Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) Airplanes, 16221-16224 [E8-6299]

Download as PDF 16221 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 60 / Thursday, March 27, 2008 / Proposed Rules and Model 328–300 airplanes, having S/Ns 3102, 3105, 3108, 3111, 3114, 3116, 3118, and 3120 through 3224; certificated in any category. Subject (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 11: Placards and Markings; and Code 52: Doors. FAA AD Differences Reason (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) states: At least one incident has occurred where, immediately after take-off, the passenger door of a Dornier 328 completely opened. The flight crew reportedly had no cockpit indication or audible chime prior to this event. The aircraft returned to the departure airfield and made an uneventful emergency landing. Substantial damage to the door, handrails, door hinge arms and fuselage skin were found. The subsequent investigation could not find any deficiency in the design of the main cabin door locking mechanism. In addition, no technical failure could be determined that precipitated the event. The flight data recorder showed that the door was closed and locked before take-off and opened shortly afterward. Although final proof could not be obtained, the most likely way in which the door opened was that the door handle was inadvertently operated during the take-off run. In response to the incident, AvCraft (the TC (type certificate) holder at the time) developed a placard set to warn the occupants against touching the door handle, as well as a structural modification of the passenger door hinge supports to make certain that the door does not separate from the aircraft when inadvertently opened during flight, allowing a safe descent and landing. Although the event described above did not prevent the flight crew from landing the aircraft safely, the condition of the aircraft immediately after the opening of the door has been determined to have been unsafe. [T]his Airworthiness Directive (AD) aims to prevent further incidents of inadvertent opening and possible detachment of a passenger door inflight, likely resulting in damage to airframe and systems and, under less favorable circumstances, loss of control of the aircraft. * * * * and support struts of the passenger doors, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of AvCraft Dornier Service Bulletin SB–328–52–460 (for Model 328–100 airplanes) or SB–328J–52–213, (for Model 328–300 airplanes), both dated February 4, 2005, as applicable. * Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/ or service information as follows: No differences. Other FAA AD Provisions (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD: (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–2125; fax (425) 227–1149. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority (or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service. (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056. Related Information (h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) Airworthiness Directive 2007–0199, dated July 25, 2007 (corrected July 26, 2007), and the service bulletins described in Table 1 of this AD, for related information. pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES Corrective actions include installing warning placards on the doors, and doing a modification that includes replacing the hinge supports and support struts of the passenger doors with new, improved hinge supports and support struts. Actions and Compliance (f) Unless already done, do the following actions. (1) Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, install warning placards on the inside of the passenger door and service doors, in accordance with AvCraft Dornier Service Bulletin SB–328–11–454 (for Model 328–100 airplanes) or SB–328J–11–209 (for Model 328–300 airplanes), both dated May 3, 2004, as applicable. (2) Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, modify the hinge supports VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:51 Mar 26, 2008 Jkt 214001 TABLE 1.—SERVICE INFORMATION AvCraft Dornier Service Bulletin SB–328–11–454 ........... SB–328–52–460 ........... SB–328J–11–209 .......... SB–328J–52–213 .......... Dated May 3, 2004. February 4, 2005. May 3, 2004. February 4, 2005. Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 20, 2008. Dionne Palermo, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E8–6296 Filed 3–26–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2008–0363; Directorate Identifier 2008–NM–020–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model CL–600–2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). AGENCY: SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the products listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as: * * * * * This assessment showed that the electrical harness of the Fuel Quantity Gauging System (FQGS) is installed in the same routing as the 28 Volts AC, 28 Volts DC, and 115 Volts AC electrical harnesses. A chafing condition between these electrical harnesses and the FQGS harness could increase the surface temperatures of fuel quantity probes and high level sensors inside the fuel tank, resulting in potential ignition source[s] and consequent fuel tank explosion. * * * * * The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the unsafe condition described in the MCAI. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 28, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Fax: (202) 493–2251. • Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–40, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https:// E:\FR\FM\27MRP1.SGM 27MRP1 16222 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 60 / Thursday, March 27, 2008 / Proposed Rules www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Fiesel, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE– 171, FAA, New York Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; telephone (516) 228–7304; fax (516) 794–5531. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2008–0363; Directorate Identifier 2008–NM–020–AD’’ at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD based on those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD. pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES Discussion Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF–2007–36, dated December 21, 2007 (referred to after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states: Bombardier Aerospace has completed a system safety review of the CL–600–2B19 aircraft fuel system against new fuel tank safety standards, introduced in Chapter 525 of the Airworthiness Manual through Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) 2002–043. The identified non-compliances were assessed using Transport Canada Policy Letter No. 525–001, to determine if mandatory corrective action is required. This assessment showed that the electrical harness of the Fuel Quantity Gauging System (FQGS) is installed in the same routing as the 28 Volts AC, 28 Volts DC, and 115 Volts AC electrical harnesses. A chafing condition between these electrical harnesses and the VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:51 Mar 26, 2008 Jkt 214001 FQGS harness could increase the surface temperatures of fuel quantity probes and high level sensors inside the fuel tank, resulting in potential ignition source[s] and consequent fuel tank explosion. To correct the unsafe condition, this directive mandates the modification of FQGS electrical harness routing. We have determined that