AD 98-06-30

This amendment supersedes an existing airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to certain Raytheon (Beech) Model 400, 400A, 400T, MU-300, MU-300-10 airplanes, that currently requires replacement of outflow/safety valves with serviceable valves. This amendment revises the applicability of the existing AD to add an airplane model and to remove other airplanes, as well as to identify the serial numbers of affected airplanes. The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent cracking and consequent failure of the outflow/safety valves, which could result in rapid decompression of the airplane.

Final rule

98-06-30 RAYTHEON AIRCRAFT COMPANY (Formerly Beech, Raytheon Corporate Jets, British Aerospace, Hawker Siddley, et al.): Amendment 39-10408. Docket 97-NM-68-AD. Supersedes AD 96-17-10, Amendment 39-9719.

Applicability: The following models and series of airplanes, certificated in any category, equipped with AlliedSignal outflow/safety valves, as identified in AlliedSignal Aerospace Service Bulletin 103570-21-4012, Revision 1, dated May 30, 1995:

Model of Airplane
Serial Numbers
400
RJ-1 through RJ-65 inclusive
400A
RK-1 through RK-42 inclusive
400T (military)
TT-4 and TT-19
MU-300
S/N A001SA through A091SA inclusive
MU-300-10
A1001SA through A1011SA inclusive

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 cracking and consequent failure of the outflow/safety valves, which could result in rapid decompression of the airplane, accomplish the following:

(a) Replace the outflow/safety valve in accordance with AlliedSignal Aerospace Service Bulletin 103570-21-4012, Revision 1, dated May 30, 1995, or Raytheon Service Bulletin No. 2476, Revision II, dated June 1997, at the time specified in paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this AD, as applicable.

(1) For Model 400, 400A, MU-300-10 series airplanes: Replace within 18 months after September 24, 1996 (the effective date of AD 96-17-10, amendment 39-9719).

(2) For Model 400T (military) and MU-300 series airplanes: Replace within 18 months after the effective date of AD.

(b) As of the effective date of this AD, no person shall install an outflow/safety valve, having a part number and serial number identified in AlliedSignal Aerospace Service Bulletin 103570-21-4012, Revision 1, dated May 30, 1995, on any airplane unless that valve is considered to be serviceable in accordance with the applicable service bulletin.

(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, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Small Airplane Directorate. Operators shall submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it tothe Manager, Wichita ACO.

NOTE 2: Information concerning the existence of approved alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be obtained from the Wichita ACO.

(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.

(e) The replacement shall be done in accordance with AlliedSignal Aerospace Service Bulletin 103570-21-4012, Revision 1, dated May 30, 1995; or Raytheon Service Bulletin No. 2476, Revision II, dated June 1997.

(1) The incorporation by reference of Raytheon Service Bulletin No. 2476, Revision II, dated June 1997, is approved by the Director of the Federal Register, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

(2) The incorporation by reference of AlliedSignal Aerospace Service Bulletin 103570-21-4012, Revision 1, dated May 30, 1995, was approved previously by the Director of the Federal Register as of September 24, 1996 (61 FR 42996, August 20, 1996).

(3) Copies may be obtained from AlliedSignal Aerospace, Technical Publications, Dept. 65-70, P.O. Box 52170, Phoenix, Arizona 85072-2170; or Raytheon Aircraft Company, Manager Service Engineering, Hawker Customer Support Department, P.O. Box 85, Wichita, Kansas 67201-0085. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

(f) This amendment becomes effective on April 24, 1998.

A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) by superseding AD 96-17-10, amendment 39-9719 (61 FR 42996, August 20, 1996), which is applicable to certain Raytheon (Beech) Model 400, 400A, MU-300-10, and 2000 series airplanes, and Model 200, B200, 300, and B300 series airplanes, was published in the Federal Register on July 30, 1997 (62 FR 40763). The action proposed to continue to require replacement of outflow/safety valves with serviceable valves. The action also proposed to revise the applicability of the existing AD to add an airplane model and to remove other airplanes, as well as to identify the serial numbers of affected airplanes.

Comments
Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate in the making of this amendment. No comments were submitted in response to the proposal or the FAA's determination of the cost to the public.

Clarification of Applicability of This AD
The preamble of the proposed AD states that the applicability of AD 96-17-10 must be revised, in part, to reference Raytheon Service Bulletin No. 2476 as the appropriate source of service information for identifying the serial numbers of the affected airplanes. That statement is incorrect.

The applicability of the proposed AD did not specifically reference that service bulletin but, instead, listed the affected airplane models and serial numbers specified in the "Material" section of that service bulletin. Since the effectivity listing of Service Bulletin No. 2476 does not include the serial numbers of the affected airplanes, the FAA finds that referencing it in the applicability of this AD as the appropriate source of service information for identifying such serial numbers could be misleading to operators. No change to this final rule is necessary in this regard.

Explanation of Changes to Proposal
The FAA finds that the compliance time specified in paragraph (a) of the proposed AD(i.e., 18 months after September 24, 1996) needs to be extended for the new airplanes (i.e., Model 400T and MU-300 series airplanes) added to the applicability of this AD. At the time of issuance of the NPRM, the FAA determined that operators of Model 400T and MU-300 series airplanes could accomplish the requirements of paragraph (a) of the proposed AD within a timely manner. However, due to delay in issuance of the final rule, the compliance time of March 24, 1998, will have passed when this final rule becomes effective. The FAA has determined that an 18-month compliance time for the subject airplanes is appropriate. Therefore, the FAA has revised paragraph (a) of the AD accordingly.

In addition, the proposed AD states that the replacement procedures described in Raytheon Service Bulletin No. 2476, Revision II, dated June 1997, are essentially identical to those described in AlliedSignal Service Bulletin 103570-21-4012, Revision 1, dated May 30, 1995 (which is referenced in AD96-17-10 as one of two appropriate sources of service information). However, the FAA inadvertently did not include the Raytheon bulletin as an additional source of service information for the requirements of paragraph (a) of the proposed AD. Therefore, the FAA has revised paragraph (a) of the final rule accordingly.

Conclusion
After careful review of the available data, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public interest require the adoption of the rule with the changes previously described. The FAA has determined that these changes will neither increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD.

Cost Impact
There are approximately 142 Raytheon (Beech) Model 400, 400A, 400T, MU-300, and MU-300-10 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 110 airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected by this AD.

The actions that are currently required by AD 96-17-10, and retained in this AD, take approximately 12 work hours per airplane to accomplish, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts will be supplied by the manufacturer at no cost to the operators. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the currently required actions on U.S. operators is estimated to be $79,200, or $720 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.

Regulatory Impact
The regulations adopted herein will 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 final rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

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, Incorporation by reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment
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
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by removing amendment 39-9719 (61 FR 42996, August 20, 1996), and by adding a new airworthiness directive (AD), to read as follows: