[Federal Register: January 31, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 21)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 4905-4910]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr31ja03-7]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 2000-CE-05-AD; Amendment 39-13037; AD 2003-03-13]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; MORAVAN a.s. Model Z-242L Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 4906]]
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) that
applies to all MORAVAN a.s. (Moravan) Model Z-242L airplanes. This AD
establishes a technical service life for these airplanes by restricting
Acrobatic and Utility category operations and requiring replacement of
the wings after a certain operational time period. This AD is the
result of mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) issued
by the airworthiness authority for the Czech Republic. The actions
specified by this AD are intended to prevent structural failure of the
wing due to fatigue cracking. Such failure could result in a wing
separating from the airplane with consequent loss of airplane control.
DATES: This AD becomes effective on March 21, 2003.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the regulations as of March
21, 2003.
ADDRESSES: You may get the service information referenced in this AD
from Moravan, Inc., 765 81 Otrokovice, Czech Republic; telephone: +420
67 767 3940; facsimile: +420 67 792 2103. You may view this information
at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Central Region, Office of
the Regional Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000-CE-05-AD, 901
Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; or at the Office of the
Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW, suite 700, Washington,
DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone: (816) 329-4059; facsimile: (816) 329-4090.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
What Events Have Caused This AD?
The Civil Aviation Authority Czech Republic (CAA CZ), which is the
airworthiness authority for the Czech Republic, notified FAA that an
unsafe condition may exist on all Moravan Model Z-242L airplanes. The
CAA CZ reports that these airplanes are operated over the load spectrum
that was used at certification. The CAA CZ further reports that a
technical service life for these airplanes is needed. The affected
airplanes fall into two different groups:
--Group 1: those airplanes with a serial number in the range of 0001
through 0656 with the original wings installed; and
--Group 2: those airplanes with stronger wings installed either through
modification (serial numbers 0001 through 0656) or at manufacture (all
serial numbers beginning with 0657).
Based on analysis, the CAA CZ reports that the technical service
life should be:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acrobatic and utility
category operations All operations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group 1....................... 190 hours time-in- 3,500 hours TIS.
service (TIS) only in New wings must
these categories. be installed
Operation only in the prior to
Normal category further
thereafter. operation.
Group 2....................... 450 hours TIS only in 5,500 hours TIS.
these categories. New wings must
Operation only in the be installed
Normal category prior to
thereafter. further
operation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
What Is the Potential Impact if FAA Took No Action?
Fatigue cracks in the wing, if not detected and corrected or
prevented, could result in structural failure of the wing. Such failure
could result in a wing separating from the airplane with consequent
loss of airplane control.
Has FAA Taken Any Action to This Point?
We issued a proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation
Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an AD that would apply to all
Moravan Model Z-242L airplanes. This proposal was published in the
Federal Register as a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on October
4, 2002 (67 FR 62214). The NPRM proposed to establish a technical
service life for these airplanes by restricting Acrobatic and Utility
category operations and requiring replacement of the wings after a
certain operational time period.
Was the Public Invited to Comment?
The FAA encouraged interested persons to participate in the making
of this amendment. The following presents the comments received on the
proposal and FAA's response to each comment:
Comment Issue No. 1: Delay the AD Until Moravan America Completes an
Analysis of the Problem and Presents an Alternative
What Is the Commenters' Concern?
Several commenters request that FAA delay issuing the final rule AD
until after Moravan America has a chance to present an alternative to
the actions specified in the NPRM. Specific comments in this area are
as follows:
--One of the alternatives that Moravan America is working on allows an
extension of the 450-hour time-in-service (TIS) Acrobatic and Utility
operations life limit to 700 hours TIS. This would only apply to
airplanes with strengthened wings;
--Moravan America will produce a service bulletin tailored to the
operational characteristics of the U.S. safety assurance system and
will provide operational guidelines and a measurement system for
exceeding load limits. Included in this service bulletin would be
guidelines for continued airworthiness and operational constraints;
--The FAA should delay issuing this AD until Moravan America has a
chance to evaluate all the facts leading to the issuance of the Czech
Republic AD. The Moravan America proposed solution will be a better
option; and
--Moravan America can have a proposed alternative to this AD within 90
days.
