82 FR 43677 - Airworthiness Directives; Ameri-King Corporation Emergency Locator Transmitters

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 180 (September 19, 2017)

Page Range		43677-43682
FR Document		2017-16048

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Ameri-King Corporation emergency locator transmitters (ELTs) as installed on various aircraft. This AD was prompted by multiple reports of ELT failure and a report of noncompliance to quality standards and manufacturer processes related to Ameri-King Corporation ELTs. This AD requires repetitive inspections of the ELT for discrepancies; repetitive checks, tests, and verifications, as applicable, to ensure the ELT is functioning; and corrective actions if necessary. This AD also allows for optional replacement of affected ELTs and, for certain aircraft, optional removal of affected ELTs. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

Federal Register, Volume 82 Issue 180 (Tuesday, September 19, 2017)

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 180 (Tuesday, September 19, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43677-43682]
From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2017-16048]

[[Page 43677]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-6673; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-092-AD;
Amendment 39-18978; AD 2017-16-01]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Ameri-King Corporation Emergency
Locator Transmitters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Ameri-King Corporation emergency locator transmitters (ELTs) as
installed on various aircraft. This AD was prompted by multiple reports
of ELT failure and a report of noncompliance to quality standards and
manufacturer processes related to Ameri-King Corporation ELTs. This AD
requires repetitive inspections of the ELT for discrepancies;
repetitive checks, tests, and verifications, as applicable, to ensure
the ELT is functioning; and corrective actions if necessary. This AD
also allows for optional replacement of affected ELTs and, for certain
aircraft, optional removal of affected ELTs. We are issuing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective October 24, 2017.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of October 24,
2017.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Gilbert Ceballos, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment
Branch, ANM-130L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5372;
fax: 562-627-5210; email: gilbert.ceballos@faa.gov. You may view this
referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221. It is also
available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-6673.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
6673; 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: 800-647-
5527) is Docket 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: Gilbert Ceballos, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130L, FAA, Los Angeles ACO, 3960
Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5372; fax:
562-627-5210; email: gilbert.ceballos@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Ameri-King
Corporation ELTs as installed on various aircraft. The NPRM published
in the Federal Register on June 3, 2016 (81 FR 35657) (``the NPRM'').
The NPRM was prompted by multiple reports of ELT failure. The NPRM was
also prompted by a report of noncompliance to quality standards and
manufacturer processes related to Ameri-King Corporation ELTs. Failure
to adhere to these standards and processes could result in ELTs that do
not function. The NPRM proposed to require repetitive inspections of
the ELT for discrepancies; repetitive checks, tests, and verifications,
as applicable, to ensure the ELT is functioning; and corrective actions
if necessary. The NPRM also proposed to allow optional replacement of
affected ELTs and, for aircraft on which an ELT is not required by
operating regulations, optional removal of affected ELTs. We are
issuing this AD to detect and correct nonfunctioning ELTs, which could
delay or impede the rescue of the flightcrew and passengers after an
emergency landing.

Comments

We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and
the FAA's response to each comment. Alaska Seaplanes supported the
NPRM. Alaska Seaplanes stated that, based on its experience with Ameri-
King Corporation ELTs, ``this is a good and needed AD.''

Request To Withdraw the NPRM

Richard Koehler, an FAA-certificated mechanic and pilot, requested
we withdraw the NPRM. The commenter stated he is strongly opposed to
issuance of the NPRM for the following reasons:
The commenter stated the ``Discussion'' paragraph of the
NPRM specifies that there have been 73 reported ELT failures and
questioned if all were Ameri-King units or a mix of the older technical
standard order (TSO)-C91 units and the newer TSO-C91a units. The
commenter stated the TSO-C91a ELT was a huge technological advance over
the old TSO-C91 units. The commenter noted that he replaced four
defective units (TSO-C91) with AK-450 units (TSO-C91a), which, in his
experience, have never had a failure. The commenter questioned how the
failure rate of the AK-450 compares to other manufacturers' units.
The commenter stated that the NPRM appears to be part of
``the ongoing vendetta against Ameri-King by the 406 ELT mafia,'' which
is trying to force all general aviation aircraft to adopt 406 ELTs. The
commenter stated that the performance of the AK-450 is at least ten
times better than the old C91 units. The commenter recommended that the
NPRM should ``get rid of poor ELTs'' by forcing the replacement of the
tens of thousands of C91 units that are still available.
The commenter stated that the inspection called out in the
proposed AD is redundant to the tests required in 14 CFR 91.207(d),
which requires a 12-calendar-month inspection cycle on all installed
ELTs.
We do not agree to withdraw the NPRM. We find that sufficient data
exist to demonstrate that Ameri-King Corporation Model AK-450-( ) and
AK-451-( ) series ELTs could fail. We consider this an unsafe condition
since nonfunctioning ELTs could delay or impede the rescue of the
flightcrew and passengers after an emergency landing. The reported ELT
failures were not a mix of TSO-C91 units and TSO-C91a units. As stated
in the NPRM, we received 73 reports of ELT failures for Ameri-King
Corporation Model AK-450-( ) series ELTs, which are approved under TSO-
C91a, and AK-451-( ) series ELTs, which are approved under TSO-C91a and
TSO-C126.
We are also aware of the noncompliance to quality standards and
manufacturer processes for Ameri-King Corporation ELTs, which could
result in

[[Page 43678]]

the failure rate of Ameri-King Corporation ELTs being higher than other
manufacturers' failure rates. When comparing the data between Ameri-
King Corporation and one other ELT manufacturer, the failure rate for
Ameri-King Corporation ELTs is significantly higher than for the other
manufacturer's ELTs. We acknowledge that 14 CFR 91.207(d) specifies
compliance times for inspecting ELTs that overlap with the compliance
times in this AD; however 14 CFR 91.207(d) does not specify corrective
actions if any discrepancies are found. In addition, 14 CFR 91.207(d)
only applies to aircraft on which ELTs are required. This AD applies to
all Ameri-King Corporation Model AK-450-( ) and AK-451-( ) series ELTs,
regardless of installation. Consequently, we have determined that this
AD is necessary in order to address the identified unsafe condition in
all affected ELTs. This AD, in conjunction with the emergency cease and
desist order, dated December 28, 2015, to Ameri-King Corporation that
terminated their technical standard order authorization (TSOA) and
parts manufacturer approval (PMA), will ensure nonfunctioning Ameri-
King Corporation ELTs are identified so that they may be eliminated
from the U.S. fleet.
We might also consider further rulemaking to address other ELTs if
we receive data that substantiate an unsafe condition exists for those
ELTs. We have not changed this final rule in this regard.