the actions identified in this AD are necessary to reduce the potential of ignition sources inside fuel tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket. The FAA has examined the underlying safety issues involved in fuel tank explosions on several large transport airplanes, including the adequacy of existing regulations, the service history of airplanes subject to those regulations, and existing maintenance practices for fuel tank systems. As a result of those findings, we issued a regulation titled ‘‘Transport Airplane Fuel Tank System Design Review, Flammability Reduction and Maintenance and Inspection Requirements’’ (66 FR 23086, May 7, 2001). In addition to new airworthiness standards for transport airplanes and new maintenance requirements, this rule included Special Federal Aviation Regulation Number 88 (‘‘SFAR 88,’’ Amendment 21–78, and subsequent Amendments 21–82 and 21–83). Among other actions, SFAR 88 requires certain type design (i.e., type certificate (TC) and supplemental type certificate (STC)) holders to substantiate that their fuel tank systems can prevent ignition sources in the fuel tanks. This requirement applies to type design holders for large turbine-powered transport airplanes and for subsequent modifications to those airplanes. It requires them to perform design reviews and to develop design changes and maintenance procedures if their designs do not meet the new fuel tank safety standards. As explained in the preamble to the rule, we intended to adopt airworthiness directives to mandate any changes found necessary to address unsafe conditions identified as a result of these reviews. In evaluating these design reviews, we have established four criteria intended to define the unsafe conditions associated with fuel tank systems that require corrective actions. The percentage of operating time during which fuel tanks are exposed to flammable conditions is one of these criteria. The other three criteria address the failure types under evaluation: single failures, single failures in combination with a latent condition(s), and in-service failure experience. For all four criteria, the evaluations included consideration of previous actions taken that may mitigate the need for further action. Relevant Service Information Bombardier has issued Service Bulletin 601R–28–059, Revision E, dated October 29, 2007. The actions described in this service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI. PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 FAA’s Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design. Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information provided in the MCAI and related service information. We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are highlighted in a NOTE within the proposed AD. Costs of Compliance Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD would affect about 709 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 83 work-hours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Required parts would cost about $15,552 per product. Where the service information lists required parts costs that are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these costs. As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties, E:\FR\FM\27MRP1.SGM 27MRP1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 60 / Thursday, March 27, 2008 / Proposed Rules some parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $15,734,128, or $22,192 per product. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA’s authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs’’ describes in more detail the scope of the Agency’s authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.’’ Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation: 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 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. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new AD: Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly Canadair): Docket No. FAA–2008–0363; Directorate Identifier 2008–NM–020–AD. Comments Due Date (a) We must receive comments by April 28, 2008. Affected ADs (b) None. Applicability (c) This AD applies to Bombardier Model CL–600–2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes; certificated in any category; serial 16223 numbers 7003 through 7067 inclusive, and 7069 through 7982 inclusive. Subject (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28: Fuel. Reason (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) states: Bombardier Aerospace has completed a system safety review of the CL–600–2B19 aircraft fuel system against new fuel tank safety standards, introduced in Chapter 525 of the Airworthiness Manual through Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) 2002–043. The identified non-compliances were assessed using Transport Canada Policy Letter No. 525–001, to determine if mandatory corrective action is required. This assessment showed that the electrical harness of the Fuel Quantity Gauging System (FQGS) is installed in the same routing as the 28 Volts AC, 28 Volts DC, and 115 Volts AC electrical harnesses. A chafing condition between these electrical harnesses and the FQGS harness could increase the surface temperatures of fuel quantity probes and high level sensors inside the fuel tank, resulting in potential ignition source[s] and consequent fuel tank explosion. To correct the unsafe condition, this directive mandates the modification of FQGS electrical harness routing. Actions and Compliance (f) Within 10,000 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, unless already done, do the following actions. (1) Modify the FQGS harness routing according to the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R–28–059, Revision E, dated October 29, 2007. (2) Actions done before the effective date of this AD in accordance with the Bombardier Service Information specified in Table 1 of this AD are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding requirements of this AD. TABLE 1.—SERVICE INFORMATION Service Bulletin No. Revision Date 601R–28–059 ........................................................................................................................................... 601R–28–059 ........................................................................................................................................... 601R–28–059 ........................................................................................................................................... Original .................. A ............................ B ............................ 601R–28–059 ........................................................................................................................................... 601R–28–059 ........................................................................................................................................... C ........................... D ........................... October 19, 2004. July 28, 2005. November 17, 2005. March 8, 2007. May 10, 2007. FAA AD Differences pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/ or service information as follows: No differences. Other FAA AD Provisions (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD: (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:51 Mar 26, 2008 Jkt 214001 authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Richard Fiesel, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE–171, FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; telephone (516) 228–7304; fax (516) 794–5531. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority (or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service. E:\FR\FM\27MRP1.SGM 27MRP1 16224 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 60 / Thursday, March 27, 2008 / Proposed Rules (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056. Related Information (h) Refer to MCAI Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF–2007–36, dated December 21, 2007, and Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R– 28–059, Revision E, dated October 29, 2007, for related information. Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 18, 2008. Dionne Palermo, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E8–6299 Filed 3–26–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 15 CFR Part 922 waste from vessels 300 gross registered tons (GRT) or more with sufficient holding tank capacity to hold treated sewage while within the sanctuary and limit the exception for graywater discharges to vessels less than 300 GRT, and vessels 300 GRT or more without sufficient holding tank capacity to hold graywater while within the MBNMS. DATES: Comments will be considered if received by May 9, 2008. ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent by mail to: Sean Morton, JMPR Management Plan Coordinator, NOAA’s Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, 1305 East-West Highway, N/ORM–6, Silver Spring, MD 20910, by e-mail to: jointplancomments@noaa.gov, or by fax to (301) 713–0404. Copies of the DMP/ DEIS are available from the same address and on the Web at: https:// www.sanctuaries.nos.noaa.gov/ jointplan. Comments can also be submitted to the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: [Docket No. 080302355–8413–01] RINs 0648 AT14, 0648 AT15, 0648 AT16 Office of National Marine Sanctuaries Regulations Sean Morton, NOAA Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, 301–713–7264 or sean.morton@noaa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS), National Ocean Service (NOS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce (DOC). ACTION: Proposed rule. pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES AGENCY: SUMMARY: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) previously published proposed revised management plans, revised Designation Documents, and revised regulations for the Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuary (CBNMS), Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary (GFNMS), and Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS). The currently pending proposed regulations would revise and provide greater clarity to existing regulations. After reviewing public comments on the proposed rules, including a request from the California State Water Resources Control Board to prohibit discharges from certain vessels in national marine sanctuaries offshore of California, and further analyzing vessel discharge issues, NOAA now proposes additional discharge regulations for the CBNMS, GFNMS, and MBNMS consistent with the request of the California State Water Resources Control Board. This proposed rule would prohibit discharge of treated VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:51 Mar 26, 2008 Jkt 214001 Pursuant to section 304(e) of the National Marine Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. 1434 et seq.) (NMSA), the ONMS conducted a review of the management plans for the CBNMS, GFNMS, and MBNMS. The review resulted in proposed new management plans for the sanctuaries, some proposed revisions to existing regulations, some proposed new regulations, and some proposed changes to the designation documents. Certain discharges or deposits of material or other matter from within or into the sanctuaries from vessels in general and certain discharges or deposits from cruise ships were among regulations proposed for modification or addition. For the CBNMS, proposed new regulations (71 FR 59039, October 6, 2006) included prohibitions on: • Discharging or depositing from within or into the Sanctuary any material or other matter from a cruise ship, except vessel engine and generator cooling water. For the CBNMS, proposed revisions to existing regulations (71 FR 59039, October 6, 2006) would: • Clarify that discharges/deposits allowed from marine sanitation devices apply only to Type I and Type II marine sanitation devices and all vessel operators are required to lock all marine sanitation devices in a manner that prevents discharge of untreated sewage; PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 • Remove an exception for discharging or depositing food waste resulting from meals on board vessels; and • Revise language for discharges and deposits from beyond the boundary of the sanctuary that subsequently enter the Sanctuary and injure Sanctuary resources. For the GFNMS, proposed new regulations (71 FR 59338, October 6, 2006) included prohibitions on: • Discharging or depositing from within or into the sanctuary any material or other matter from a cruise ship, except vessel engine and generator cooling water; and • Discharging or depositing, from beyond the boundary of the sanctuary, any material or other matter that subsequently enters the sanctuary and injures a sanctuary resource or quality. For the GFNMS, proposed revisions to existing regulations (71 FR 59338, October 6, 2006) would: • Clarify that discharges/deposits allowed from marine sanitation devices apply only to Type I and Type II marine sanitation devices, and that the vessel operators are required to lock all marine sanitation devices in a manner that prevents discharge of untreated sewage; and • Remove exceptions to the discharging or depositing prohibition that pertain to discharge of municipal sewage. For the MBNMS, proposed new regulations (71 FR 59050, October 6, 2006) included prohibitions on: • Discharging or depositing any material or other matter from a cruise ship other than vessel engine cooling water, vessel generator cooling water, or anchor wash. For the MBNMS, proposed revisions to existing regulations (71 FR 59050, October 6, 2006) would: • Clarify that discharges/deposits allowed from marine sanitation devices apply only to Type I and Type II marine sanitation devices and that vessel operators are required to lock all marine sanitation devices in a manner that prevents discharge of untreated sewage; • Clarify that the prohibition against discharges/deposits applies to discharges/deposits both within and into the sanctuary; • Clarify that discharges/deposits resulting from cruise ship generator cooling water, anchor wash, and clean bilge water (defined as not containing detectable levels of harmful matter) are excepted from the cruise ship discharge/ deposit prohibition. NOAA published these proposals in 2006 in the CBNMS, GFNMS, and MBNMS Draft Management Plans E:\FR\FM\27MRP1.SGM 27MRP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 60 (Thursday, March 27, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16221-16224]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-6299]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0363; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-020-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional 
Jet Series 100 & 440) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the 
products listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory 
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation 
authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe 
condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe 
condition as:

