[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 16, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2282-2283]
[FR Doc No: 2018-00495]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-125, OMB Control No. 3235-0104]

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736.

Extension:
    Form 3.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant, to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collections
of information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.

    Exchange Act Forms 3 is filed by insiders of public companies that
have a class of securities registered under Section 12 of the Exchange
Act. Form 3 is an initial statement beneficial ownership of securities.
Approximately 28,877 insiders file Form 3 annually and it takes
approximately 0.50 hours to prepare for a total of 14,439 annual burden
hours (0.50 hours per response x 28,877 responses).
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether these collections of
information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions
of the agency, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
collections of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility,
and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information on respondents, including
through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology. Consideration will be given to comments and
suggestions submitted in writing within 60 days of this publication.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid control number.
    Please direct your written comment to Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 or send an email
to: [email protected].

    Dated: January 9, 2018.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-00495 Filed 1-12-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 241 (Monday, December 16, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76040-76045]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29679]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0724; Directorate Identifier 99-CE-013-AD;
Amendment 39-17691; AD 99-26-19 R1]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Piper Aircraft, Inc. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are revising Airworthiness Directive (AD) 99-26-19 that
applies to certain The New Piper Aircraft, Inc. Model J-2 airplanes
equipped with wing lift struts. AD 99-26-19 required repetitively
inspecting the wing lift struts for dents and corrosion; repetitively
inspecting the wing lift strut forks for cracks; replacing any dented
or corroded wing lift strut; replacing any cracked wing lift strut
fork; and repetitively replacing the wing lift strut forks at specified
times for certain airplanes. AD 99-26-19 also required incorporating a
``NO STEP'' placard on the wing lift strut. Since we issued AD 99-26-
19, we were informed that paragraph (c) had been misinterpreted and
caused confusion. This AD clarifies the intent of the language in
paragraph (c) of AD 99-26-19 and retains all other requirements of AD
99-26-19. We are issuing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on
these products.

DATES: This AD is effective January 21, 2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of February 14,
2000 (64 FR 72524, December 28, 1999).

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact Piper
Aircraft, Inc., Customer Services, 2926 Piper Drive, Vero Beach,
Florida 32960; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet: www.piper.com. You
may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
(816) 329-4148.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating it in Docket No. FAA-
2013-0724; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office
(phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Document Management Facility, U.S. Department
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory ``Keith'' Noles, Aerospace
Engineer, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office, 1701 Columbia
Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (404)
474-5606; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to revise AD 99-26-19, Amendment 39-11479 (64 FR 72524,
December 28, 1999), (``AD 99-26-19''). AD 99-26-19 applied to the
specified products. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on
August 13, 2013 (78 FR 49221). The NPRM proposed to retain all
requirements of AD 99-26-19

and clarify our intent of required actions if the seal on a sealed wing
lift strut is ever improperly broken.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of
the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting this AD as proposed except for
minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (78 FR 49221, August 13, 2013) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (78 FR 49221, August 13, 2013).

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 91 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD. However,
the only difference in the costs presented below and the costs
associated with AD 99-26-19 is the change in the labor rate from $65
per hour to $85 per hour:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                   Labor cost          Parts cost       Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection of the wing lift       8 work-hours x $85  Not applicable....  $680 per            $61,880 per
 struts and wing lift strut        per hour = $680                         inspection cycle.   inspection cycle.
 forks.                            per inspection
                                   cycle.
Installation placard............  1 work-hour x $85   $30...............  $115..............  $10,465.
                                   = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacements
that will be required based on the results of the inspection. We have
no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these
replacements:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                    Action                      Labor cost per wing lift strut   Parts cost per    product per
                                                                                wing lift strut  wing lift strut
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement of the wing lift strut and/or      4 work-hours x $85 per hour =              $440             $780
 wing lift strut forks.                         $340.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Findings

    We have determined that this AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (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),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 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. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
99-26-19, Amendment 39-11479 (64 FR 72524, December 28, 1999), and
adding the following new AD:

99-26-19 R1 Piper Aircraft, Inc.: Amendment 39-17691; Docket No.
FAA-2013-0724; Directorate Identifier 99-CE-013-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective January 21, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD revises AD 99-26-19, Amendment 39-11479 (64 FR 72524,
December 28, 1999). AD 99-01-05, Amendment 39-10972 (63 FR 72132,
December 31, 1998), which superseded AD 93-10-06, Amendment 39-8586
(58 FR 29965, May 25, 1993), also relates to the subject of this AD.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Piper Aircraft, Inc. Model J-2 airplanes,
serial numbers 500 through 1975, that are:
    (1) equipped with wing lift struts; and
    (2) certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    (1) The subject of this AD was originally prompted by reports of
corrosion damage found on the wing lift struts. We are revising AD
99-26-19, Amendment 39-11479 (64 FR 72524, December 28, 1999),
because of reports that paragraph (c) had been misinterpreted and
caused confusion. This AD removes the language in paragraph (c) of
AD 99-26-19, which caused the confusion.
    (2) This AD clarifies the FAA's intention that if a sealed wing
lift strut assembly is installed as a replacement part, the
repetitive inspection requirement is terminated only if the seal is
never improperly broken. If the seal is improperly broken, then that
wing lift strut becomes subject to continued repetitive inspections.
We did not intend to promote drilling holes into or otherwise
unsealing a sealed strut. This AD retains all the actions required
in AD 99-26-19 and this AD does not require any actions over that
already required in AD 99-26-19. This AD does not add any additional
burden to the owners/operators of the affected airplanes.
    (3) We are issuing this AD to detect and correct corrosion and
cracking on the front and rear wing lift struts and forks, which
could cause the wing lift strut to fail. This failure could result
in the wing separating from the airplane.

(f) Paragraph Designation Changes to AD 99-26-19

    Since AD 99-26-19, Amendment 39-11479 (64 FR 72524, December 28,
1999), was issued, the AD format has been revised, and certain
paragraphs have been rearranged. As a result, the corresponding
paragraph identifiers have changed in this AD, as listed in the
following table:

   Table 1 to Paragraph (f) of This AD--Revised Paragraph Identifiers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Corresponding  requirement  in this
     Requirement in AD 99-26-19                       AD
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             paragraph (a)                        paragraph (h)
          paragraph (a)(1)                     paragraph (i)(1)
       paragraph (a)(1)(i)                  paragraph (i)(1)(i)
      paragraph (a)(1)(ii)                 paragraph (i)(1)(ii)
          paragraph (a)(2)                     paragraph (i)(2)
       paragraph (a)(2)(i)                  paragraph (i)(2)(i)
      paragraph (a)(2)(ii)                 paragraph (i)(2)(ii)
          paragraph (a)(3)                     paragraph (j)(1)
          paragraph (a)(4)                     paragraph (j)(2)
             paragraph (b)                        paragraph (k)
paragraph (b)(1) through (b)(1)(ii)               paragraph (l)
   paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(A)                     paragraph (l)(1)
paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(B) and                    paragraph (l)(2)
                 (b)(1)(iv)
     paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(C) and               paragraph (l)(3)
                 (b)(1)(iv)
paragraph (b)(1)(iii) and (b)(2)               paragraph (m)(1)
paragraph (b)(3) through (b)(3)(ii)            paragraph (m)(2)
             Paragraph (c)                              Removed
             paragraph (d)                     paragraph (n)(1)
          paragraph (d)(1)                  paragraph (n)(1)(i)
          paragraph (d)(2)                 paragraph (n)(1)(ii)
                       N/A                     Paragraph (n)(2)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(g) Compliance

    Unless already done (compliance with AD 99-26-19, Amendment 39-
11479 (64 FR 72524, December 28, 1999)), do the following actions
within the compliance times specified in paragraphs (h) through (n)
of this AD, including all subparagraphs. Properly unsealing and
resealing a sealed wing lift strut is still considered a terminating
action for the repetitive inspection requirements of this AD as long
as all appropriate regulations and issues are considered, such as
static strength, fatigue, material effects, immediate and long-term
(internal and external) corrosion protection, resealing methods,
etc. Current FAA regulations in 14 CFR 43.13(b) specify that
maintenance performed will result in the part's condition to be at
least equal to its original or properly altered condition. Any
maintenance actions that unseal a sealed wing lift strut should be
coordinated with the Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office (ACO)
through the local airworthiness authority (e.g., Flight Standards
District Office). There are provisions in paragraph (o) of this AD
for approving such actions as an alternative method of compliance
(AMOC).

(h) Remove Wing Lift Struts

    At whichever of the compliance times specified in paragraphs
(h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD that occurs later, remove the wing lift
struts following Piper Service Bulletin (SB) No. 528D, dated October
19, 1990. Before further flight after the removal, do the actions in
one of the following paragraphs (i)(1), (i)(2), (j)(1), or (j)(2) of
this AD, including all subparagraphs.
    (1) Within 1 calendar month after February 14, 2000 (the
effective date retained from AD 99-26-19, Amendment 39-11479 (64 FR
72524, December 28, 1999)); or
    (2) Within 24 calendar months after the last inspection done in
accordance with AD 93-10-06, Amendment 39-8586 (58 FR 29965, May 25,
1993).

(i) Inspect Wing Lift Struts

    Before further flight after the removal required in paragraph
(h) of this AD, inspect each wing lift strut following paragraph
(i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, including all subparagraphs, or do the
wing lift strut replacement following one of the options in
paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Inspect each wing lift strut for corrosion and perceptible
dents following Piper SB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990.
    (i) If no corrosion is visible and no perceptible dents are
found on any wing lift strut during the inspection required in
paragraph (i)(1) of this AD, before further flight, apply corrosion
inhibitor to each wing lift strut following Piper SB No. 528D, dated
October 19, 1990. Repetitively thereafter inspect each wing lift
strut at intervals not to exceed 24 calendar months following the
procedures in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, including all
subparagraphs.
    (ii) If corrosion or perceptible dents are found on any wing
lift strut during the inspection required in paragraph (i)(1) of
this AD or during any repetitive inspection required in paragraph
(i)(1)(i) of this AD, before further flight, replace the affected
wing lift strut with one of the replacement options specified in
paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD. Do the replacement following
the procedures specified in those paragraphs, as applicable.
    (2) Inspect each wing lift strut for corrosion following the
procedures in the Appendix to this AD. This inspection must be done
by a Level 2 or Level 3 inspector certified using the guidelines
established by the American Society for Non-destructive Testing or
the ``Military Standard for Nondestructive Testing Personnel
Qualification and Certification'' (MIL-STD-410E), which can be found
on the Internet at http://aerospacedefense.thomasnet.com/Asset/MIL-STD-410.pdf.
    (i) If no corrosion is found on any wing lift strut during the
inspection required in paragraph (i)(2) of this AD and all
requirements in the Appendix to this AD are met, before further
flight, apply corrosion inhibitor to each wing lift strut following
Piper SB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990. Repetitively thereafter
inspect each wing lift strut at intervals not to exceed 24 calendar
months following the procedures in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of
this AD, including all subparagraphs.
    (ii) If corrosion is found on any wing lift strut during the
inspection required in paragraph (i)(2) of this AD or during any
repetitive inspection required in paragraph (i)(2)(i) of this AD, or
if any requirement in the Appendix of this AD is not met, before
further flight after any inspection in which corrosion is found or
the Appendix requirements are not met, replace the affected wing
lift strut with one of the replacement options specified in
paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD. Do the replacement following
the procedures specified in those paragraphs, as applicable.

(j) Wing Lift Strut Replacement Options

    Before further flight after the removal required in paragraph
(h) of this AD, replace the wing lift struts following one of the
options in paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD, or inspect each
wing lift strut following paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD,
including all subparagraphs.
    (1) Install original equipment manufacturer (OEM) part number
wing lift struts (or FAA-

approved equivalent part numbers) that have been inspected following
the procedures in either paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD,
including all subparagraphs, and are found to be airworthy. Do the
installations following Piper SB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990.
Repetitively thereafter inspect the newly installed wing lift struts
at intervals not to exceed 24 calendar months following the
procedures in either paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD,
including all subparagraphs.
    (2) Install new sealed wing lift strut assemblies (or FAA-
approved equivalent part numbers) (these sealed wing lift strut
assemblies also include the wing lift strut forks) following Piper
SB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990. Installing one of these new
sealed wing lift strut assemblies terminates the repetitive
inspection requirements in paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this AD,
and the wing lift strut fork removal, inspection, and replacement
requirements in paragraphs (k) and (l) of this AD, including all
subparagraphs, for that wing lift strut assembly.

(k) Remove Wing Lift Strut Forks

    Within the next 100 hours time-in-service (TIS) after February
14, 2000 (the effective date retained from AD 99-26-19, Amendment
39-11479 (64 FR 72524, December 28, 1999)) or within 500 hours TIS
after the last inspection done in accordance with AD 93-10-06,
Amendment 39-8586 (58 FR 29965, May 25, 1993), whichever occurs
later, remove the wing lift strut forks (unless already replaced in
accordance with paragraph (j)(2) of this AD). Do the removal
following Piper SB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990. Before further
flight after the removal, do the actions in one of the following
paragraphs (l) or (m) of this AD, including all subparagraphs.

(l) Inspect Wing Lift Strut Forks

    Before further flight after the removal required in paragraph
(k) of this AD, inspect the wing lift strut forks following
paragraph (l) of this AD, including all subparagraphs, or do the
wing lift strut fork replacement following one of the options in
paragraph (m)(1) or (m)(2) of this AD. Inspect the wing lift strut
forks for cracks using magnetic particle procedures, such as those
contained in FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 43.13-1B, Chapter 5, which
can be found in the Internet at http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/
99c827db9baac81b86256b4500596c4e/$FILE/Chapter%2005.pdf.
Repetitively thereafter inspect at intervals not to exceed 500 hours
TIS until the replacement time requirement specified in paragraph
(l)(2) or (l)(3) of this AD is reached provided no cracks are found.
    (1) If cracks are found during any inspection required in
paragraph (l) of this AD or during any repetitive inspection
required in paragraph (l)(2) or (l)(3) of this AD, before further
flight, replace the affected wing lift strut fork with one of the
replacement options specified in paragraph (m)(1) or (m)(2) of this
AD. Do the replacement following the procedures specified in those
paragraphs, as applicable.
    (2) If no cracks are found during the initial inspection
required in paragraph (l) of this AD and the airplane is currently
equipped with floats or has been equipped with floats at any time
during the previous 2,000 hours TIS since the wing lift strut forks
were installed, at or before accumulating 1,000 hours TIS on the
wing lift strut forks, replace the wing lift strut forks with one of
the replacement options specified in paragraph (m)(1) or (m)(2) of
this AD. Do the replacement following the procedures specified in
those paragraphs, as applicable. Repetitively thereafter inspect the
newly installed wing lift strut forks at intervals not to exceed 500
hours TIS following the procedures specified in paragraph (l) of
this AD, including all subparagraphs.
    (3) If no cracks are found during the initial inspection
required in paragraph (l) of this AD and the airplane has never been
equipped with floats during the previous 2,000 hours TIS since the
wing lift strut forks were installed, at or before accumulating
2,000 hours TIS on the wing lift strut forks, replace the wing lift
strut forks with one of the replacement options specified in
paragraph (m)(1) or (m)(2) of this AD. Do the replacement following
the procedures specified in those paragraphs, as applicable.
Repetitively thereafter inspect the newly installed wing lift strut
forks at intervals not to exceed 500 hours TIS following the
procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this AD, including all
subparagraphs.

(m) Wing Lift Strut Fork Replacement Options

    Before further flight after the removal required in paragraph
(k) of this AD, replace the wing lift strut forks following one of
the options in paragraph (m)(1) or (m)(2) of this AD, or inspect the
wing lift strut forks following paragraph (1) of this AD, including
all subparagraphs
    (1) Install new OEM part number wing lift strut forks of the
same part numbers of the existing part (or FAA-approved equivalent
part numbers) that were manufactured with rolled threads. Wing lift
strut forks manufactured with machine (cut) threads are not to be
used. Do the installations following Piper SB No. 528D, dated
October 19, 1990. Repetitively thereafter inspect and replace the
newly installed wing lift strut forks at intervals not to exceed 500
hours TIS following the procedures specified in paragraph (l) of
this AD, including all subparagraphs.
    (2) Install new sealed wing lift strut assemblies (or FAA-
approved equivalent part numbers) (these sealed wing lift strut
assemblies also include the wing lift strut forks) following Piper
SB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990. This installation may have
already been done through the option specified in paragraph (j)(2)
of this AD. Installing one of these new sealed wing lift strut
assemblies terminates the repetitive inspection requirements in
paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this AD, and the wing lift strut
fork removal, inspection, and replacement requirements in paragraphs
(k) and (l) of this AD, including all subparagraphs, for that wing
lift strut assembly.

(n) Install Placard

    (1) Within 1 calendar month after February 14, 2000 (the
effective date retained from AD 99-26-19, Amendment 39-11479 (64 FR
72524, December 28, 1999), or within 24 calendar months after the
last inspection required by AD 93-10-06, Amendment 39-8586 (58 FR
29965, May 25, 1993), whichever occurs later, and before further
flight after any replacement of a wing lift strut assembly required
by this AD, do the actions in one of the following paragraphs
(n)(1)(i) or (n)(1)(ii) of this AD:
    (i) Install ``NO STEP'' decal, Piper (P/N) 80944-02, on each
wing lift strut approximately 6 inches from the bottom of the wing
lift strut in a way that the letters can be read when entering and
exiting the airplane; or
    (ii) Paint the words ``NO STEP'' approximately 6 inches from the
bottom of the wing lift strut in a way that the letters can be read
when entering and exiting the airplane. Use a minimum of 1-inch
letters using a color that contrasts with the color of the airplane.
    (2) The ``NO STEP'' markings required by paragraph (n)(1)(i) and
(n)(1)(ii) of this AD must remain in place for the life of the
airplane.

(o) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Atlanta ACO, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your
principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the
ACO, send it to the attention of the person identified in the
Related Information section of this AD.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) AMOCs approved for AD 93-10-06, Amendment 39-8586 (58 FR
29965, May 25, 1993) and AD 99-26-19, Amendment 39-11479 (64 FR
72524, December 28, 1999) are approved as AMOCs for this AD.

(p) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Gregory K. Noles,
Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Atlanta ACO, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College
Park, Georgia 30337; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(q) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
February 14, 2000 (64 FR 72524, December 28, 1999).
    (i) Piper Service Bulletin No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (4) For Piper Aircraft, Inc. service information identified in
this AD, contact Piper Aircraft, Inc., Customer Services, 2926

Piper Drive, Vero Beach, Florida 32960; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
Internet: www.piper.com.
    (5) You may view this service information at FAA, Small Airplane
Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
(816) 329-4148.
    (6) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