Request To Amend Facts Regarding the Basis for the NPRM

Michael L. Dworkin, legal representative for Ameri-King Corporation
(Ameri-King), submitted comments intended to serve as Ameri-King's
public comments on the NPRM. Ameri-King requested that, if we go
forward with the final rule, we amend the facts regarding the basis for
the NPRM. Ameri-King stated it objects to the FAA's stated basis for
the NPRM for the following reasons:
Ameri-King stated that the alleged 73 reported ELT
failures were never communicated to Ameri-King and Ameri-King has never
been afforded the opportunity to investigate the cause(s) of such
alleged failures. The commenter questioned whether they were due to
design or production defects, or improper installation, maintenance,
and use.
Ameri-King stated that the number of allegedly reported
failures does not comport with the FAA's service difficulty report
(SDR) database, which shows only 64 reports related to service
difficulties with Ameri-King ELTs. Ameri-King stated that many of these
64 reports clearly indicate failures due to factors other than design
or manufacturing, and outside of Ameri-King's activities, such as
improper installation, improper and inadequate maintenance, and dead
batteries.
Ameri-King noted that whether there were 64 or 73 reports,
these numbers are relatively inconsequential considering that there are
over 14,500 Ameri-King ELTs in the field. Ameri-King added that
utilizing the FAA's number of 73 failures would evidence a failure rate
of approximately one-half of one percent (0.5%). Ameri-King stated that
the number of reports confined to Ameri-King's ELTs pales in comparison
to the FAA's SDR database for all ELT manufacturers (799 SDRs), further
bolstering Ameri-King's quality control and performance
accomplishments.
Ameri-King also pointed out that the NPRM states that for
service information, affected persons should contact Ameri-King
directly. However, by the terms of the cease and desist order, dated
December 28, 2015, the FAA has prevented Ameri-King from providing any
assistance. Ameri-King noted that, to the extent functional tests
reveal that the failures are due to dead batteries, the aircraft owner
may not be able to purchase replacements. Although these batteries are
``off the shelf'' generic batteries that are not of Ameri-King's design
or manufacture, under the terms of the cease and desist order, Ameri-
King cannot sell other manufacturers' replacement batteries.
Ameri-King stated that FAA certification guidelines
classify ELTs as non-essential equipment, and that under TSO-C126a and
TSO-C126b, ELT failures have been considered by the FAA to be ``minor
failures.''
In response to the commenter's request to amend the facts regarding
the basis for the NPRM, we note that the 73 ELT failures are from
reports that Ameri-King Quality Control (QC) provided to the FAA.
Regarding the failure rate, SDR source data comes from operator reports
and varies in completion and information detail provided. In addition,
the SDR database is not a comprehensive database. It is only one of the
tools used to investigate potential safety issues (e.g., Hotline
reports, National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) safety
investigations, etc.). There is no basis (i.e., data substantiation)
for Ameri-King's assertion that Ameri-King's failure rate is lower than
other manufacturers.
As stated previously, Ameri-King's failure rate is significantly
higher than at least one other manufacturer. The Ameri-King failures
include occurrences of inadvertent G-switch activation and premature
battery replacement due to repeated inadvertent ELT self-test
initialization.
We found Ameri-King's quality control records to be insufficient as
they only included data covering one year. In addition, we discovered
that Ameri-King would receive failed ELTs from operators, repair them,
and reissue them with a new serial number, which affects quality and
configuration control. Since there were noncompliance findings with
quality standards and manufacturer processes, it is unknown how many
future failures there may be due to manufacturing factors at Ameri-
King.
We acknowledge that the NPRM should not have referred to Ameri-King
for contact information for the service information. We have revised
the ADDRESSES section of this final rule to specify contacting the FAA
for service information. We have also specified contacting the FAA for
service information in paragraph (m)(3) of this AD.
We have also revised paragraph (g) of this AD to clarify that
operators are not required to get replacement batteries from Ameri-King
Corporation. Ameri-King AK-450-( ) series ELTs use alkaline batteries.
Ameri-King AK-451-( ) series ELTs use lithium batteries. Regarding
lithium battery replacement, operators should note that replacement
batteries should follow the battery standards requirements specified in
TSO-C142a, Non-Rechargeable Lithium Cells and Batteries. TSO-C142a
states that non-rechargeable lithium cells and batteries must meet
minimum performance standards in RTCA, Inc., document RTCA DO-227,
``Minimum Operational Performance Standards for Lithium Batteries,''
dated June 23, 1995 (``DO-227''). As specified in DO-227, if any
lithium battery replacement is necessary, all batteries should be
replaced, i.e., there should not be a mixture of new and old batteries
installed in an ELT. If operators have questions on lithium battery
replacement, they may contact the person identified under the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT paragraph of this AD.
Regarding Ameri-King's comment about non-essential equipment and
minor failures, we acknowledge that ELTs are considered non-essential
equipment for certain aircraft. However, the majority of Ameri-King
ELTs (approximately 10,500 units) were sold to operators of small
airplanes, certificated under 14 CFR part 23. In assessing this issue,
we followed Section 4-12, ``Other Structure--

[[Page 43679]]

Occupant Protection,'' of the Small Airplane Risk Analysis (SARA)
Handbook, dated September 30, 2010, which contains the following
statement: ``An ASE [aviation safety engineer] should consider
corrective action for any defect or failure in a design feature
intended to improve survivability in accidents.'' As noted in Section
1-2, ``Use of Risk Methods,'' of the SARA handbook:

Also, airplane components intended to provide occupant
protection must function as intended in a survivable incident or
accident. Using a probabilistic approach in these types of
situations is not appropriate for making decisions on whether
airworthiness action is necessary. However, probabilistic methods
can help us determine how quickly we should take an airworthiness
action and how effective a proposed airworthiness action may be in
reducing the risk associated with an airworthiness concern.

Thus, we find that Ameri-King ELT failures must be addressed
because nonfunctioning ELTs could delay or impede the rescue of the
flightcrew and passengers after an emergency landing.

