master scavenge pumps, part numbers 101633-01 or -02; and Rajay 
scavenge pumps, part numbers RJ1025-1 or -2; with Aerostar scavenge 
pumps, part number 300110-001 or -002.

The FAA's Determination and an Explanation of the Provisions of the 
Proposed AD

What Has FAA Decided?

    After examining the circumstances and reviewing all available 
information related to the incidents, we have determined that:

--The unsafe condition referenced in this document exists or could 
develop on other Aerostar Models 601, 601P, 602P, and 700P airplanes of 
the same type design;
--These airplanes should have the actions specified in the above 
service bulletin incorporated; and
--The FAA should take AD action to correct this unsafe condition.

What Would This Proposed AD Require?

    This proposed AD would require you to replace the Roto-Master or 
Rajay scavenge pumps with Aerostar scavenge pumps, if not already 
performed.

What Are the Differences Between the Service Bulletin and the Proposed 
AD?

    Aerostar specifies in the service information that you replace the 
scavenge pumps within the next 50 hours time-in-service (TIS) or at the 
next annual inspection, whichever comes first. We propose a requirement 
that you replace the scavenge pumps within the next 50 hours TIS after 
the effective date of the proposed AD. We cannot enforce a compliance 
time of ``at the next annual inspection.'' We believe that 50 hours TIS 
will give the owners/operators of the affected airplanes enough time to 
have the proposed actions done without compromising the safety of the 
airplanes. This will allow the owners/operators to work this proposed 
replacement into regularly scheduled maintenance.

Cost Impact

How Many Airplanes Would This Proposed AD Impact?

    We estimate the proposed AD would affect 650 airplanes in the U.S. 
registry.

What Would Be the Cost Impact of This Proposed AD on Owners/Operators 
of the Affected Airplanes?

    We estimate that it would take about 8 workhours to do the proposed 
installation of both left and right engine scavenge pumps, at an 
average labor rate of $60 an hour. We estimate parts costs for each 
airplane at $4,750. Based on the cost factors presented above, we 
estimate the total cost impact of the proposed installation on U.S. 
operators is $3,399,500, or $5,230 for each airplane.

Regulatory Flexibility Determination and Analysis

What Are the Requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act?

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 was enacted by Congress to 
assure that small entities are not unnecessarily or disproportionately 
burdened by government regulations. This Act establishes ``as 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 Act requires agencies to 
solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the 
rationale for their actions. The Act 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 proposed or 
final rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. If the determination is that the rule will, 
the Agency must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described 
in the RFA.
    However, if an agency determines that a proposed or final rule is 
not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the 
head of the agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis 
is not required. The certification must include a statement providing 
the factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be 
clear.

What Is FAA's Determination?

    The FAA has determined that this proposed AD could have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
However, we have determined that we should continue with this proposed 
action in order to address the unsafe condition and ensure aviation 
safety.
    You may obtain a copy of the complete Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis (entitled ``Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis'') that 
was prepared for this proposed AD from the Docket file at the location 
listed under the ADDRESSES section of this document.

Regulatory Impact

Would This Proposed AD Impact Relations Between Federal and State 
Governments?

    The proposed regulations 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. We have determined that this proposed 
rule would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 
13132.

Would This Proposed AD Involve a Significant Rule or Regulatory Action?

    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this proposed 
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) if

[[Page 53743]]

promulgated, could have a significant economic impact, positive or 
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria 
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. You may obtain a copy of the 
complete Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (entitled ``Initial Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis'') that was prepared for this proposed AD from the 
Docket file at the location listed under the ADDRESSES section of this 
document.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under 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:

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.


Sec. 39.13  [Amended]

    2. FAA amends Section 39.13 by adding a new airworthiness directive 
(AD) to read as follows:

Aerostar Aircraft Corporation: Docket No. 99-CE-86-AD.

    (a) What airplanes are affected by this AD? This AD affects the 
following airplanes, all serial numbers, certificated in any 
category: Models PA-60-601 (Aerostar 601), PA-60-601P (Aerostar 
601P), PA-60-602P (Aerostar 602P), and PA-60-700P (Aerostar 700P) 
airplanes.
    (b) Who must comply with this AD? Anyone who wishes to operate 
any of the above airplanes on the U.S. Register must comply with 
this AD.
    (c) What problem does this AD address? The actions specified by 
this AD are intended to replace faulty oil scavenge pumps with pumps 
of improved design. The faulty oil scavenge pumps have rotors that 
machine through the end plate, resulting in loss of engine oil and 
possible loss of engine power.
    (d) What must I do to address this problem? To address this 
problem, you must do the following actions:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Actions               Compliance times       Procedures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Replace the Roto-Master       Within the next 50  Do this
 scavenge pumps, part numbers      hours time-in-      replacement
 101633-01 or -02; and Rajay       service after the   following the
 scavenge umps, part numbers       effective date of   INSTRUCTIONS
 RJ1025-1 or -2; with Aerostar     this AD, unless     paragraph of
 part number 300110-001 or -002.   already performed.  Aerostar
                                                       Mandatory Service
                                                       Bulletin SB600-
                                                       131A, January 10,
                                                       1998, and the
                                                       Aerostar
                                                       Maintenance
                                                       Manual.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Do not install, on any        As of the           Not applicable.
 affected airplane, Roto-Master    effective date of
 scavenge pumps, part numbers      this AD.
 101633-01 or -02; and Rajay
 scavenge pumps, part numbers
 RJ1025-1 or -2
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (e) Can I comply with this AD in any other way? You may use an 
alternative method of compliance or adjust the compliance time if:
    (1) Your alternative method of compliance provides an equivalent 
level of safety; and
    (2) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 
approves your alternative. Send your request through an FAA 
Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send 
it to the Manager, Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 
Washington 98055.

    Note: This AD applies to each airplane identified in paragraph 
(a) of this AD, 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 (e) of this AD. You should 
include in the request an assessment of the effect of the 
modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition 
addressed by this AD; and, if you have not eliminated the unsafe 
condition, specific actions you propose to address it.

    (f) Where can I get information about any already-approved 
alternative methods of compliance? Contact Richard Simonson, 
Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 
Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4065; telephone: (425) 
227-2597; facsimile: (425) 227-1181.
    (g) What if I need to fly the airplane to another location to 
comply with this AD? The FAA can issue a special flight permit under 
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate your airplane to a location where 
you can do the requirements of this AD.
    (h) How do I get copies of the documents referenced in this AD? 
You may get the service information referenced in the AD from 
Aerostar Aircraft Corporation, 10555 Airport Drive, Coeur d'Alene 
Airport, Hayden Lake, Idaho 83835-8742; Telephone: (208) 762-0338; 
facsimile: (208) 762-8349. You may read this document at FAA, 
Central Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 
506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on October 16, 2001.
Michael Gallagher,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 01-26714 Filed 10-23-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P