What Is FAA's Response to the Concern?
The FAA is continuing with this AD action. However, we will add a
grace period of ``90 days after the effective date of this AD'' to the
compliance time of the life limits in the Utility and Acrobatic
categories. This would make the compliance time ``upon accumulating
either 190 hours TIS or 450 hours TIS in the Utility or Acrobatic
category or on or before June 10, 2003 (90 days after the effective
date of this AD), whichever occurs later.'' This compliance time change
will give Moravan America the time it needs to develop an alternative
method of compliance and service bulletin for FAA approval.
Based on data submitted, we may approve an alternative method of
compliance and amend the AD, as appropriate.
[[Page 4907]]
Comment Issue No. 2: The Life Limit for Airplanes With Strengthened
Wings Should Be 5,500 Hours Time-in-Service (TIS)
What Is the Commenter's Concern?
One commenter states that the life limit for airplanes with the
strengthened wings should be 5,500 hours TIS. We infer that the
commenter wants the NPRM changed to reflect this.
What Is FAA's Response to the Concern?
We partially concur. The life limit for the affected airplanes with
strengthened wings is 5,500 hours TIS while operated in the Normal
category. The life limit for these airplanes in the Utility and
Acrobatic categories is 450 hours TIS. After the sum of time in the
Utility and Acrobatic categories equals 450 hours TIS or within 90 days
after the effective date of the AD (whichever occurs later), you may
only operate the airplane in the Normal category until the accumulation
of 5,500 hours TIS. Utility and Acrobatic category operation would be
prohibited until the installation of new wings.
The life limits for Utility and Acrobatic category operation and
Normal category operation would start over again after replacement of
the wings.
We are not changing the final rule AD action as a result of this
comment.
Comment Issue No. 3: Allow a Life Limit Extension Through Installation
of the AMU1 Monitoring Unit
What Is the Commenters' Concern?
Several commenters request that FAA change the NPRM to allow those
airplanes that incorporate the strengthened wings to operate past 450
hours TIS in the Utility and Acrobatic categories if an AMU1
(acceleration monitoring unit) is installed. The commenters state that
this unit regularly monitors the load factors on the primary structure
and evaluates the measured load spectrum and collates it with the CAA-
FAA and ZLIN-A spectrums. The commenters feel that this AMU1 unit has
had an indisputable and substantial impact on increasing the safe
fatigue life on the Model Z-242L airplanes.
What Is FAA's Response to the Concern?
We do not concur that the AMU1 unit should be part of the proposed
AD. The CAA CZ examined all the available data and decided that these
airplanes should be life limited to the levels described in the NPRM.
We have determined that these life limit values are valid and that
allowing all airplanes to exceed these values through the use of an
acceleration monitoring unit does not address the unsafe condition. The
FAA will evaluate requests for this option on an individual basis and
may issue alternative methods of compliance provided the request is
made in accordance with the procedures in paragraph (e) of the AD and
provides a level of safety acceptable to FAA.
We are not changing the final rule AD action as a result of this
comment.
Comment Issue No. 4: Allow Moravan to Extend the Life Limits on a Case-
by-Case Basis
What Is the Commenters' Concern?
Several commenters state that Moravan has the capability of
approving the data from the acceleration monitoring unit and allowing
continued operation past the specified life limits. The commenters
further state that Moravan recognizes the information from both the
AMU1 unit and the Corsa Data Acquisition System (CDAS) in allowing the
affected airplanes to operate past the 450-hour TIS life limit in the
Utility and Acrobatic categories and operate to the 5,500-hour TIS
Normal category life limit.
The commenters suggest that FAA give Moravan the authority to allow
the affected airplane operators to operate past the Utility and
Acrobatic life limit categories.
What Is FAA's Response to the Concern?
We do not concur. As earlier stated, the CAA CZ examined all the
available data and decided that these airplanes should be life limited
to the levels described in the NPRM. We have determined that these life
limits are valid.
The FAA is not allowed to delegate its rulemaking authority to an
aircraft manufacturer. Allowing Moravan to determine whether an
airplane can exceed these values through the use of an AMU1 or CDAS
would be the same as delegating our rulemaking authority.
We will evaluate requests for this option on an individual basis
and may issue alternative methods of compliance provided the request is
found to be at a level of safety acceptable to FAA and is made in
accordance with the procedures in paragraph (e) of the AD.
We are not changing the final rule AD action as a result of this
comment.
Comment Issue No. 5: Allow a Root Wing Modification
What Is the Commenter's Concern?
One commenter recommends that FAA add the option of incorporating a
wing root modification to allow operation in the Utility and Acrobatic
categories to 3,500 hours TIS. This is for airplanes with
unstrengthened wings that are not eligible for the AMU1 method to
increase operation to the 5,500 hours TIS.
What Is FAA's Response to the Concern?
We do not concur. As earlier stated, the CAA CZ examined all the
available data and decided that these airplanes should be life limited
to the levels described in the NPRM. We have determined that these life
limits are valid.
Moravan has superseded the service bulletin that incorporated the
referenced root wing modification, and the CAA CZ does not have current
AD action that references this root wing modification. The FAA has
examined all of the information available from CAA CZ and has
determined that the root wing modification is not a valid option for
this AD action.
We are not changing the final rule AD action as a result of this
comment.
Comment Issue No. 6: The Model Z-242L Airplanes Should Either Be
Eliminated From the AD or Not Have Utility and Acrobatic Category Life
Limit Restrictions
What Is the Commenters' Concern?
Several comments state that both the CAA CZ and FAA have approved
fatigue testing done on 3 Model Z242L airplanes that shows that the
airplanes can be operated to 5,500 hours TIS without any life limits on
Utility or Acrobatic category operations. These commenters recommend
that we remove the Utility and Acrobatic category life limit
requirement from the AD for the Model Z-242L airplanes.
Another commenter states that the service history on this subject
matter is only for the earlier manufactured airplane models and no data
exists for the Model Z-242L airplanes. The airplane models that the
commenter refers to are not certificated for operation in the United
States. This commenter recommends that FAA withdraw the NPRM.
One commenter states that the proposed AD action is based on an
accident of a Model Z-142 airplane (not certificated in the United
States) in Australia. The commenter points out that the wing on the
Model Z-242L has a totally different design and should not be affected
by the subject matter in this AD. The commenter proposes that FAA
withdraw the NPRM.
What Is FAA's Response to the Concern?
The FAA does not concur that the Model Z-242L airplanes should be
[[Page 4908]]
excluded from the AD or exempt from the Utility and Acrobatic category
life limit requirements. We concur that there may be differences in the
design of the aircraft, but we do not concur that the Model Z-242L is
not affected by this subject matter. The CAA CZ has approved the life
limits that are included in this AD for the Model Z-242L airplanes, and
FAA has determined that they are valid for these airplanes that are
registered in the United States. The FAA has to issue an AD to mandate
the reduction in a life limit or a change or addition of an
airworthiness limitation, even if the reduction, change, or addition is
FAA-approved. Therefore, the AD is necessary in order to ensure the
life limits are required.
We are not changing the final rule AD action as a result of this
comment.
Comment Issue No. 7: Why Issue an AD When the Life Limits Are Already
Published in the Maintenance Manual
What Is the Commenter's Concern?
One commenter states that the current life limits are already in
force because the manufacturer included them in a revision to the
maintenance manual. Because of this, the commenter believes the AD is
unnecessary and requests that FAA withdraw the NPRM.
What Is FAA's Response to the Concern?
We do not concur that the AD is unnecessary and the NPRM should be
withdrawn. There are distinct differences between the CAA CZ and FAA's
rulemaking processes. If the CAA CZ determines an airworthiness
limitation should be added or a life limit should be reduced, it only
has to stamp CAA CZ approved on the document (service bulletin or
maintenance manual revision) to enforce the change. The FAA has to
issue an AD to mandate the reduction in a life limit or a change or
addition of an airworthiness limitation, even if the reduction, change,
or addition is FAA-approved. Therefore, the AD is necessary in order to
ensure the life limits are required.
We are not changing the final rule AD action as a result of this
comment.
Comment Issue No. 8: Allow the Option of Repetitive Inspections Instead
of Wing Replacement
What Is the Commenter's Concern?
One commenter requests that FAA allow repetitive inspection of the
wings once one of the affected airplanes reaches the life limit in
Utility and Acrobatic operations. The commenter believes that the
aircraft could then continue to fly until it reached the total hours
TIS life limit provided no cracks are found during the inspections. The
commenter states that this would provide the same level of safety
because cracks would be detected before failure, and then FAA could
mandate replacement of the wings when the cracks were found.
What Is FAA's Response to the Concern?
There currently are no procedures available for detecting cracks in
the wings of the affected airplanes. The CAA CZ has not approved
inspections in this area and has approved the life limits. Therefore,
we are mandating the life limits through this AD action.
We would consider repetitive inspections as an alternative method
of compliance provided the method:
--included procedures that provided details on how the onset of the
fatigue damage was going to be detected;
--was submitted in accordance with the procedures specified in this AD;
and
--provided a level of safety that was acceptable to FAA.
We are not changing the final rule AD action as a result of this
comment.
Comment Issue No. 9: The Cost of This AD Is Too High
What Is the Commenters' Concern?
Several commenters request that FAA not issue the AD because of the
high cost.
What Is FAA's Response to the Concern?
The FAA does not concur. While we do take the cost impact into
consideration on AD actions, the most important aspect is the safety
issue. The passenger injuries that might be prevented through
compliance with this AD outweigh the cost of compliance with this AD.
We have determined that the CAA CZ life limits are valid and should be
mandated for airplanes certificated for operation in the United States.
We will approve any alternative method of compliance from the
commenters provided it is submitted in accordance with the procedures
in the AD and we determine that it provides an acceptable level of
safety.
We are not changing the final rule AD action as a result of this
comment.
Comment Issue No. 10: How Do You Track Utility and Acrobatic Time?
What Is the Commenter's Concern?
One commenter wants clarification on how time in the Utility and
Acrobatic categories is calculated. This commenter states that no U.S.
operator has an accurate account of acrobatic time at this point so all
wings would have to be replaced or no one is going to claim the right
number of hours in these categories.
What Is FAA's Response to the Concern?
We concur that it could be difficult to account for the number of
hours TIS previously accumulated in the Utility and Acrobatic
categories. However, the CAA CZ established the limits in the Utility
and Acrobatic categories at 190 or 450 hours TIS and we have determined
that they are valid and should be mandated for airplanes certificated
for operation in the United States. As previously discussed, we are
adding a grace period of ``90 days after the effective date of this
AD'' to the compliance time of the life limits in the Utility and
Acrobatic categories. This would make the compliance time ``upon
accumulating either 190 hours TIS or 450 hours TIS in the Utility or
Acrobatic category or on or before June 10, 2003 (90 days after the
effective date of this AD), whichever occurs later.''
All operators will have at least 90 days before they are restricted
from operations in the Utility and Acrobatic categories.
We have added procedures to the AD on how to track time in the
Acrobatic and Utility categories. These procedures are also specified
in Moravan Mandatory Service Bulletin Z 242L/37a (Z 142C/17a), Rev. 1,
dated October 31, 2000; and Moravan Mandatory Service Bulletin Z 242L/
38a (Z 142C/18a), dated October 31, 2000.
Comment Issue No. 11: Aircraft Equipped With Nitrogen Spars Should Be
Exempt From the AD
What Is the Commenter's Concern?
One commenter states that the life limits are not valid because the
affected airplanes are equipped with nitrogen spars. With these spars,
you can detect cracks through pressure leakage. The commenter believes
that because of these early signs of failure, it is inconceivable that
the wings will fall off due to stress. The commenter requests that FAA
withdraw the NPRM.
What Is FAA's Response to the Concern?
We do not concur that the AD action is not valid because the
affected airplanes are equipped with nitrogen spars. The CAA CZ was
aware of this when it performed the analysis to determine the life
limits. We have determined that the CAA CZ life limits are valid and
should be mandated for airplanes certificated for operation in the
United States.
We are not changing the final rule AD action as a result of this
comment.
[[Page 4909]]
FAA's Determination
What Is FAA's Final Determination on This Issue?
After careful review of all available information related to the
subject presented above, we have determined that air safety and the
public interest require the adoption of the rule as proposed except for
the compliance time change, the addition of procedures on how to track
time in the Acrobatic and Utility categories, and minor editorial
corrections. We have determined that the change, the addition, and the
minor editorial corrections:
--provide the intent that was proposed in the NPRM for correcting the
unsafe condition; and
--do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already
proposed in the NPRM.
Cost Impact
How Many Airplanes Does This AD Impact?
We estimate that this AD affects 39 airplanes in the U.S. registry.
What Is the Cost Impact of This AD on Owners/Operators of the Affected
Airplanes?
We estimate the following costs to replace the wings after the
technical service life is reached:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total cost
Labor cost Parts cost Total cost on U.S.
per airplane operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
60 work hours x $60 per hour = $3,600........... $17,400 per set of wings.......... $21,000 $819,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have no way of determining the monetary cost of the
inconvenience of restricting flight to Normal category operations.
Regulatory Impact
Does This AD Impact Various Entities?
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.
Does This AD Involve a Significant Rule or Regulatory Action?
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 copy of the final evaluation prepared for this
action is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained
by contacting 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, under 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.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding a new AD to read as follows:
2003-03-13 MORAVAN A.S.: Amendment 39-13037; Docket No. 2000-CE-05-
AD.
(a) What airplanes are affected by this AD? This AD affects
Model Z-242L airplanes, all serial numbers, that are certificated in
any category.
(b) Who must comply with this AD? Anyone who wishes to operate
any of the airplanes identified in paragraph (a) of this AD must
comply with this AD.
(c) What problem does this AD address? The actions specified by
this AD are intended to prevent structural failure of the wing due
to fatigue cracking. Such failure could result in a wing separating
from the airplane with consequent loss of airplane control.
(d) What actions must I accomplish to address this problem? To
address this problem, you must establish a technical service life
and restrict Acrobatic and Utility category operations. This must be
done by accomplishing the following, as applicable:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actions Compliance Procedures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) You must annotate As of the March 21, This is specified in
Acrobatic and Utility 2003 (the effective Moravan Mandatory
category operational time date of this AD). Service Bulletin Z
in the logbook. If the 242L/37a (Z 142C/
airplane is utilized in 17a), Rev. 1, dated
either of these categories October 31, 2000;
at any time during a and Moravan
flight, you must annotate Mandatory Service
the total time for that Bulletin Z 242L/38a
flight in the Utility or (Z 142C/18a), dated
Acrobatic category, as October 31, 2000.
appropriate. The owner/
operator holding at least a
private pilot certificate
as authorized by section
43.7 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 43.7) may annotate the
logbook.
-----------------------------
[[Page 4910]]
(2) If you have an airplane AFM incorporation: AFM incorporation:
with a serial number in the Upon the The owner/operator
range of 0001 through 0656 accumulation of 190 holding at least a
that does not have hours time-in- private pilot
strengthened wings service (TIS) in certificate as
installed (both left and the Acrobatic authorized by
right wings) in accordance category and/or section 43.7 of the
with Moravan Mandatory Utility category or Federal Aviation
Service Bulletin Z 242L/ on or before June Regulations (14 CFR
27a--Rev. 1, dated October 10, 2003 (90 days 43.7) may
31, 2000, accomplish the after the effective accomplish this AFM
following:. date of this AD), insertion of this
(i) Insert the following whichever occurs AD. Make an entry
information into the later; and into the aircraft
Limitations Section of the Replacement: Upon records showing
Airplane Flight Manual the accumulation of compliance with
(AFM): ``Do not operate in 3,500 hours TIS in these portions of
the Acrobatic or Utility all operations or the AD in
category. Operate in the within the next 50 accordance with
Normal category only.''. hours TIS in all section 43.9 of the
(ii) Replace both wings with operations after Federal Aviation
the following part numbers:. March 21, 2003 (the Regulations (14 CFR
(A) L 242.2100 left-hand effective date of 43.9). This
wing; and. this AD), whichever operational
(B) L 242.2200 right-hand occurs later. restriction is
wing. referenced in
Moravan Mandatory
Service Bulletin Z
242L/37a (Z 142C/
17a), Rev. 1, dated
October 31, 2000.