Request To Remove Requirement To Repair Discrepancies

Three commenters requested that we remove repair requirements from
the proposed AD. One of these commenters, Neal Dillman, noted that the
existing manual does not specify that repairs be accomplished. The
commenter indicated that doing a repair in order to maintain
airworthiness is supported by existing advisory circulars, as well as
other FAA documentation. The commenter also noted that other ELT
manufacturers have documentation that does not include repairs and,
therefore, requiring a repair for Ameri-King is superfluous.
Another commenter, Richard Koehler, questioned why the proposed AD
specifies to repair discrepancies when 14 CFR 91.207(d) calls for an
inspection of the ELT, but leaves the repair to the mechanic with an
inspection authorization. The commenter questioned why we have to add
overt words to repair discrepancies in the proposed AD, but not in the
regulations. We infer the commenter is requesting that we not include
repair requirements.
Another commenter, Michael L. Dworkin, legal representative for
Ameri-King, stated that to the extent that the proposed AD requires
accomplishing the actions already specified in Ameri-King's
Installation & Operations Manuals, ``Documents IM-450 and IM-451,''
which include yearly inspections and performance of functional and
operations tests, no objection is offered. However, Ameri-King stated
that the requirements of the proposed AD differ from Ameri-King's
Installation & Operations Manuals where it specifies corrective actions
that would be required in repairing or replacing inoperative ELTs.
Ameri-King noted that corrective action is already required under
the applicable Federal Aviation Regulations and established industry
practices. Ameri-King considered that it should be intuitive and
axiomatic that any personnel performing inspections and functional or
operations tests would take appropriate corrective actions to ensure
that any faults are corrected so the equipment meets and performs in
accordance with specifications. As such, Ameri-King concluded that
there is little, if any, need to mandate corrective action by AD.
Ameri-King also noted that Ameri-King's Installation & Operations
Manuals were approved by the FAA in conjunction with the FAA having
issued TSOAs and PMAs to Ameri-King, and at that time, the FAA saw no
need to specify corrective actions in the event that inspection or
testing revealed any problems--most likely because corrective action is
already required by the Federal Aviation Regulations and standard
industry practices.
We disagree with the commenter's request to remove the requirement
to repair discrepancies. When we issue an AD, we must include actions
that are necessary to address the unsafe condition. We acknowledge that
the existing regulations provide acceptable requirements to ensure
proper maintenance inspection and operation. However, we also typically
include actions in ADs to ensure that operators do not overlook
(unintentionally or otherwise) the necessity of accomplishing on-
condition repairs or replacements related to actions that are necessary
to address unsafe conditions. We have not found a similar unsafe
condition on ELTs from other manufacturers. For the ELTs identified in
this AD, repairs or replacements must be done if discrepancies are
found, except as provided by paragraph (j) of this AD. We have not
changed this AD in this regard.
However, we have revised paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD to
clarify that either a repair or replacement may be done if any of the
conditions identified in those paragraphs is found. Paragraphs (h)(1)
and (h)(2) of the proposed AD had only specified that a replacement
must be done. An ELT may be repaired using approved maintenance
practices and following 14 CFR 91.207(a), 14 CFR 91.207(f), and 14 CFR
135.168, as applicable, and other applicable operating rules under
subchapters F and G of 14 CFR chapter I. Repairs must be done at an
authorized repair station. For clarity, we added a reference to 14 CFR
135.168 to specify the applicable regulation for rotorcraft that
affects ELTs.
We have also revised paragraph (h)(3) of this AD to clarify that
all discrepancies must be repaired using approved maintenance practices
and to add a reference to 14 CFR 135.168. In addition, we revised
paragraph (g) of this AD to include a reference to 14 CFR 135.168.

Request To Require the Use of Specific Equipment

Michael L. Dworkin, legal representative for Ameri-King, requested
that we revise the requirements of the proposed AD to include requiring
the use of Ameri-King compatible equipment, as currently specified in
Ameri-King's Installation & Operations Manuals, for the functional and
operations tests. Ameri-King stated that non-compatible equipment will
damage the ELT and may produce erroneous test results.
We agree with the commenter that operators should use Ameri-King
compatible equipment as identified in Ameri-King's Installation &
Operations Manuals. However, this AD requires operators to do actions
in accordance with section 3.4, ``Periodic Maintenance,'' of Ameri-King
Corporation Document IM-450, ``INSTALLATION & OPERATION MANUAL,''
Revision A, dated October 18, 1995; or section 3.4, ``Periodic
Maintenance (Instructions for Continued Airworthiness),'' Ameri-King
Corporation Document IM-451, ``INSTALLATION AND OPERATION MANUAL,''
Revision NC-4.1h, dated July 5, 2014. The steps in those sections
either do not specify test equipment that must be used or specify a
type of equipment ``or equivalent'' that must be used. Therefore, we
have determined it is not necessary to revise this AD in this regard.

Request To Allow Operators To Determine if the ELT Is Functional

Michael Dunn requested that we allow operators to determine if the
ELT is functional. The commenter noted his AK-451 ELT was inadvertently
set off and it worked.
We disagree with the commenter's request. The service information
specified in this AD provides instructions for testing the ELT, and we
have determined this test is necessary to address the identified unsafe
condition.

[[Page 43680]]

We have not changed this AD in this regard.

Request To Revise Work-Hour Estimate

Richard Koehler stated the number of work-hours specified in the
NPRM for the inspection is high. The commenter stated the inspection
should be done in about 20 minutes, particularly when done in concert
with an annual inspection. We infer the commenter is requesting that we
revise the 2 work-hours specified in the ``Costs of Compliance''
paragraph in the preamble of the NPRM.
We disagree with the request to revise the work hours. The
specified number of work hours is only an estimate. The estimate does
not assume operators will do the required inspection concurrently with
other actions that are not mandated by this AD. Operators may
accomplish required actions concurrently with other actions, provided
the AD actions are done within the specified compliance time. We have
not revised this AD in this regard.

Explanation of Removal of Paragraph (h)(4) of the Proposed AD

Paragraph (h)(4) of the proposed AD is an exception to the service
information and provides specific instructions to replace non-
functioning batteries. We have determined that this AD does not need to
specify those instructions as an exception to paragraph (g) of this AD.
Replacing affected batteries as required by paragraph (g) of this AD
addresses the identified unsafe condition for ELTs with non-functioning
batteries. Therefore we have not included paragraph (h)(4) of the
proposed AD in the regulatory text of this AD.

Request To Correct the Number of Replacement Batteries

Leon Rinke stated that paragraph (h)(4)(i) of the proposed AD
specifies to use four ``D'' cell batteries, but the AK-450 ELT uses six
``D'' cell batteries, as specified in the maintenance manual. We infer
the commenter is requesting that we revise paragraph (h)(4)(i) of the
proposed AD to correct the number of replacement batteries.
We agree with the commenter's statement for the reasons provided.
However, we have not revised this AD because paragraph (h)(4)(i) of the
proposed AD is not included in the regulatory text of this AD.

Explanation of Change to Table 1 to Paragraph (c) of This AD

We have confirmed with Ameri-King that Bell Helicopter Textron
Canada Limited rotorcraft did not receive Ameri-King ELTs. Therefore,
we have removed Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited rotorcraft from
table 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD, which lists known aircraft that
might have the affected ELTs installed. However, if an affected ELT is
installed on any Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited rotorcraft,
this AD applies to that rotorcraft.

Conclusion

We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
Are consistent with 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.
We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

We reviewed section 3.4, ``Periodic Maintenance,'' Ameri-King
Corporation Document IM-450, ``INSTALLATION & OPERATION MANUAL,''
Revision A, dated October 18, 1995; and section 3.4, ``Periodic
Maintenance (Instructions for Continued Airworthiness),'' Ameri-King
Corporation Document IM-451, ``INSTALLATION AND OPERATION MANUAL,''
Revision NC-4.1h, dated July 5, 2014. The service information describes
procedures for inspections of the ELT for discrepancies; checks, tests,
and verifications to ensure the ELT is functioning; and corrective
actions. Corrective actions include replacing affected parts. These
documents are distinct because they apply to different Ameri-King
Corporation ELT models. This service information is reasonably
available because the interested parties have access to it through
their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 14,500 ELTs installed on various
aircraft of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Labor cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspections, checks, tests, and 2 work-hours x $85 per $170 per inspection $2,465,000 per
verifications. hour = $170 per cycle. inspection cycle.
inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacements
that would be required based on the results of the inspections, checks,
tests, and verifications. We have no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these replacements.