* * * * *
    This assessment showed that the electrical harness of the Fuel 
Quantity Gauging System (FQGS) is installed in the same routing as 
the 28 Volts AC, 28 Volts DC, and 115 Volts AC electrical harnesses. 
A chafing condition between these electrical harnesses and the FQGS 
harness could increase the surface temperatures of fuel quantity 
probes and high level sensors inside the fuel tank, resulting in 
potential ignition source[s] and consequent fuel tank explosion.
* * * * *
The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the 
unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 28, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax: (202) 493-2251.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://

[[Page 16222]]

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office 
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory 
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street 
address for the Docket Operations office (telephone (800) 647-5527) is 
in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket 
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Fiesel, Aerospace Engineer, 
Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft 
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New 
York 11590; telephone (516) 228-7304; fax (516) 794-5531.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or 
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address 
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2008-0363; 
Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-020-AD'' at the beginning of your 
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We 
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend 
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We 
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we 
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation 
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-
2007-36, dated December 21, 2007 (referred to after this as ``the 
MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The 
MCAI states:

    Bombardier Aerospace has completed a system safety review of the 
CL-600-2B19 aircraft fuel system against new fuel tank safety 
standards, introduced in Chapter 525 of the Airworthiness Manual 
through Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) 2002-043. The identified 
non-compliances were assessed using Transport Canada Policy Letter 
No. 525-001, to determine if mandatory corrective action is 
required.
    This assessment showed that the electrical harness of the Fuel 
Quantity Gauging System (FQGS) is installed in the same routing as 
the 28 Volts AC, 28 Volts DC, and 115 Volts AC electrical harnesses. 
A chafing condition between these electrical harnesses and the FQGS 
harness could increase the surface temperatures of fuel quantity 
probes and high level sensors inside the fuel tank, resulting in 
potential ignition source[s] and consequent fuel tank explosion.
    To correct the unsafe condition, this directive mandates the 
modification of FQGS electrical harness routing.

You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD 
docket.
    The FAA has examined the underlying safety issues involved in fuel 
tank explosions on several large transport airplanes, including the 
adequacy of existing regulations, the service history of airplanes 
subject to those regulations, and existing maintenance practices for 
fuel tank systems. As a result of those findings, we issued a 
regulation titled ``Transport Airplane Fuel Tank System Design Review, 
Flammability Reduction and Maintenance and Inspection Requirements'' 
(66 FR 23086, May 7, 2001). In addition to new airworthiness standards 
for transport airplanes and new maintenance requirements, this rule 
included Special Federal Aviation Regulation Number 88 (``SFAR 88,'' 
Amendment 21-78, and subsequent Amendments 21-82 and 21-83).
    Among other actions, SFAR 88 requires certain type design (i.e., 
type certificate (TC) and supplemental type certificate (STC)) holders 
to substantiate that their fuel tank systems can prevent ignition 
sources in the fuel tanks. This requirement applies to type design 
holders for large turbine-powered transport airplanes and for 
subsequent modifications to those airplanes. It requires them to 
perform design reviews and to develop design changes and maintenance 
procedures if their designs do not meet the new fuel tank safety 
standards. As explained in the preamble to the rule, we intended to 
adopt airworthiness directives to mandate any changes found necessary 
to address unsafe conditions identified as a result of these reviews.
    In evaluating these design reviews, we have established four 
criteria intended to define the unsafe conditions associated with fuel 
tank systems that require corrective actions. The percentage of 
operating time during which fuel tanks are exposed to flammable 
conditions is one of these criteria. The other three criteria address 
the failure types under evaluation: single failures, single failures in 
combination with a latent condition(s), and in-service failure 
experience. For all four criteria, the evaluations included 
consideration of previous actions taken that may mitigate the need for 
further action.
    We have determined that the actions identified in this AD are 
necessary to reduce the potential of ignition sources inside fuel 
tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result 
in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    Bombardier has issued Service Bulletin 601R-28-059, Revision E, 
dated October 29, 2007. The actions described in this service 
information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in 
the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another 
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant 
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have 
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service 
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we 
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition 
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same 
type design.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in 
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it 
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the 
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these 
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information 
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those 
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are 
highlighted in a NOTE within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD 
would affect about 709 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that 
it would take about 83 work-hours per product to comply with the basic 
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per 
work-hour. Required parts would cost about $15,552 per product. Where 
the service information lists required parts costs that are covered 
under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these 
costs. As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties,

[[Page 16223]]

some parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these 
figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to 
be $15,734,128, or $22,192 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to 
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the 
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs'' 
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in 
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General 
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with 
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing 
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator 
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within 
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition 
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this 
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not 
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship 
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed 
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the 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.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to 
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

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. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly Canadair): Docket No. FAA-2008-0363; 
Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-020-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by April 28, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Bombardier Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional 
Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes; certificated in any category; 
serial numbers 7003 through 7067 inclusive, and 7069 through 7982 
inclusive.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28: Fuel.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) 
states:
    Bombardier Aerospace has completed a system safety review of the 
CL-600-2B19 aircraft fuel system against new fuel tank safety 
standards, introduced in Chapter 525 of the Airworthiness Manual 
through Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) 2002-043. The identified 
non-compliances were assessed using Transport Canada Policy Letter 
No. 525-001, to determine if mandatory corrective action is 
required.
    This assessment showed that the electrical harness of the Fuel 
Quantity Gauging System (FQGS) is installed in the same routing as 
the 28 Volts AC, 28 Volts DC, and 115 Volts AC electrical harnesses. 
A chafing condition between these electrical harnesses and the FQGS 
harness could increase the surface temperatures of fuel quantity 
probes and high level sensors inside the fuel tank, resulting in 
potential ignition source[s] and consequent fuel tank explosion.
    To correct the unsafe condition, this directive mandates the 
modification of FQGS electrical harness routing.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Within 10,000 flight hours after the effective date of this 
AD, unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) Modify the FQGS harness routing according to the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-28-
059, Revision E, dated October 29, 2007.
    (2) Actions done before the effective date of this AD in 
accordance with the Bombardier Service Information specified in 
Table 1 of this AD are acceptable for compliance with the 
corresponding requirements of this AD.

                                          Table 1.--Service Information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Service Bulletin No.                         Revision                              Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
601R-28-059.............................  Original..........................  October 19, 2004.
601R-28-059.............................  A.................................  July 28, 2005.
601R-28-059.............................  B.................................  November 17, 2005.
601R-28-059.............................  C.................................  March 8, 2007.
601R-28-059.............................  D.................................  May 10, 2007.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA AD Differences

    Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information 
as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New 
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to 
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found 
in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Richard Fiesel, Aerospace 
Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York 
ACO, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; 
telephone (516) 228-7304; fax (516) 794-5531. Before using any 
approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your 
appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards 
District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain 
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these 
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered 
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority 
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product 
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

[[Page 16224]]

    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in 
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information 
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2007-36, 
dated December 21, 2007, and Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-28-
059, Revision E, dated October 29, 2007, for related information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 18, 2008.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
 [FR Doc. E8-6299 Filed 3-26-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.