Replacement: In
accordance with
Moravan Mandatory
Service Bulletin Z
242L/27a--Rev. 1,
dated October 31,
2000.
-----------------------------
(3) If you have an airplane AFM incorporation: AFM incorporation:
with a serial number of Upon the The owner/operator
0657 or higher or one in accumulation of 450 holding at least a
the range of 0001 through hours (TIS) in the private pilot
0656 that has strengthened Acrobatic category certificate as
wings (both left and right) and/or Utility authorized by
installed in accordance category or on or section 43.7 of the
with Moravan Mandatory before June 10, Federal Aviation
Service Bulletin Z 242L/ 2003 (90 days after Regulations (14 CFR
27a--Rev. 1, dated October the effective date 43.7) may
31, 2000, accomplish the of this AD), accomplish this AFM
following:. whichever occurs insertion of this
(i) Insert the following later; and AD. Make an entry
information into the Replacement: Upon into the aircraft
Limitations Section of the the accumulation of records showing
Airplane Flight Manual 5,500 hours TIS in compliance with
(AFM): ``Do not operate in all operations or these portions of
the Acrobatic or Utility within the next 50 the AD in
category. Operate in the hours TIS after accordance with
Normal category only.''. March 21, 2003 (the section 43.9 of the
(ii) Replace both wings with effective date of Federal Aviation
the following part numbers:. this AD), whichever Regulations (14 CFR
(A) L 242.2100 left-hand occurs later. You 43.9). This
wing; and. must maintain the operational
(B) L 242.2200 right-hand AFM requirement restriction is
wing. until replacement referenced in
of the wings. Moravan Mandatory
Service Bulletin Z
242L/38a (Z 142C/
18a), dated October
31, 2000.
Replacement: In
accordance with
Moravan Mandatory
Service Bulletin Z
242L/27a--Rev. 1,
dated October 31,
2000.
-----------------------------
(4) Only install a wing with As of March 21, 2003 Not applicable.
a part number of L 242.2100 (the effective date
left-hand wing or L of this AD).
242.2200 right-hand wing.
-----------------------------
(5) When you install new AFM incorporation: See paragraph (d)(3)
wings (both left and right) Upon the of this AD.
on your airplane, the AFM accumulation of 450
and replacement hours TIS in the
requirements of paragraph Acrobatic category
(d)(2) of this AD apply. and/or Utility
category; and
Replacement: Upon
the accumulation of
5,500 hours TIS in
all operations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(e) Can I comply with this AD in any other way? You may use an
alternative method of compliance or adjust the compliance time if:
(1) Your alternative method of compliance provides an equivalent
level of safety; and
(2) The Manager, Standards Office, Small Airplane Directorate,
approves your alternative. Submit your request through an FAA
Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send
it to the Manager, Standards Office, Small Airplane Directorate.
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in paragraph
(a) of this AD, 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 (e) 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 you have not eliminated the unsafe condition, specific
actions you propose to address it.
(f) Where can I get information about any already-approved
alternative methods of compliance? Contact Doug Rudolph, Aerospace
Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301,
Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329-4059; facsimile:
(816) 329-4090.
(g) What if I need to fly the airplane to another location to
comply with this AD? The FAA can issue a special flight permit under
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate your airplane to a location where
you can accomplish the requirements of this AD.
(h) Are any service bulletins incorporated into this AD by
reference? The replacements required by this AD must be done in
accordance with Moravan Mandatory Service Bulletin Z 242L/27a--Rev.
1, dated October 31, 2000. The Director of the Federal Register
approved this incorporation by reference under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1
CFR part 51. You may get copies from Moravan, Inc., 765 81
Otrokovice, Czech Republic; telephone: +420 67 767 3940; facsimile:
+420 67 792 2103. You may view copies at the FAA, Central Region,
Office of the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City,
Missouri, or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North
Capitol Street, NW, suite 700, Washington, DC.
Note 2: The subject of this AD is addressed in Czech Republic AD
Number CAA-AD-T-099/2000R1, dated June 28, 2001.
(i) When does this amendment become effective? This amendment
becomes effective on March 21, 2003.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on January 21, 2003.
Michael Gallagher,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 03-1956 Filed 1-30-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P