On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement...................... 4 work-hours x $85 per Between $600 and $1,500. Between $940 and $1,840.
hour = $340.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 43681]]

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

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 adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2017-16-01 Ameri-King Corporation: Amendment 39-18978; Docket No.
FAA-2016-6673; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-092-AD.

(a) Effective Date

This AD is effective October 24, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

None.

This AD applies to Ameri-King Corporation Model AK-450-( ) and
AK-451-( ) series emergency locator transmitters (ELTs). This
appliance is installed on, but not limited to, aircraft identified
in table 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD.

Table 1 to Paragraph (c) of This AD--Certain Aircraft That Might Have Affected ELTs Installed
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aircraft ELT model
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airbus rotorcraft.......................................... AK-451.
American Champion Aircraft Corp. airplanes................. AK-450 and AK-451.
Aviat Aircraft Inc. airplanes.............................. AK-450.
Beechcraft Corporation airplanes........................... AK-451.
Bombardier Inc. airplanes.................................. AK-451.
Cessna Aircraft Company airplanes.......................... AK-451.
Cirrus Design Corporation airplanes........................ AK-451.
Diamond Aircraft Industries Inc. airplanes................. AK-450 and AK-451.
Eclipse Aerospace Inc. airplanes........................... AK-451.
Embraer S.A. airplanes..................................... AK-451.
KitFox Aircraft LLC (formerly SkyStar Aircraft Corporation AK-450.
and also Denney Aerocraft Company) airplanes.
Luscombe Aircraft Corporation airplanes.................... AK-450 and AK-451.
Mooney Aircraft Corporation airplanes...................... AK-450.
Piper Aircraft Inc. airplanes.............................. AK-451.
Robinson Helicopter Company rotorcraft..................... AK-451.
Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation rotorcraft................... AK-451.
SOCATA, S.A., Socata Groupe Aerospatiale airplanes......... AK-450.
Twin Commander Aircraft LLC airplanes...................... AK-451.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(d) Subject

Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 2562, Emergency Locator Beacon.

(e) Unsafe Condition

This AD was prompted by multiple reports of ELT failure. This AD
was also prompted by a report of noncompliance to quality standards
and manufacturer processes related to Ameri-King Corporation ELTs.
Failure to adhere to these standards and processes could result in
ELTs that do not function. We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct nonfunctioning ELTs, which, if not corrected, could delay or
impede the rescue of the flightcrew and passengers after an
emergency landing.

(f) Compliance

Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Repetitive Actions and Corrective Actions

Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, do general
visual inspections of the ELT for discrepancies; checks, tests, and
verifications, as applicable, to ensure the ELT is functioning; and
all applicable corrective actions; in accordance with section 3.4,
``Periodic Maintenance,'' of Ameri-King Corporation Document IM-450,
``INSTALLATION & OPERATION MANUAL,'' Revision A, dated October 18,
1995; or section 3.4, ``Periodic Maintenance (Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness),'' Ameri-King Corporation Document IM-451,
``INSTALLATION AND OPERATION MANUAL,'' Revision NC-4.1h, dated July
5, 2014; as applicable; and as required by paragraph (h) of this AD.
Do all applicable corrective actions following 14 CFR 91.207(a), 14
CFR 91.207(f), and 14 CFR 135.168, as applicable, and other
applicable operating rules under subchapters F and G of 14 CFR
chapter I (hereafter referred to as ``other applicable operating
rules'') after accomplishing the inspections, checks, tests, and
verifications. Repeat the inspections and

[[Page 43682]]

applicable checks, tests, and verifications thereafter at intervals
not to exceed 12 months until the terminating action specified in
paragraph (j) of this AD is done. Operators are not required to get
replacement batteries from Ameri-King Corporation.

(h) Additional Corrective Actions

(1) If, during any action required by paragraph (g) of this AD,
any ELT fails the functional test specified in step 6., the
verification specified in step 7., or the activation check specified
in step 8., of section 3.4, ``Periodic Maintenance,'' of Ameri-King
Corporation Document IM-450, ``INSTALLATION & OPERATION MANUAL,''
Revision A, dated October 18, 1995, do the actions specified in
paragraph (h)(1)(i) or (h)(1)(ii) of this AD.
(i) Replace the affected Model AK-450-( ) ELT with a serviceable
FAA-approved ELT as specified in paragraph (i) of this AD
(``Definition of Serviceable FAA-approved ELT''), following 14 CFR
91.207(a), 14 CFR 91.207(f), and 14 CFR 135.168, as applicable, and
other applicable operating rules.
(ii) Repair the ELT using approved maintenance practices and
following 14 CFR 91.207(a), 14 CFR 91.207(f), and 14 CFR 135.168, as
applicable, and other applicable operating rules.
(2) If, during any action required by paragraph (g) of this AD,
any ELT fails any of the actions specified in paragraphs (h)(2)(i)
through (h)(2)(v) of this AD: Replace the affected Model AK-451-( )
ELT with a serviceable FAA-approved ELT as specified in paragraph
(i) of this AD (``Definition of Serviceable FAA-approved ELT''),
following 14 CFR 91.207(a), 14 CFR 91.207(f), and 14 CFR 135.168, as
applicable, and other applicable operating rules; or repair the ELT
using approved maintenance practices and following 14 CFR 91.207(a),
14 CFR 91.207(f), and 14 CFR 135.168, as applicable, and other
applicable operating rules.
(i) The operational test specified in step 3.4.6 of section 3.4,
``Periodic Maintenance (Instructions for Continued Airworthiness),''
of Ameri-King Corporation Document IM-451, ``INSTALLATION AND
OPERATION MANUAL,'' Revision NC-4.1h, dated July 5, 2014.
(ii) Any check specified in step 3.4.7 of section 3.4,
``Periodic Maintenance (Instructions for Continued Airworthiness),''
of Ameri-King Corporation Document IM-451, ``INSTALLATION AND
OPERATION MANUAL,'' Revision NC-4.1h, dated July 5, 2014.
(iii) The digital message verification specified in step 3.4.8
of section 3.4, ``Periodic Maintenance (Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness),'' of Ameri-King Corporation Document IM-451,
``INSTALLATION AND OPERATION MANUAL,'' Revision NC-4.1h, dated July
5, 2014.
(iv) The registration verification specified in step 3.4.9 of
section 3.4, ``Periodic Maintenance (Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness),'' of Ameri-King Corporation Document IM-451,
``INSTALLATION AND OPERATION MANUAL,'' Revision NC-4.1h, dated July
5, 2014.
(v) The verification of the ELT and global positioning system
(GPS) interface specified in step 3.4.10 of section 3.4, ``Periodic
Maintenance (Instructions for Continued Airworthiness),'' of Ameri-
King Corporation Document IM-451, ``INSTALLATION AND OPERATION
MANUAL,'' Revision NC-4.1h, dated July 5, 2014.
(3) If, during any action required by paragraph (g) of this AD,
any of the discrepancies specified in paragraphs (h)(3)(i) through
(h)(3)(vi) of this AD are found, repair all discrepancies using
approved maintenance practices and following 14 CFR 91.207(a), 14
CFR 91.207(f), and 14 CFR 135.168, as applicable, and other
applicable operating rules.
(i) Any unsecured fastener or mechanical assembly.
(ii) Any cuts or abrasions on the coaxial cable outer jacket.
(iii) Any corrosion on the ``BNC'' connectors and mating plug on
the antenna and the ELT main unit.
(iv) Any wear or abrasion on the modular cable outer jacket.
(v) Any corrosion on the jack and plug of the modular connecting
cable.
(vi) Any corrosion on the battery compartment.