Appendix to AD 99-26-19 R1

Procedures and Requirements for Ultrasonic Inspection of Piper Wing
Lift Struts

EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS

    1. A portable ultrasonic thickness gauge or flaw detector with
echo-to-echo digital thickness readout capable of reading to 0.001-
inch and an A-trace waveform display will be needed to do this
inspection.
    2. An ultrasonic probe with the following specifications will be
needed to do this inspection: 10 MHz (or higher), 0.283-inch (or
smaller) diameter dual element or delay line transducer designed for
thickness gauging. The transducer and ultrasonic system shall be
capable of accurately measuring the thickness of AISI 4340 steel
down to 0.020-inch. An accuracy of +/- 0.002-inch throughout a
0.020-inch to 0.050-inch thickness range while calibrating shall be
the criteria for acceptance.
    3. Either a precision machined step wedge made of 4340 steel (or
similar steel with equivalent sound velocity) or at least three shim
samples of same material will be needed to do this inspection. One
thickness of the step wedge or shim shall be less than or equal to
0.020-inch, one shall be greater than or equal to 0.050-inch, and at
least one other step or shim shall be between these two values.
    4. Glycerin, light oil, or similar non-water based ultrasonic
couplants are recommended in the setup and inspection procedures.
Water-based couplants, containing appropriate corrosion inhibitors,
may be utilized, provided they are removed from both the reference
standards and the test item after the inspection procedure is
completed and adequate corrosion prevention steps are then taken to
protect these items.
     NOTE: Couplant is defined as ``a substance used between
the face of the transducer and test surface to improve transmission
of ultrasonic energy across the transducer/strut interface.''
     NOTE: If surface roughness due to paint loss or
corrosion is present, the surface should be sanded or polished
smooth before testing to assure a consistent and smooth surface for
making contact with the transducer. Care shall be taken to remove a
minimal amount of structural material. Paint repairs may be
necessary after the inspection to prevent further corrosion damage
from occurring. Removal of surface irregularities will enhance the
accuracy of the inspection technique.

INSTRUMENT SETUP

    1. Set up the ultrasonic equipment for thickness measurements as
specified in the instrument's user's manual. Because of the variety
of equipment available to perform ultrasonic thickness measurements,
some modification to this general setup procedure may be necessary.
However, the tolerance requirement of step 13 and the record keeping
requirement of step 14, must be satisfied.
    2. If battery power will be employed, check to see that the
battery has been properly charged. The testing will take
approximately two hours. Screen brightness and contrast should be
set to match environmental conditions.
    3. Verify that the instrument is set for the type of transducer
being used, i.e. single or dual element, and that the frequency
setting is compatible with the transducer.
    4. If a removable delay line is used, remove it and place a drop
of couplant between the transducer face and the delay line to assure
good transmission of ultrasonic energy. Reassemble the delay line
transducer and continue.
    5. Program a velocity of 0.231-inch/microsecond into the
ultrasonic unit unless an alternative instrument calibration
procedure is used to set the sound velocity.
    6. Obtain a step wedge or steel shims per item 3 of the
EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS. Place the probe on the thickest sample using
couplant. Rotate the transducer slightly back and forth to ``ring''
the transducer to the sample. Adjust the delay and range settings to
arrive at an A-trace signal display with the first backwall echo
from the steel near the left side of the screen and the second
backwall echo near the right of the screen. Note that when a single
element transducer is used, the initial pulse and the delay line/
steel interface will be off of the screen to the left. Adjust the
gain to place the amplitude of the first backwall signal at
approximately 80% screen height on the A-trace.
    7. ``Ring'' the transducer on the thinnest step or shim using
couplant. Select positive half-wave rectified, negative half-wave
rectified, or filtered signal display to obtain the cleanest signal.
Adjust the pulse voltage, pulse width, and damping to obtain the
best signal resolution. These settings can vary from one transducer
to another and are also user dependent.
    8. Enable the thickness gate, and adjust the gate so that it
starts at the first backwall echo and ends at the second backwall
echo. (Measuring between the first and second backwall echoes will
produce a measurement of the steel thickness that is not affected by
the paint layer on the strut). If instability of the gate trigger
occurs, adjust the gain, gate level, and/or damping to stabilize the
thickness reading.
    9. Check the digital display reading and if it does not agree
with the known thickness of the thinnest thickness, follow your
instrument's calibration recommendations to produce the correct
thickness reading. When a single element transducer is used this
will usually involve adjusting the fine delay setting.
    10. Place the transducer on the thickest step of shim using
couplant. Adjust the thickness gate width so that the gate is
triggered by the second backwall reflection of the thick section. If
the digital display does not agree with the thickest thickness,
follow your instruments calibration recommendations to produce the
correct thickness reading. A slight adjustment in the velocity may
be necessary to get both the thinnest and the thickest reading
correct. Document the changed velocity value.
    11. Place couplant on an area of the lift strut which is thought
to be free of corrosion and ``ring'' the transducer to surface.
Minor adjustments to the signal and gate settings may be required to
account for coupling improvements resulting from the paint layer.
The thickness gate level should be set just high enough so as not to
be triggered by irrelevant signal noise. An area on the upper
surface of the lift strut above the inspection area would be a good
location to complete this step and should produce a thickness
reading between 0.034-inch and 0.041-inch.
    12. Repeat steps 8, 9, 10, and 11 until both thick and thin shim
measurements are within tolerance and the lift strut measurement is
reasonable and steady.
    13. Verify that the thickness value shown in the digital display
is within +/- 0.002-inch of the correct value for each of the three
or more steps of the setup wedge or shims. Make no further
adjustments to the instrument settings.
    14. Record the ultrasonic versus actual thickness of all wedge
steps or steel shims available as a record of setup.

