[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 210 (Tuesday, November 1, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65827-65832]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21543]



 ========================================================================
 Rules and Regulations
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents 
 having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed 
 to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published 
 under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
 
 The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. 
 Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each 
 week.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 210 / Tuesday, November 1, 2005 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 65827]]



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 98-NM-300-AD; Amendment 39-14355; AD 2005-22-11]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Mitsubishi Model YS-11 Airplanes, and 
Model YS-11A-200, YS-11A-300, YS-11A-500, and YS-11A-600 Series 
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), 
applicable to certain Mitsubishi Model YS-11 airplanes, and Model YS-
11A-200, YS-11A-300, YS-11A-500, and YS-11A-600 series airplanes. This 
AD requires repetitive removal of the spinner; repetitive detailed 
inspections of the propeller hub to detect fatigue cracking; and 
replacement of a propeller hub with a new propeller hub, if necessary. 
This action is necessary to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the 
propeller hub, which could cause the loss of the propeller. This action 
is intended to address the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Effective December 6, 2005.

ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be 
obtained from Nihon Aeroplane Manufacturing, Toranomon Daiichi, 
Kotohire-Cho, Shiba, Minato-Ku, Tokyo, Japan. 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, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 
3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brent Bandley, Project Engineer, 
Continuing Operational Safety, ANM-100L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft 
Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 
90712-4137; telephone (562) 627-5237; fax (562) 627-5210.

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 all Mitsubishi Model YS-11 and YS-
11A series airplanes was published in the Federal Register on August 
31, 1999 (64 FR 47442). That action proposed to require repetitive 
removal of the spinner; repetitive detailed visual inspections of the 
propeller hub to detect fatigue cracking; and replacement of a 
propeller hub with a new propeller hub, if necessary.

Comments

    Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate 
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to 
the comments received.

Request To Include Only Airplanes With Incorrectly Inspected Propeller 
Hubs

    Two commenters, the airplane manufacturer and the Japan Civil 
Aviation Bureau (JCAB), which is the airworthiness authority for Japan, 
request that we limit the airplanes affected by the notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPRM) to those that have propeller hubs that were inspected 
incorrectly. The commenters explain that, after we issued the NPRM, 
which applies to all Mitsubishi Model YS-11 and YS-11A series 
airplanes, the JCAB found some discrepancies in procedures that an 
overhauler used when inspecting the hub. The JCAB revised its 
airworthiness directive and issued Japanese airworthiness directive 
TCD-4667A-98, dated March 18, 1998, to apply only to the hubs that were 
inspected incorrectly. The commenters request that we incorporate the 
list of applicable propellers into the final rule.
    We infer that the commenters are also stating that hubs that were 
correctly inspected are not subject to the stated unsafe condition. We 
agree with the commenters; only propeller hubs that were incorrectly 
inspected are subject to the unsafe condition. Therefore, the final 
rule should be applicable only to airplanes on which these incorrectly 
inspected propeller hubs are installed. The Japanese airworthiness 
directive identifies the affected propellers by serial number. We have 
revised the summary and applicability of the final rule to reflect this 
change and to include only those serial numbers.

Request To Exclude Airplanes With Strengthened Propeller Hubs

    The same commenters request that we exclude from the applicability 
any affected airplane that has a propeller hub that was strengthened in 
accordance with Dowty Rotol Service Bulletin 61-921, dated April 24, 
1980, or later version approved by the JCAB. The commenters state that 
strengthened hubs do not require a repetitive visual inspection. The 
Japanese airworthiness directive excludes from its applicability all 
airplanes that have strengthened hubs; however, JCAB also notes in its 
comment that there have been two reports of cracks in strengthened 
hubs. In addition, the commenters request that we incorporate the 
actions in this service bulletin into the requirements of the final 
rule.
    We do not agree with the commenters. The JCAB noted that there have 
been two reports of cracks found in hubs that have been modified in 
accordance with the Dowty Rotol service bulletin. We have determined 
that propellers with the strengthened hubs do have a potential unsafe 
cracking condition because it has been reported that strengthened hubs 
have also cracked. The strengthened hubs should not be excluded from 
the applicability and inspection requirements of the final rule. We 
have not changed the final rule in this regard.

Explanation of Further Changes to the Final Rule

    We have revised the applicability to reflect the model designations 
as published in the most recent type certificate data sheets.
    We have changed paragraph (a)(2) of the final rule to refer to the 
repair procedure to follow if any crack is detected in a hub.
    We have changed references to a ``detailed visual inspection'' to 
``detailed inspection.'' We have included the definition for a detailed 
inspection in a note in the final rule.

[[Page 65828]]

    Although the Japanese airworthiness directive referenced in this AD 
specifies to submit certain information to the JCAB, this AD does not 
include that requirement.
    We have revised this action to clarify the appropriate procedure 
for notifying the principal inspector before using any approved AMOC on 
any airplane to which the AMOC applies.

Conclusion

    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 with the changes described 
previously. The FAA has determined that these changes will neither 
increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of 
the AD.

Changes to 14 CFR Part 39/Effect on the AD

    On July 10, 2002, the FAA issued a new version of 14 CFR part 39 
(67 FR 47997, July 22, 2002), which governs the FAA's airworthiness 
directives system. The regulation now includes material that relates to 
altered products, special flight permits, and alternative methods of 
compliance. However, for clarity and consistency in this final rule, we 
have retained the language of the NPRM regarding that material.

Cost Impact

    Since we issued the NPRM, we have determined that none of the 
airplanes affected by this action are on the U.S. Register. All 
airplanes affected by this AD are currently operated by non-U.S. 
operators under foreign registry; therefore, they are not directly 
affected by this AD action. However, we consider this AD necessary to 
ensure that the unsafe condition is addressed if any affected airplane 
is imported and placed on the U.S. Register in the future. If an 
affected airplane is imported and placed on the U.S. Register in the 
future, the required actions would take about 32 work hours per 
airplane to accomplish the inspection, and that the average labor rate 
is $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the 
AD would be $2,080 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 cost impact figures discussed 
in AD rulemaking actions represent only the time necessary to perform 
the specific actions actually required by the AD. These figures 
typically do not include incidental costs, such as the time required to 
gain access and close up, planning time, or time necessitated by other 
administrative actions.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to 
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the 
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, 
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in 
subtitle VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701, ``General 
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with 
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing 
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator 
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within 
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition 
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this 
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Impact

    The regulations adopted herein will not have a substantial direct 
effect 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, it 
is determined that this final rule does not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132.
    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, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
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

0
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]

0
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new airworthiness 
directive:

2005-22-11 Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, LTD.: Amendment 39-14355. 
Docket 98-NM-300-AD.

    Applicability: Model YS-11 airplanes, and Model YS-11A-200, YS-
11A-300, YS-11A-500, and YS-11A-600 series airplanes, certificated 
in any category; having propeller hubs with the following serial 
numbers: CHE942, DRG1/74, DRG7/68, DRG8/68, DRG13/70, DRG14/71, 
DRG31/68, DRG33/70, DRG34/68, DRG35/68, DRG48/69, DRG53/69, DRG65/
78, DRG72/69, DRG73/68, DRG75/69, DRG83/65, DRG87/68, DRG105/67, 
DRG126/70, DRG128/68, DRG130/70, DRG132/68, DRG132/70, DRG134/68, 
DRG137/67, DRG150/69, DRG154/65, DRG161/70, DRG179/68, DRG180/68, 
DRG194/63, DRG208/67, DRG231/70, DRG238/65, DRG275/68, DRG281/68, 
DRG284/64, DRG300/63, DRG302/67, DRG308/64, DRG308/66, DRG486/67, 
and DRG551/67.


    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 (b) 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 detect and correct fatigue cracking of the propeller hub, 
which could cause the loss of the propeller, accomplish the 
following:

Inspection and Replacement

    (a) Within 25 flight hours or 30 days after the effective date 
of this AD, whichever occurs first, remove the spinner and perform a 
detailed inspection for cracking of the propeller hub in the crack 
area shown in Figure 1 of this AD.


    Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is: 
``An intensive examination of a specific item, installation, or 
assembly to detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available 
lighting is normally supplemented with a direct source of good 
lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. Inspection aids such as 
mirror, magnifying

[[Page 65829]]

lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface cleaning and elaborate 
procedures may be required.''


    (1) If no crack is found, repeat the actions required by 
paragraph (a) of this AD thereafter at intervals not to exceed 25 
flight hours.
    (2) If any crack is detected, prior to further flight, replace 
the hub with a new hub according to a method approved by either the 
Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA; or 
the Japan Civil Aviation Bureau (JCAB) (or its delegated agent). 
Chapter 61 of the Nihon Aeroplane Manufacturing Company YS-11 and 
YS-11A Aircraft Maintenance Manuals is one approved method. Repeat 
the actions required by paragraph (a) of this AD thereafter at 
intervals not to exceed 25 flight hours.

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[[Page 65830]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01NO05.001


[[Page 65831]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01NO05.002

BILLING CODE 4910-13-C

[[Page 65832]]

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (b)(1) 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, Los Angeles ACO. Operators shall 
submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal 
Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the 
Manager, Los Angeles ACO.
    (2) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with Sec.  
39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the 
appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards 
Certificate Holding District Office.


    Note 3: Information concerning the existence of approved 
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be 
obtained from the Los Angeles ACO.

Special Flight Permits

    (c) Special flight permits may be issued for non-revenue bearing 
flights with essential crew only 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.


    Note 4: The subject of this AD is addressed in Japanese 
airworthiness directive TCD-4667A-98, dated March 18, 1998.

Incorporation by Reference

    (d) None.

Effective Date

    (e) This amendment becomes effective on December 6, 2005.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 20, 2005.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 05-21543 Filed 10-31-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-C