(i) Definition of Serviceable FAA-Approved ELT

For the purposes of this AD, a serviceable FAA-approved ELT is
any FAA-approved ELT other than a Model AK-450-( ) and AK-451-( )
series ELT produced by Ameri-King Corporation.

(j) Optional Terminating Action

Doing the applicable action specified in paragraph (j)(1) or
(j)(2) of this AD terminates the actions required by paragraphs (g)
and (h) of this AD.
(1) For aircraft required by operating regulations to be
equipped with an ELT: Replace the ELT with a serviceable FAA-
approved ELT as specified in paragraph (i) of this AD (``Definition
of Serviceable FAA-approved ELT'').
(2) For aircraft not required by operating regulations to be
equipped with an ELT: Replace the ELT with a serviceable FAA-
approved ELT as specified in paragraph (i) of this AD (``Definition
of Serviceable FAA-approved ELT''). The ELT may be removed as an
alternative to the ELT replacement; if an ELT is re-installed, it
must be a serviceable ELT as specified in paragraph (i) of this AD
(``Definition of Serviceable FAA-approved ELT'').

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 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 paragraph (l) 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.

(l) Related Information

For more information about this AD, contact Gilbert Ceballos,
Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130L, FAA, Los
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount
Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5372; fax: 562-
627-5210; email: gilbert.ceballos@faa.gov.

(m) 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.
(i) Section 3.4, ``Periodic Maintenance,'' Ameri-King
Corporation Document IM-450, ``INSTALLATION & OPERATION MANUAL,''
Revision A, dated October 18, 1995.
(ii) Section 3.4, ``Periodic Maintenance (Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness),'' Ameri-King Corporation Document IM-451,
``INSTALLATION AND OPERATION MANUAL,'' Revision NC-4.1h, dated July
5, 2014.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Gilbert Ceballos, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch,
ANM-130L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 3960
Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5372;
fax: 562-627-5210; email: gilbert.ceballos@faa.gov.
(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
(5) 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 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 19, 2017.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-16048 Filed 9-18-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

43678 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 19, 2017 / Rules and Regulations

the failure rate of Ameri-King difficulties with Ameri-King ELTs. Ameri-King failures include occurrences
Corporation ELTs being higher than Ameri-King stated that many of these 64 of inadvertent G-switch activation and
other manufacturers’ failure rates. When reports clearly indicate failures due to premature battery replacement due to
comparing the data between Ameri-King factors other than design or repeated inadvertent ELT self-test
Corporation and one other ELT manufacturing, and outside of Ameri- initialization.
manufacturer, the failure rate for Ameri- King’s activities, such as improper We found Ameri-King’s quality
King Corporation ELTs is significantly installation, improper and inadequate control records to be insufficient as they
higher than for the other manufacturer’s maintenance, and dead batteries. only included data covering one year. In
ELTs. We acknowledge that 14 CFR • Ameri-King noted that whether addition, we discovered that Ameri-
91.207(d) specifies compliance times for there were 64 or 73 reports, these King would receive failed ELTs from
inspecting ELTs that overlap with the numbers are relatively inconsequential operators, repair them, and reissue them
compliance times in this AD; however considering that there are over 14,500 with a new serial number, which affects
14 CFR 91.207(d) does not specify Ameri-King ELTs in the field. Ameri- quality and configuration control. Since
corrective actions if any discrepancies King added that utilizing the FAA’s there were noncompliance findings with
are found. In addition, 14 CFR 91.207(d) number of 73 failures would evidence a quality standards and manufacturer
only applies to aircraft on which ELTs failure rate of approximately one-half of processes, it is unknown how many
are required. This AD applies to all one percent (0.5%). Ameri-King stated future failures there may be due to
Ameri-King Corporation Model AK– that the number of reports confined to manufacturing factors at Ameri-King.
450–( ) and AK–451–( ) series ELTs, Ameri-King’s ELTs pales in comparison We acknowledge that the NPRM
regardless of installation. Consequently, to the FAA’s SDR database for all ELT should not have referred to Ameri-King
we have determined that this AD is manufacturers (799 SDRs), further for contact information for the service
necessary in order to address the bolstering Ameri-King’s quality control information. We have revised the
identified unsafe condition in all and performance accomplishments. ADDRESSES section of this final rule to
affected ELTs. This AD, in conjunction • Ameri-King also pointed out that specify contacting the FAA for service
with the emergency cease and desist the NPRM states that for service information. We have also specified
order, dated December 28, 2015, to information, affected persons should contacting the FAA for service
Ameri-King Corporation that terminated contact Ameri-King directly. However, information in paragraph (m)(3) of this
their technical standard order by the terms of the cease and desist AD.
authorization (TSOA) and parts order, dated December 28, 2015, the We have also revised paragraph (g) of
manufacturer approval (PMA), will FAA has prevented Ameri-King from this AD to clarify that operators are not
ensure nonfunctioning Ameri-King providing any assistance. Ameri-King required to get replacement batteries
Corporation ELTs are identified so that noted that, to the extent functional tests from Ameri-King Corporation. Ameri-
they may be eliminated from the U.S. reveal that the failures are due to dead King AK–450–( ) series ELTs use
fleet. batteries, the aircraft owner may not be alkaline batteries. Ameri-King AK–451–
We might also consider further able to purchase replacements. ( ) series ELTs use lithium batteries.
rulemaking to address other ELTs if we Although these batteries are ‘‘off the Regarding lithium battery replacement,
receive data that substantiate an unsafe shelf’’ generic batteries that are not of operators should note that replacement
condition exists for those ELTs. We Ameri-King’s design or manufacture, batteries should follow the battery
have not changed this final rule in this under the terms of the cease and desist standards requirements specified in
regard. order, Ameri-King cannot sell other TSO–C142a, Non-Rechargeable Lithium
manufacturers’ replacement batteries. Cells and Batteries. TSO–C142a states
Request To Amend Facts Regarding the • Ameri-King stated that FAA that non-rechargeable lithium cells and
Basis for the NPRM certification guidelines classify ELTs as batteries must meet minimum
Michael L. Dworkin, legal non-essential equipment, and that under performance standards in RTCA, Inc.,
representative for Ameri-King TSO–C126a and TSO–C126b, ELT document RTCA DO–227, ‘‘Minimum
Corporation (Ameri-King), submitted failures have been considered by the Operational Performance Standards for
comments intended to serve as Ameri- FAA to be ‘‘minor failures.’’ Lithium Batteries,’’ dated June 23, 1995
King’s public comments on the NPRM. In response to the commenter’s (‘‘DO–227’’). As specified in DO–227, if
Ameri-King requested that, if we go request to amend the facts regarding the any lithium battery replacement is
forward with the final rule, we amend basis for the NPRM, we note that the 73 necessary, all batteries should be
the facts regarding the basis for the ELT failures are from reports that replaced, i.e., there should not be a
NPRM. Ameri-King stated it objects to Ameri-King Quality Control (QC) mixture of new and old batteries
the FAA’s stated basis for the NPRM for provided to the FAA. Regarding the installed in an ELT. If operators have
the following reasons: failure rate, SDR source data comes from questions on lithium battery
• Ameri-King stated that the alleged operator reports and varies in replacement, they may contact the
73 reported ELT failures were never completion and information detail person identified under the FOR FURTHER
communicated to Ameri-King and provided. In addition, the SDR database INFORMATION CONTACT paragraph of this
Ameri-King has never been afforded the is not a comprehensive database. It is AD.
opportunity to investigate the cause(s) only one of the tools used to investigate Regarding Ameri-King’s comment
of such alleged failures. The commenter potential safety issues (e.g., Hotline about non-essential equipment and
questioned whether they were due to reports, National Transportation Safety minor failures, we acknowledge that
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES

design or production defects, or Board (NTSB) safety investigations, ELTs are considered non-essential
improper installation, maintenance, and etc.). There is no basis (i.e., data equipment for certain aircraft. However,
use. substantiation) for Ameri-King’s the majority of Ameri-King ELTs
• Ameri-King stated that the number assertion that Ameri-King’s failure rate (approximately 10,500 units) were sold
of allegedly reported failures does not is lower than other manufacturers. to operators of small airplanes,
comport with the FAA’s service As stated previously, Ameri-King’s certificated under 14 CFR part 23. In
difficulty report (SDR) database, which failure rate is significantly higher than assessing this issue, we followed
shows only 64 reports related to service at least one other manufacturer. The Section 4–12, ‘‘Other Structure—

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:10 Sep 18, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM 19SER1

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 19, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 43679

Occupant Protection,’’ of the Small requirements of the proposed AD differ operating rules under subchapters F and
Airplane Risk Analysis (SARA) from Ameri-King’s Installation & G of 14 CFR chapter I. Repairs must be
Handbook, dated September 30, 2010, Operations Manuals where it specifies done at an authorized repair station. For
which contains the following statement: corrective actions that would be clarity, we added a reference to 14 CFR
‘‘An ASE [aviation safety engineer] required in repairing or replacing 135.168 to specify the applicable
should consider corrective action for inoperative ELTs. regulation for rotorcraft that affects
any defect or failure in a design feature Ameri-King noted that corrective ELTs.
intended to improve survivability in action is already required under the We have also revised paragraph (h)(3)
accidents.’’ As noted in Section 1–2, applicable Federal Aviation Regulations of this AD to clarify that all
‘‘Use of Risk Methods,’’ of the SARA and established industry practices. discrepancies must be repaired using
handbook: Ameri-King considered that it should be approved maintenance practices and to
intuitive and axiomatic that any add a reference to 14 CFR 135.168. In
Also, airplane components intended to
provide occupant protection must function as personnel performing inspections and addition, we revised paragraph (g) of
intended in a survivable incident or accident. functional or operations tests would this AD to include a reference to 14 CFR
Using a probabilistic approach in these types take appropriate corrective actions to 135.168.
of situations is not appropriate for making ensure that any faults are corrected so
decisions on whether airworthiness action is the equipment meets and performs in Request To Require the Use of Specific
necessary. However, probabilistic methods accordance with specifications. As such, Equipment
can help us determine how quickly we Ameri-King concluded that there is
should take an airworthiness action and how
Michael L. Dworkin, legal
little, if any, need to mandate corrective representative for Ameri-King,
effective a proposed airworthiness action action by AD.
may be in reducing the risk associated with requested that we revise the
Ameri-King also noted that Ameri- requirements of the proposed AD to
an airworthiness concern.
King’s Installation & Operations include requiring the use of Ameri-King
Thus, we find that Ameri-King ELT Manuals were approved by the FAA in compatible equipment, as currently
failures must be addressed because conjunction with the FAA having issued specified in Ameri-King’s Installation &
nonfunctioning ELTs could delay or TSOAs and PMAs to Ameri-King, and at Operations Manuals, for the functional
impede the rescue of the flightcrew and that time, the FAA saw no need to
and operations tests. Ameri-King stated
passengers after an emergency landing. specify corrective actions in the event
that non-compatible equipment will
Request To Remove Requirement To that inspection or testing revealed any
damage the ELT and may produce
problems—most likely because
Repair Discrepancies erroneous test results.
corrective action is already required by
Three commenters requested that we the Federal Aviation Regulations and We agree with the commenter that
remove repair requirements from the standard industry practices. operators should use Ameri-King
proposed AD. One of these commenters, We disagree with the commenter’s compatible equipment as identified in
Neal Dillman, noted that the existing request to remove the requirement to Ameri-King’s Installation & Operations
manual does not specify that repairs be repair discrepancies. When we issue an Manuals. However, this AD requires
accomplished. The commenter AD, we must include actions that are operators to do actions in accordance
indicated that doing a repair in order to necessary to address the unsafe with section 3.4, ‘‘Periodic
maintain airworthiness is supported by condition. We acknowledge that the Maintenance,’’ of Ameri-King
existing advisory circulars, as well as existing regulations provide acceptable Corporation Document IM–450,
other FAA documentation. The requirements to ensure proper ‘‘INSTALLATION & OPERATION
commenter also noted that other ELT maintenance inspection and operation. MANUAL,’’ Revision A, dated October
manufacturers have documentation that However, we also typically include 18, 1995; or section 3.4, ‘‘Periodic
does not include repairs and, therefore, actions in ADs to ensure that operators Maintenance (Instructions for
requiring a repair for Ameri-King is do not overlook (unintentionally or Continued Airworthiness),’’ Ameri-King
superfluous. otherwise) the necessity of Corporation Document IM–451,
Another commenter, Richard Koehler, accomplishing on-condition repairs or ‘‘INSTALLATION AND OPERATION
questioned why the proposed AD replacements related to actions that are MANUAL,’’ Revision NC–4.1h, dated
specifies to repair discrepancies when necessary to address unsafe conditions. July 5, 2014. The steps in those sections
14 CFR 91.207(d) calls for an inspection We have not found a similar unsafe either do not specify test equipment that
of the ELT, but leaves the repair to the condition on ELTs from other must be used or specify a type of
mechanic with an inspection manufacturers. For the ELTs identified equipment ‘‘or equivalent’’ that must be
authorization. The commenter in this AD, repairs or replacements must used. Therefore, we have determined it
questioned why we have to add overt be done if discrepancies are found, is not necessary to revise this AD in this
words to repair discrepancies in the except as provided by paragraph (j) of regard.
proposed AD, but not in the regulations. this AD. We have not changed this AD Request To Allow Operators To
We infer the commenter is requesting in this regard. Determine if the ELT Is Functional
that we not include repair requirements. However, we have revised paragraphs
Another commenter, Michael L. (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD to clarify that Michael Dunn requested that we
Dworkin, legal representative for Ameri- either a repair or replacement may be allow operators to determine if the ELT
King, stated that to the extent that the done if any of the conditions identified is functional. The commenter noted his
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES

proposed AD requires accomplishing in those paragraphs is found. Paragraphs AK–451 ELT was inadvertently set off
the actions already specified in Ameri- (h)(1) and (h)(2) of the proposed AD had and it worked.
King’s Installation & Operations only specified that a replacement must We disagree with the commenter’s
Manuals, ‘‘Documents IM–450 and IM– be done. An ELT may be repaired using request. The service information
451,’’ which include yearly inspections approved maintenance practices and specified in this AD provides
and performance of functional and following 14 CFR 91.207(a), 14 CFR instructions for testing the ELT, and we
operations tests, no objection is offered. 91.207(f), and 14 CFR 135.168, as have determined this test is necessary to
However, Ameri-King stated that the applicable, and other applicable address the identified unsafe condition.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:10 Sep 18, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM 19SER1

43680 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 19, 2017 / Rules and Regulations

We have not changed this AD in this paragraph (h)(4) of the proposed AD in • Are consistent with the intent that
regard. the regulatory text of this AD. was proposed in the NPRM for
correcting the unsafe condition; and
Request To Revise Work-Hour Estimate Request To Correct the Number of
Replacement Batteries • Do not add any additional burden
Richard Koehler stated the number of upon the public than was already
Leon Rinke stated that paragraph proposed in the NPRM.
work-hours specified in the NPRM for (h)(4)(i) of the proposed AD specifies to
the inspection is high. The commenter We also determined that these
use four ‘‘D’’ cell batteries, but the AK– changes will not increase the economic
stated the inspection should be done in 450 ELT uses six ‘‘D’’ cell batteries, as
about 20 minutes, particularly when burden on any operator or increase the
specified in the maintenance manual. scope of this AD.
done in concert with an annual We infer the commenter is requesting
inspection. We infer the commenter is that we revise paragraph (h)(4)(i) of the Related Service Information Under 1
requesting that we revise the 2 work- proposed AD to correct the number of CFR Part 51
hours specified in the ‘‘Costs of replacement batteries.
Compliance’’ paragraph in the preamble We reviewed section 3.4, ‘‘Periodic
We agree with the commenter’s Maintenance,’’ Ameri-King Corporation
of the NPRM. statement for the reasons provided. Document IM–450, ‘‘INSTALLATION &
We disagree with the request to revise However, we have not revised this AD OPERATION MANUAL,’’ Revision A,
the work hours. The specified number because paragraph (h)(4)(i) of the dated October 18, 1995; and section 3.4,
of work hours is only an estimate. The proposed AD is not included in the ‘‘Periodic Maintenance (Instructions for
estimate does not assume operators will regulatory text of this AD. Continued Airworthiness),’’ Ameri-King
do the required inspection concurrently Explanation of Change to Table 1 to Corporation Document IM–451,
with other actions that are not mandated Paragraph (c) of This AD ‘‘INSTALLATION AND OPERATION
by this AD. Operators may accomplish MANUAL,’’ Revision NC–4.1h, dated
required actions concurrently with other We have confirmed with Ameri-King
that Bell Helicopter Textron Canada July 5, 2014. The service information
actions, provided the AD actions are describes procedures for inspections of
done within the specified compliance Limited rotorcraft did not receive
Ameri-King ELTs. Therefore, we have the ELT for discrepancies; checks, tests,
time. We have not revised this AD in and verifications to ensure the ELT is
this regard. removed Bell Helicopter Textron
Canada Limited rotorcraft from table 1 functioning; and corrective actions.
Explanation of Removal of Paragraph to paragraph (c) of this AD, which lists Corrective actions include replacing
(h)(4) of the Proposed AD known aircraft that might have the affected parts. These documents are
affected ELTs installed. However, if an distinct because they apply to different
Paragraph (h)(4) of the proposed AD affected ELT is installed on any Bell Ameri-King Corporation ELT models.
is an exception to the service Helicopter Textron Canada Limited This service information is reasonably
information and provides specific rotorcraft, this AD applies to that available because the interested parties
instructions to replace non-functioning rotorcraft. have access to it through their normal
batteries. We have determined that this course of business or by the means
AD does not need to specify those Conclusion identified in the ADDRESSES section.
instructions as an exception to We reviewed the relevant data,
Costs of Compliance
paragraph (g) of this AD. Replacing considered the comments received, and
affected batteries as required by determined that air safety and the We estimate that this AD affects
paragraph (g) of this AD addresses the public interest require adopting this AD 14,500 ELTs installed on various aircraft
identified unsafe condition for ELTs with the changes described previously of U.S. registry.
with non-functioning batteries. and minor editorial changes. We have We estimate the following costs to
Therefore we have not included determined that these minor changes: comply with this AD:
ESTIMATED COSTS
Cost per Cost on U.S.
Action Labor cost product operators

Inspections, checks, tests, and 2 work-hours × $85 per hour = $170 per inspection cycle ............ $2,465,000 per inspection cycle.
verifications. $170 per inspection cycle.

We estimate the following costs to do inspections, checks, tests, and determining the number of aircraft that
any necessary replacements that would verifications. We have no way of might need these replacements.
be required based on the results of the

ON-CONDITION COSTS
Cost per
Action Labor cost Parts cost
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES

product

Replacement ................................... 4 work-hours × $85 per hour = Between $600 and $1,500 ........... Between $940 and $1,840.
$340.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:10 Sep 18, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM 19SER1

43682 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 19, 2017 / Rules and Regulations

