Browse: Departments   Dates   Agencies  

CFR Citation: 14 CFR Part 39

Docket ID: [Docket No. 2004-CE-01-AD]

RIN ID: RIN 2120-AA64

NOTICE: PROPOSED RULES

ACTION: Airworthiness directives:

DOCUMENT ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

SUBJECT CATEGORY: Airworthiness Directives; Raytheon Aircraft Company Beech 100, 200, and 300 Series Airplanes

DATES: We must receive any comments on this proposed AD by November 2, 2004.

DOCUMENT SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 93- 2507, which applies to Raytheon Aircraft Company (Raytheon) Beech 100, 200, and 300 series airplanes. AD 932507 currently requires you to repetitively inspect the fuselage stringers for cracks and modify at certain times depending on the number of cracked stringers. This proposed AD is the result of FAA's policy (since 1996) to not allow airplane operation when known cracks exist in primary structure. The fuselage structure is
[[Page 55370]]
considered primary structure and operation is currently allowed for a certain period of time if less than five fuselage stringers are cracked. Consequently, this proposed AD would retain the inspection and modification requirements of AD 932507, but would require you to repair any cracked fuselage stringers. We are issuing this proposed AD to detect and correct any cracked fuselage stringers in the rear pressure bulkhead area, which could result in structural damage to the fuselage. This damage could lead to failure of the fuselage with potential loss of control of the airplane.

SUMMARY: Raytheon,

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

How do I comment on this proposed AD? We invite you to submit any written relevant data, views, or arguments regarding this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``AD Docket No. 2004CE01AD'' in the subject line of your comments. If you want us to acknowledge receipt of your mailed comments, send us a self addressed, stamped postcard with the docket number written on it. We will datestamp your postcard and mail it back to you.

Are there any specific portions of this proposed AD I should pay attention to? We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. If you contact us through a nonwritten communication and that contact relates to a substantive part of this proposed AD, we will summarize the contact and place the summary in the docket. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD in light of those comments and contacts.

Discussion

Has FAA taken any action to this point? Reports of cracks on the fuselage stringers in the rear pressure bulkhead area on Raytheon Beech 100, 200, and 300 series airplanes caused us to issue AD 932507, Amendment 398773. AD 932507 currently requires the following on Raytheon Beech Models 200, A200, B200, A1001, 200C, A200C, B200C, 200CT, A200CT, B200CT, 200T, B200T, 300, B300, and B300C airplanes: Repetitive inspections of the fuselage stringers for cracks; and Modification at certain times depending on the number of cracked stringers.

What has happened since AD 932507 to initiate this proposed action? As currently written, AD 932507 allows continued flight if cracks are found in less than five fuselage stringers in the area of the rear pressure bulkhead. In 1996, FAA developed policy to not allow airplane operation when known cracks exist in primary structure, unless the ability to sustain limit and ultimate load with these cracks is proven. The fuselage stringers in the area of the rear pressure bulkhead are considered primary structure.

This proposed AD would bring the actions of AD 932507 in compliance with FAA policy. Therefore, FAA has determined:
That airplane operation on the affected airplanes should not be allowed for more than 25 hours timeinservice (TIS) if less than five fuselage stringers (Stringer Nos. 5 through 11) in the rear pressure bulkhead are cracked; and
That no operation should be allowed until modification for any airplane with five or more cracked fuselage stringers (Stringer Nos. 5 through 11) in the rear pressure bulkhead.

The FAA has also identified other airplanes that should be affected by this action.

What is the potential impact if FAA took no action? Cracked fuselage stringers in the rear pressure bulkhead area, if not detected and corrected, could result in structural damage to the fuselage. This damage could lead to failure of the fuselage with potential loss of control of the airplane.

Is there service information that applies to this subject? Raytheon has issued Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 532472, Rev. 4, Revised: July, 2003.

What are the provisions of this service information? The service bulletin includes procedures for:
Inspecting the fuselage stringers (Nos. 5 through 11) in the rear pressure bulkhead for cracks; and
Incorporating a modification kit on any cracked fuselage stringer. Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

What has FAA decided? We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other products of this same type design. Therefore, we are proposing AD action.

What would this proposed AD require? This proposed AD would supersede AD 932507 with a new AD that would retain the requirement of repetitively inspecting the fuselage stringers for cracks, but would require the repair of any cracked fuselage stringers. The FAA is proposing a grace period of 25 cycles for all airplanes with less than five cracked fuselage stringers. The repetitive inspections would no longer be required when all fuselage stringers (Nos. 5 though 11) in the rear pressure bulkhead are modified. The specific Raytheon Beech airplane models affected by this AD are as follows:
Model Serial Nos. A1001 (U21J)............................ BB3 through BB5.
200 and B200.............................. BB2 and BB6 through BB 1462.
A200 (C12A) and A200 (C12C)............. BC1 through BC75 and BD1 through BD30.
A200C (UC12B)............................ BJ1 through BJ66. A200CT (C12D)............................ BP1, BP22, and BP24 through BP51.
A200CT (FWC12D).......................... BP7 through BP11. A200CT (RC12D)........................... GR1 through GR13. A200CT (C12F)............................ BP52 through BP63. A200CT (RC12G)........................... FC1 and FC3.
A200CT (RC12H)........................... GR14 through GR19. A200CT (RC12K)........................... FE1 through FE9. [[Page 55371]]
A200CT (RC12P)........................... FE10 through FE24. A200CT (RC12K)........................... FE25 through FE31. 200C and B200C............................ BL1 through BL72 and BL 124 through BL138. 200CT and B200CT.......................... BN1 through BN4. B200T and 200T............................ BT1 through BT38. B200C (C12F)............................. BL73 through BL112 and BL 118 through BL123. B200C (C12F)............................. BP64 through BP71. B200C (UC12F)............................ BU1 through BU10. B200C (UC12M)............................ BV1 through BV12. B200CT.................................... FG1 and FG2.
300....................................... FA1 through FA228. 300....................................... FF1 through FF19. B300...................................... FL1 through FL103. B300C..................................... FM1 through FM8. B300C..................................... FN1.

How does the revision to 14 CFR part 39 affect this proposed AD? On July 10, 2002, we published a new version of 14 CFR part 39 (67 FR 47997, July 22, 2002), which governs FAA's AD system. This regulation now includes material that relates to altered products, special flight permits, and alternative methods of compliance. This material previously was included in each individual AD. Since this material is included in 14 CFR part 39, we will not include it in future AD actions.

Costs of Compliance

How many airplanes would this proposed AD impact? We estimate that this proposed AD affects 2,300 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 the following costs to do each proposed inspection:
Total cost on Labor cost Parts cost Total cost per airplane U.S. operators 2 workhours at $65 per hour = $130 per No special parts necessary to $130 per airplane....... $299,000 airplane. do the inspection.

We estimate the following costs to incorporate the fuselage stringer repair kit that would be required based on the results of this proposed inspection. We have no way of determining the number of airplanes that may need this repair kit:
Total cost per Labor cost Parts cost airplane 11 workhours at $65 per hour = Approximately $200 per Ranging from $715 per airplane. repair kit with one $915 per to three kits airplane to necessary depending $1,315 per on the extent of the airplane. cracks (possible
total of $600 per
airplane).

Regulatory Findings

Would this proposed AD impact various entities? We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would 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.

Would this proposed AD involve a significant rule or regulatory action? For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this proposed

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Steven E. Potter, Aerospace Engineer, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, 1801 Airport Road, Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone: (316) 9464124; facsimile: (316) 946 4107.