INSPECTION PROCEDURE

    1. Clean the lower 18 inches of the wing lift struts using a
cleaner that will remove all dirt and grease. Dirt and grease will
adversely affect the accuracy of the inspection technique. Light
sanding or polishing may also be required to reduce surface
roughness as noted in the EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS section.
    2. Using a flexible ruler, draw a \1/4\-inch grid on the surface
of the first 11 inches from the lower end of the strut as shown in
Piper SB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990, or Piper SB No. 910A,
dated October 10, 1989. This can be done using a soft (2)
pencil and should be done on both faces of the strut. As an
alternative to drawing a complete grid, make two rows of marks
spaced every \1/4\-inch across the width of the strut. One row of
marks should be about 11 inches from the lower end of the strut, and
the second row should be several inches away where the strut starts
to narrow. Lay the flexible ruler between respective tick marks of
the two rows and use tape or a rubber band to keep the ruler in
place. See Figure 1.
    3. Apply a generous amount of couplant inside each of the square
areas or along the edge of the ruler. Re-application of couplant may
be necessary.
    4. Place the transducer inside the first square area of the
drawn grid or at the first \1/4\-inch mark on the ruler and ``ring''
the transducer to the strut. When using a dual element transducer,
be very careful to record the thickness value with the axis of the
transducer elements perpendicular to any curvature in the strut. If
this is not done, loss of signal or inaccurate readings can result.

    5. Take readings inside each square on the grid or at \1/4\-inch
increments along the ruler and record the results. When taking a
thickness reading, rotate the transducer slightly back and forth and
experiment with the angle of contact to produce the lowest thickness
reading possible. Pay close attention to the A-scan display to
assure that the thickness gate is triggering off of maximized
backwall echoes.
     NOTE: A reading shall not exceed .041 inch. If a
reading exceeds .041-inch, repeat steps 13 and 14 of the INSTRUMENT
SETUP section before proceeding further.
    6. If the A-trace is unsteady or the thickness reading is
clearly wrong, adjust the signal gain and/or gate setting to obtain
reasonable and steady readings. If any instrument setting is
adjusted, repeat steps 13 and 14 of the INSTRUMENT SETUP section
before proceeding further.
    7. In areas where obstructions are present, take a data point as
close to the correct area as possible.
     NOTE: The strut wall contains a fabrication bead at
approximately 40% of the strut chord. The bead may interfere with
accurate measurements in that specific location.
    8. A measurement of 0.024-inch or less shall require replacement
of the strut prior to further flight.
    9. If at any time during testing an area is encountered where a
valid thickness measurement cannot be obtained due to a loss of
signal strength or quality, the area shall be considered suspect.
These areas may have a remaining wall thickness of less than 0.020-
inch, which is below the range of this setup, or they may have small
areas of localized corrosion or pitting present. The latter case
will result in a reduction in signal strength due to the sound being
scattered from the rough surface and may result in a signal that
includes echoes from the pits as well as the backwall. The suspect
area(s) shall be tested with a Maule ``Fabric Tester'' as specified
in Piper SB No. 528D, dated October 19, 1990, or Piper SB No. 910A,
dated October 10, 1989.
    10. Record the lift strut inspection in the aircraft log book.
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16DE13.001

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on November 22, 2013.
Earl Lawrence,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-29679 Filed 12-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P