applicable checks, tests, and verifications in step 3.4.10 of section 3.4, ‘‘Periodic of the local flight standards district office/
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 12 Maintenance (Instructions for Continued certificate holding district office.
months until the terminating action specified Airworthiness),’’ of Ameri-King Corporation
in paragraph (j) of this AD is done. Operators (l) Related Information
Document IM–451, ‘‘INSTALLATION AND
are not required to get replacement batteries OPERATION MANUAL,’’ Revision NC–4.1h, For more information about this AD,
from Ameri-King Corporation. dated July 5, 2014. contact Gilbert Ceballos, Aerospace Engineer,
(3) If, during any action required by Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–130L,
(h) Additional Corrective Actions FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
paragraph (g) of this AD, any of the
(1) If, during any action required by discrepancies specified in paragraphs Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard,
paragraph (g) of this AD, any ELT fails the (h)(3)(i) through (h)(3)(vi) of this AD are Lakewood, CA 90712–4137; phone: 562–627–
functional test specified in step 6., the found, repair all discrepancies using 5372; fax: 562–627–5210; email:
verification specified in step 7., or the approved maintenance practices and gilbert.ceballos@faa.gov.
activation check specified in step 8., of following 14 CFR 91.207(a), 14 CFR 91.207(f),
section 3.4, ‘‘Periodic Maintenance,’’ of (m) Material Incorporated by Reference
and 14 CFR 135.168, as applicable, and other
Ameri-King Corporation Document IM–450, (1) The Director of the Federal Register
applicable operating rules.
‘‘INSTALLATION & OPERATION approved the incorporation by reference
(i) Any unsecured fastener or mechanical
MANUAL,’’ Revision A, dated October 18, (IBR) of the service information listed in this
assembly.
1995, do the actions specified in paragraph paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
(h)(1)(i) or (h)(1)(ii) of this AD. (ii) Any cuts or abrasions on the coaxial
cable outer jacket. part 51.
(i) Replace the affected Model AK–450–( ) (2) You must use this service information
ELT with a serviceable FAA-approved ELT as (iii) Any corrosion on the ‘‘BNC’’
connectors and mating plug on the antenna as applicable to do the actions required by
specified in paragraph (i) of this AD this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(‘‘Definition of Serviceable FAA-approved and the ELT main unit.
(iv) Any wear or abrasion on the modular (i) Section 3.4, ‘‘Periodic Maintenance,’’
ELT’’), following 14 CFR 91.207(a), 14 CFR Ameri-King Corporation Document IM–450,
91.207(f), and 14 CFR 135.168, as applicable, cable outer jacket.
(v) Any corrosion on the jack and plug of ‘‘INSTALLATION & OPERATION
and other applicable operating rules. MANUAL,’’ Revision A, dated October 18,
(ii) Repair the ELT using approved the modular connecting cable.
(vi) Any corrosion on the battery 1995.
maintenance practices and following 14 CFR (ii) Section 3.4, ‘‘Periodic Maintenance
91.207(a), 14 CFR 91.207(f), and 14 CFR compartment.
(Instructions for Continued Airworthiness),’’
135.168, as applicable, and other applicable (i) Definition of Serviceable FAA-Approved Ameri-King Corporation Document IM–451,
operating rules. ELT ‘‘INSTALLATION AND OPERATION
(2) If, during any action required by
For the purposes of this AD, a serviceable MANUAL,’’ Revision NC–4.1h, dated July 5,
paragraph (g) of this AD, any ELT fails any
FAA-approved ELT is any FAA-approved 2014.
of the actions specified in paragraphs (h)(2)(i)
ELT other than a Model AK–450–( ) and AK– (3) For service information identified in
through (h)(2)(v) of this AD: Replace the
451–( ) series ELT produced by Ameri-King this AD, contact Gilbert Ceballos, Aerospace
affected Model AK–451–( ) ELT with a
Corporation. Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch,
serviceable FAA-approved ELT as specified
ANM–130L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft
in paragraph (i) of this AD (‘‘Definition of (j) Optional Terminating Action
Serviceable FAA-approved ELT’’), following Certification Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount
14 CFR 91.207(a), 14 CFR 91.207(f), and 14 Doing the applicable action specified in Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712–4137;
CFR 135.168, as applicable, and other paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD terminates phone: 562–627–5372; fax: 562–627–5210;
applicable operating rules; or repair the ELT the actions required by paragraphs (g) and (h) email: gilbert.ceballos@faa.gov.
using approved maintenance practices and of this AD. (4) You may view this service information
following 14 CFR 91.207(a), 14 CFR 91.207(f), (1) For aircraft required by operating at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
and 14 CFR 135.168, as applicable, and other regulations to be equipped with an ELT: 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
applicable operating rules. Replace the ELT with a serviceable FAA- information on the availability of this
(i) The operational test specified in step approved ELT as specified in paragraph (i) of material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.
3.4.6 of section 3.4, ‘‘Periodic Maintenance this AD (‘‘Definition of Serviceable FAA- (5) You may view this service information
(Instructions for Continued Airworthiness),’’ approved ELT’’). that is incorporated by reference at the
of Ameri-King Corporation Document IM– (2) For aircraft not required by operating National Archives and Records
451, ‘‘INSTALLATION AND OPERATION regulations to be equipped with an ELT: Administration (NARA). For information on
MANUAL,’’ Revision NC–4.1h, dated July 5, Replace the ELT with a serviceable FAA- the availability of this material at NARA, call
2014. approved ELT as specified in paragraph (i) of 202–741–6030, or go to: http://
(ii) Any check specified in step 3.4.7 of this AD (‘‘Definition of Serviceable FAA- www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-
section 3.4, ‘‘Periodic Maintenance approved ELT’’). The ELT may be removed locations.html.
(Instructions for Continued Airworthiness),’’ as an alternative to the ELT replacement; if Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 19,
of Ameri-King Corporation Document IM– an ELT is re-installed, it must be a 2017.
451, ‘‘INSTALLATION AND OPERATION serviceable ELT as specified in paragraph (i)
of this AD (‘‘Definition of Serviceable FAA- Michael Kaszycki,
MANUAL,’’ Revision NC–4.1h, dated July 5,
2014. approved ELT’’). Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
(iii) The digital message verification Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance
specified in step 3.4.8 of section 3.4, [FR Doc. 2017–16048 Filed 9–18–17; 8:45 am]
(AMOCs)
‘‘Periodic Maintenance (Instructions for BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
Continued Airworthiness),’’ of Ameri-King (1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft
Corporation Document IM–451, Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to
‘‘INSTALLATION AND OPERATION approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
MANUAL,’’ Revision NC–4.1h, dated July 5, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
2014. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES

(iv) The registration verification specified request to your principal inspector or local 16 CFR Part 259
in step 3.4.9 of section 3.4, ‘‘Periodic Flight Standards District Office, as
Maintenance (Instructions for Continued appropriate. If sending information directly Guide Concerning Fuel Economy
Airworthiness),’’ of Ameri-King Corporation to the manager of the ACO, send it to the Advertising for New Automobiles
Document IM–451, ‘‘INSTALLATION AND attention of the person identified in
OPERATION MANUAL,’’ Revision NC–4.1h, paragraph (l) of this AD. AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.
dated July 5, 2014. (2) Before using any approved AMOC, ACTION: Final rule; adoption of revised
(v) The verification of the ELT and global notify your appropriate principal inspector, guides.
positioning system (GPS) interface specified or lacking a principal inspector, the manager

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:10 Sep 18, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19SER1.SGM 19SER1

Document Created: 2018-10-24 14:17:33
Document Modified: 2018-10-24 14:17:33

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Rules and Regulations
Action		Final rule.
Dates		This AD is effective October 24, 2017.
Contact		Gilbert Ceballos, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130L, FAA, Los Angeles ACO, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-5372; fax: 562-627-5210; email: [email protected]
FR Citation		82 FR 43677
RIN Number		2120-AA64
CFR Associated		Air Transportation; Aircraft; Aviation Safety; Incorporation by Reference and Safety

82 FR 43677 - Airworthiness Directives; Ameri-King Corporation Emergency Locator Transmitters

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONFederal Aviation Administration

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 180 (September 19, 2017)

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration