Quiero saber acerca de...

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 164 / Friday, August 27, 2021 / Proposed Rules contain commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing CBI
as PROPIN. The FAA will treat such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI
should be sent to Mike Kiesov, Aviation Safety Engineer, General Aviation &
Rotorcraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, MO 64106. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.
Background The Civil Aviation Authority CAA, which is the aviation authority for New Zealand, has issued AD No. DCA/
750XL/37, effective April 25, 2019
referred to after this as the MCAI, to correct an unsafe condition for certain Pacific Aerospace Limited Model 750XL
airplanes. The MCAI states:

FAAs Determination This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAAs bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. The FAA is issuing this NPRM after determining the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.
Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM
This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously, except as discussed under Differences Between this Proposed AD
and the MCAI.

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at https
www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA2021
0711.

Differences Between This Proposed AD
and the MCAI
The MCAI requires an inspection at the next 150 hour maintenance inspection or within the next 50 hours time-in-service TIS, whichever occurs later, while this proposed AD would require those actions within 50 hours TIS or at the next annual inspection after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later. If there is no chafing and damage found during the inspection, the MCAI requires certain follow-on actions at the next 300 hour maintenance inspection or within the next 50 hours TIS, whichever is later.
This proposed AD would require those actions within 50 hours TIS or at the next annual inspection, whichever occurs later, because there is no regulatory requirement for operators in the U.S. to have 150-hour or 300-hour maintenance inspections.

Related Service Information Under 1
CFR Part 51
The FAA reviewed Pacific Aerospace Mandatory Service Bulletin PACSB/XL/
113, Issue 2, dated March 8, 2019. The service information contains procedures for inspecting the engine fuel feed line hoses and the electrical wiring for chafing or damage, rerouting all fuel lines and the fuel transducer and pressure switch wiring including installing P clips, and inspecting the fuel hose for chafing and replacing chafed fire sleeves or fuel hoses if necessary. This service information is reasonably available because the
Costs of Compliance The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would affect 23
airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA also estimates that it would take about 5
work-hours per airplane and require parts costing $20 per airplane to comply with the inspection and re-routing that would be required by this proposed AD.
The average labor rate is $85 per workhour.
Based on these figures, the FAA
estimates the inspection and re-routing cost of this proposed AD on U.S.
operators to be $10,235, or $445 per airplane.

DCA/750XL/37 is prompted by a review of the installation of the engine fuel lines and the electrical installation forward of the engine firewall on aircraft fitted with an air conditioner and/or a standby alternator, including those aircraft configured for the installation of an air conditioner and/or a standby alternator. It was found that the engine fuel feed lines hoses could possibly chafe against the adjacent electrical wiring and the ignition exciter, which could result in a fuel leak and possible fire. The CAA
AD is issued to introduce the corrective actions in Pacific Aerospace Mandatory Service Bulletin MSB PACSB/XL/113 issue 2, dated 8 March 2019.

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:25 Aug 26, 2021

Jkt 253001

PO 00000

Frm 00042

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

48087

The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate. According to the manufacturer, however, some of the costs of this proposed AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected operators.
Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAAs 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 Agencys authority.
The FAA is 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 Findings The FAA 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify this proposed regulation:
1 Is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, 2 Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and 3 Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

E:FRFM27AUP1.SGM

27AUP1