Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model DHC-8-100 and DHC-8-200 Series Airplanes, and Model DHC-8-301, -311, and -315 Airplanes, 40778-40781 [E9-19420]

Download as PDF 40778 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 155 / Thursday, August 13, 2009 / Proposed Rules 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: Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2009–0713; Directorate Identifier 2007–NM–303–AD. Comments Due Date (a) We must receive comments by September 14, 2009. Affected ADs (b) None. Applicability (c) This AD applies to all Airbus Model A318 series airplanes; certificated in any category. Subject (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27: Flight Controls. Reason (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) states: ‘‘Some operators have reported airframe vibration under specific flight conditions including gusts. ‘‘Investigations have revealed that under such conditions, vibrations may occur when the hinge moment of the elevator is close to zero, associated to elevator free-play.’’ * * * * * sroberts on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS The unsafe condition is excessive vibration of the elevators, which could result in reduced structural integrity and reduced controllability of the airplane. The corrective action includes inspecting the elevators for excessive freeplay, and repairing the elevator or servo controls, if necessary. Actions and Compliance (f) Unless already done, do the following actions. (1) At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and (f)(1)(ii) of this AD, inspect the elevators for excessive freeplay, using a load application tool and a spring scale assembly, in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (or its delegated agent). Repeat the inspection at intervals not to exceed 20 months. Note 1: Guidance on the inspection procedures can be found in Task 27–34–00– VerDate Nov<24>2008 18:45 Aug 12, 2009 Jkt 217001 200–001 of the A318/A319/A320/A321 Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM). (i) Within 20 months since the date of issuance of the original French, German, or EASA airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original French, German, or EASA export certificate of airworthiness, or within 3 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later. (ii) Within 20 months since the last inspection of the elevators for excessive freeplay performed in accordance with Task 27–34–00–200–001 of the Airbus A320 Airplane Maintenance Manual. (2) If any inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD indicates that the freeplay in the elevator exceeds 7 millimeters, before further flight, repair the elevator or servo controls in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the EASA (or its delegated agent). (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 EASA Airworthiness Directive 2007–0163, dated June 11, 2007, for related information. Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 3, 2009. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E9–19419 Filed 8–12–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P FAA AD Differences Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information as follows: (1) The EASA AD applies to Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes, but the FAA AD applies only to Airbus Model A318 series airplanes. The actions required by the EASA AD for Airbus Model A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes are addressed in FAA AD 2001–16– 09, amendment 39–12377, and FAA AD 2005–22–10 R1, amendment 39–14354. (2) This FAA AD does not require modification of the elevator neutral setting as specified in paragraph 2. of the EASA AD because this modification is already part of the FAA-approved type design for Airbus Model A318 series airplanes. (3) This FAA AD does not require a detailed inspection to determine the position of each tail cone triangle as specified in paragraph 3. of the EASA AD because that action was already accomplished on all Airbus Model A318 series airplanes during production. Other FAA AD Provisions (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD: (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Branch, 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: Tim Dulin, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–2141; fax (425) 227–1149. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office. (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 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2009–0712; Directorate Identifier 2007–NM–152–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model DHC–8–100 and DHC–8–200 Series Airplanes, and Model DHC–8– 301, –311, and –315 Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT) ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Bombardier Model DHC–8–100 and DHC–8–200 series airplanes, and DHC–8–301, –311, and –315 airplanes. This proposed AD would require implementing a corrosion prevention and control program (CPCP) either by accomplishing specific tasks or by revising the maintenance inspection program to include a CPCP. This proposed AD results from the determination that, as airplanes age, they are more likely to exhibit indications of corrosion. We are proposing this AD to prevent structural failure of the airplane due to corrosion. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 14, 2009. 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. E:\FR\FM\13AUP1.SGM 13AUP1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 155 / Thursday, August 13, 2009 / Proposed Rules • 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 W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Bombardier, ˆ Inc., 400 Cote-Vertu Road West, Dorval, ´ Quebec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone 514–855–5000; fax 514–855–7401; email thd.qseries@aero.bombardier.com; Internet https://www.bombardier.com. You may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221 or 425–227–1152. sroberts on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https:// www.regulations.gov; 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 proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket 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: Pong K. Lee, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE–171, FAA, New York Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; telephone (516) 228– 7324; 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–2009–0712; Directorate Identifier 2007–NM–152–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 because of those comments. VerDate Nov<24>2008 18:45 Aug 12, 2009 Jkt 217001 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 airworthiness authority for Canada, notified us that an unsafe condition may exist on certain Bombardier Model DHC–8–100 and DHC–8–200 series airplanes, and Model DHC–8–301, –311, and –315 airplanes. TCCA advises that, as airplanes age, they are more likely to exhibit indications of corrosion. Operators must implement a Corrosion Prevention and Control Program (CPCP) that identifies specific areas to be inspected to minimize and control deterioration of the airplane from corrosion. This condition, if not corrected, could result in structural failure of the airplane. Relevant Service Information Bombardier has issued Part 1, Section 3, Structural Inspection Program, of the following de Havilland Dash 8 Maintenance Program MRB (Maintenance Review Board) Reports. In this proposed AD, we refer to these publications as the ‘‘manual.’’ • Program Support Manual (PSM) 1–8–7, Revision 22, dated November 1, 2008, for Bombardier Model DHC–8– 100 series airplanes. • PSM 1–82–7, Revision 13, dated November 1, 2008, for Bombardier Model DHC–8–200 series airplanes. • PSM 1–83–7, Revision 22, dated November 1, 2008, for Bombardier Model DHC–8–300 series airplanes. The manual provides a basic structural inspection schedule, which is intended to ensure continuous airworthiness. Only primary structures defined as Structurally Significant Items (SSIs) and secondary structures whose failure may adversely affect the systems’ functions are included in the manual. Canadian airworthiness requirements state that the aircraft maintenance program must identify specific inspections under the CPCP. For the affected airplanes, the CPCP includes a complete re-analysis of the structural inspection program, supported by inservice engineering findings. New and revised tasks identified as CPCP are annotated in the manual as ED/CPCP. ED stands for ‘‘environmental damage.’’ TCCA mandated the service information and issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF–2007–06, dated April 10, 2007, to ensure the PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 40779 continued airworthiness of these airplanes in Canada. Levels of Corrosion The Canadian Airworthiness Directive refers to levels of corrosion. For the purposes of this proposed AD, the levels are defined in Part 1 of the Bombardier (de Havilland) DHC–6 Twin Otter, Dash 7 & Dash 8 Corrosion Prevention and Control Manual PSM 1–GEN–5, Revision 3, dated November 30, 1998, as follows: • Level 1 corrosion: 1. Occurs between repetitive inspections, is local, and can be reworked within certain limits; or 2. Is local but exceeds allowable limits and is attributed to an event not typical of the usage of the other airplanes in the operator’s fleet; or 3. Exceeds allowable limits but for which only light corrosion has been found in previous inspections. • Level 2 corrosion: 1. Occurs between repetitive inspections and exceeds allowable limits, necessitating a repair or complete replacement of a structural significant element; or 2. Occurs between repetitive inspections, is widespread, and requires a rework approaching allowable limits. • Level 3 corrosion is found during initial or repetitive inspections and is determined to be a potentially urgent unsafe condition necessitating expeditious action. FAA’s Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD These airplanes are manufactured in Canada and are type certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral airworthiness agreement, TCCA has kept the FAA informed of the situation described above. We have examined TCCA’s findings, evaluated all pertinent information, and determined that we need to issue an AD for airplanes of this type design that are certificated for operation in the United States. Therefore, we are proposing this AD, which would require implementing a CPCP either by accomplishing specific tasks or by revising the maintenance inspection program to include a CPCP. The proposed AD would require you to use the manual described previously to perform these actions. The proposed AD also would require you to report findings of Level 3 corrosion to the airplane manufacturer and to the FAA. E:\FR\FM\13AUP1.SGM 13AUP1 40780 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 155 / Thursday, August 13, 2009 / Proposed Rules Costs of Compliance This proposed AD would affect about 154 airplanes of U.S. registry. There are between 16 and 17 specific inspections, depending on the applicable manual identified in Table 1 of this AD. The proposed inspections would take about 53 work hours per airplane, per inspection cycle, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the proposed AD for U.S. operators is $652,960, or $4,240 per airplane, per inspection cycle. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA’s authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency’s authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this 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 that the 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. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly de Havilland, Inc.): Docket No. FAA–2009–0712; Directorate Identifier 2007–NM–152–AD. Comments Due Date (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by September 14, 2009. Affected ADs (b) None. Applicability (c) This AD applies to Bombardier Model DHC–8–101, DHC–8–102, DHC–8–103, DHC– 8–106, DHC–8–201, DHC–8–202, DHC–8– 301, DHC–8–311, and DHC–8–315 airplanes, certificated in any category; serial numbers 003 and subsequent. Subject (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Codes 32: Landing Gear, 51: Standard Practices/Structures; 52: Doors; 53: Fuselage; 54: Nacelles/Pylons; 55: Stabilizers; and 57: Wings. Unsafe Condition 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. (e) This AD results from the determination that, as airplanes age, they are more likely to exhibit indications of corrosion. We are issuing this AD to prevent structural failure of the airplane due to corrosion. Compliance (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done. Manual References (g) This AD refers to the manuals listed in Table 1 of this AD. TABLE 1—APPLICABLE MANUALS Bombardier model Manual (1) DHC–8–101, –102, –103, and –106 airplanes. Part 1, Section 3, Structural Inspection Program, of the Dash 8 Maintenance Program MRB (Maintenance Review Board) Report Program Support Manual (PSM) 1–8–7, Revision 22, dated November 1, 2008. Part 1, Section 3, Structural Inspection Program, of the Dash 8 Maintenance Program MRB Report PSM 1–82–7, Revision 13, dated November 1, 2008. Part 1, Section 3, Structural Inspection Program, of the Dash 8 Maintenance Program MRB Report PSM 1–83–7, Revision 22, dated November 1, 2008. (2) DHC–8–201 and DHC–8–202 airplanes ....... sroberts on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS (3) Model DHC–8–301, DHC–8–311, and DHC– 8–315 airplanes. Inspections (h) At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD, do each of the Environmental Damage/Corrosion Protection and Control Program (ED/CPCP) inspections, including re-protection tasks, as applicable, in accordance with the applicable manual identified in Table 1 of this AD. Except as provided by paragraph (i) of this AD, repeat each task thereafter at intervals not to exceed the compliance time specified in the ‘‘Repeat’’ column of the applicable manual identified in Table 1 of this AD. VerDate Nov<24>2008 18:45 Aug 12, 2009 Jkt 217001 (1) Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD. (2) At the compliance time specified in the ‘‘Threshold’’ column of the applicable manual identified in Table 1 of this AD since the date of issuance of the original Canadian airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original Canadian export certificate of airworthiness. If there is no value in the ‘‘Threshold’’ column, use the time specified in the ‘‘Repeat’’ column. (i) After accomplishment of each initial ED/CPCP task required by paragraph (h) of PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 this AD, the FAA may approve the incorporation into the operator’s approved maintenance/inspection program of the CPCP specified in the applicable manual identified in Table 1 of this AD; or the equivalent program that is approved in accordance with this AD. In all cases, the initial corrosion task for each airplane area must be completed by the initial compliance time specified in paragraph (h) of this AD. (1) Any operator complying with paragraph (i) of this AD may use an alternative recordkeeping method to that otherwise E:\FR\FM\13AUP1.SGM 13AUP1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 155 / Thursday, August 13, 2009 / Proposed Rules required by section 91.417 (‘‘Maintenance records’’) or section 121.380 (‘‘Maintenance recording requirements’’) of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 91.417 or 14 CFR 121.380, respectively) for the actions required by this AD, provided that the recordkeeping method is approved by the FAA and is included in a revision to the maintenance/inspection program. For the purposes of this paragraph, ‘‘the FAA’’ is defined as the cognizant Principal Maintenance Inspector (PMI) for operators that are assigned a PMI (i.e., part 121, 125, and 135 operators), and the cognizant Flight Standards District Office for other operators (i.e., part 91 operators). (2) After the initial accomplishment of the ED/CPCP tasks required by paragraph (h) of this AD, any extension of the repetitive intervals specified in the manual must be approved by the Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. sroberts on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS Corrective Actions (j) If any corrosion is found during accomplishment of any action required by paragraph (h) of this AD: Before further flight, rework, repair, or replace, as applicable, in accordance with a method approved by either the Manager, New York ACO, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA) (or its delegated agent). Reporting Requirements for Level 3 Corrosion Findings (k) If any Level 3 corrosion, as defined in Part 1 of the Bombardier (de Havilland) DHC–6 Twin Otter, Dash 7 & Dash 8 Corrosion Prevention and Control Manual PSM 1–GEN–5, Revision 3, dated November 30, 1998, is found during the accomplishment of any action required by this AD, do paragraphs (k)(1), (k)(2), and (k)(3) of 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. (1) Within 3 days after the finding of Level 3 corrosion, report findings to the Manager, New York ACO, FAA, in accordance with the Bombardier (de Havilland) DHC–6 Twin Otter, Dash 7 & Dash 8 Corrosion Prevention and Control Manual PSM 1–GEN–5, Revision 3, dated November 30, 1998. (2) Within 10 days after the finding of Level 3 corrosion, either submit a plan to the FAA to identify a schedule for accomplishing the applicable CPCP task on the remainder of the airplanes in the operator’s fleet that are subject to this AD, or provide data substantiating that the Level 3 corrosion that was found is an isolated case. The FAA may impose a schedule other than that proposed in the plan upon finding that a change to the schedule is needed to ensure that any other Level 3 corrosion is detected in a timely manner. For the purposes of this paragraph, ‘‘the FAA’’ is defined as the cognizant Principal Maintenance Inspector (PMI) for operators that are assigned a PMI (i.e., part 121, 125, and 135 operators), and the cognizant Flight Standards District Office for other operators (i.e., part 91 operators). (3) Within the time schedule approved in accordance with paragraph (k)(2) of this AD, VerDate Nov<24>2008 18:45 Aug 12, 2009 Jkt 217001 40781 accomplish the applicable task on the remainder of the airplanes in the operator’s fleet that are subject to this AD. Office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD. Limiting Future Corrosion Findings (l) If corrosion findings that exceed Level 1 are found in any area during any repeat of any CPCP task after the initial accomplishment required by paragraph (h) of this AD: Within 60 days after such finding, implement a means approved by the FAA to reduce future findings of corrosion in that area to Level 1 or better. For the purposes of this paragraph, ‘‘the FAA’’ is defined as the cognizant PMI for operators that are assigned a PMI (i.e., part 121, 125, and 135 operators), and the cognizant Flight Standards District Office for other operators (i.e., part 91 operators). Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 3, 2009. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E9–19420 Filed 8–12–09; 8:45 am] Scheduling Corrosion Tasks for Transferred Airplanes (m) Before any airplane subject to this AD is transferred and placed into service by an operator: Establish a schedule for accomplishing the CPCP tasks required by this AD in accordance with paragraph (m)(1) or (m)(2) of this AD, as applicable. (1) For airplanes on which the CPCP tasks required by this AD have been accomplished previously at the schedule established by this AD: Perform the first CPCP task in each area in accordance with the previous operator’s schedule, or in accordance with the new operator’s schedule, whichever results in an earlier accomplishment of that CPCP task. After the initial accomplishment of each CPCP task in each area as required by this paragraph, repeat each CPCP task in accordance with the new operator’s schedule. (2) For airplanes on which the CPCP tasks required by this AD have not been accomplished previously, or have not been accomplished at the schedule established by this AD: The new operator must perform each initial CPCP task in each area before further flight or in accordance with a schedule approved by the FAA. For the purposes of this paragraph, ‘‘the FAA’’ is defined as the cognizant Principal Maintenance Inspector (PMI) for operators that are assigned a PMI (i.e., part 121, 125, and 135 operators), and the cognizant Flight Standards District Office for other operators (i.e., part 91 operators). Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (n)(1) The Manager, New York 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: Pong K. Lee, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE–171, FAA, New York Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; telephone (516) 228–7324; fax (516) 794–5531. (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Related Information (o) Canadian airworthiness directive CF– 2007–06, dated April 10, 2007, also addresses the subject of this AD. BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2009–0745; Directorate Identifier 2009–CE–036–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; American Champion Aircraft Corp. Models 7ECA, 7GCAA, 7GCBC, 7KCAB, 8KCAB, and 8GCBC Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all American Champion Aircraft Corp. Models 7ECA, 7GCAA, 7GCBC, 7KCAB, 8KCAB, and 8GCBC airplanes, manufactured prior to 1989 and equipped with folding rear seat backs. This proposed AD would require inspection of the rear seat back hinge areas for cracking and excessive elongation of the rear seat hinge bolt hole and, if cracking or excessive elongation is found, replacement of the rear seat frame. This proposed AD results from an occurrence of the rear seat hinge area failing in flight. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct cracking of the rear seat back hinge area and excessive elongation of the rear seat hinge bolt hole, either of which could result in failure of the seat back. This failure could lead to a rear-seated pilot or passenger inadvertently interfering with the control stick while attempting to not roll to the rear of the airplane upon seat back failure. Consequently, this failure could result in loss of control. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 28, 2009. E:\FR\FM\13AUP1.SGM 13AUP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 155 (Thursday, August 13, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40778-40781]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19420]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0712; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-152-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model DHC-8-100 and DHC-8-
200 Series Airplanes, and Model DHC-8-301, -311, and -315 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT)

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) 
for certain Bombardier Model DHC-8-100 and DHC-8-200 series airplanes, 
and DHC-8-301, -311, and -315 airplanes. This proposed AD would require 
implementing a corrosion prevention and control program (CPCP) either 
by accomplishing specific tasks or by revising the maintenance 
inspection program to include a CPCP. This proposed AD results from the 
determination that, as airplanes age, they are more likely to exhibit 
indications of corrosion. We are proposing this AD to prevent 
structural failure of the airplane due to corrosion.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 14, 
2009.

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.

[[Page 40779]]

     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 W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact 
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec 
H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone 514-855-5000; fax 514-855-7401; e-mail 
thd.qseries@aero.bombardier.com; Internet https://www.bombardier.com. 
You may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA, 
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the 
FAA, call 425-227-1221 or 425-227-1152.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov; 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 proposed AD, the regulatory 
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street 
address for the Docket 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: Pong K. Lee, Aerospace Engineer, 
Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft 
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New 
York 11590; telephone (516) 228-7324; 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-2009-0712; 
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-152-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 because of 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 airworthiness 
authority for Canada, notified us that an unsafe condition may exist on 
certain Bombardier Model DHC-8-100 and DHC-8-200 series airplanes, and 
Model DHC-8-301, -311, and -315 airplanes. TCCA advises that, as 
airplanes age, they are more likely to exhibit indications of 
corrosion. Operators must implement a Corrosion Prevention and Control 
Program (CPCP) that identifies specific areas to be inspected to 
minimize and control deterioration of the airplane from corrosion. This 
condition, if not corrected, could result in structural failure of the 
airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    Bombardier has issued Part 1, Section 3, Structural Inspection 
Program, of the following de Havilland Dash 8 Maintenance Program MRB 
(Maintenance Review Board) Reports. In this proposed AD, we refer to 
these publications as the ``manual.''
     Program Support Manual (PSM) 1-8-7, Revision 22, dated 
November 1, 2008, for Bombardier Model DHC-8-100 series airplanes.
     PSM 1-82-7, Revision 13, dated November 1, 2008, for 
Bombardier Model DHC-8-200 series airplanes.
     PSM 1-83-7, Revision 22, dated November 1, 2008, for 
Bombardier Model DHC-8-300 series airplanes.
    The manual provides a basic structural inspection schedule, which 
is intended to ensure continuous airworthiness. Only primary structures 
defined as Structurally Significant Items (SSIs) and secondary 
structures whose failure may adversely affect the systems' functions 
are included in the manual. Canadian airworthiness requirements state 
that the aircraft maintenance program must identify specific 
inspections under the CPCP. For the affected airplanes, the CPCP 
includes a complete re-analysis of the structural inspection program, 
supported by in-service engineering findings. New and revised tasks 
identified as CPCP are annotated in the manual as ED/CPCP. ED stands 
for ``environmental damage.''
    TCCA mandated the service information and issued Canadian 
Airworthiness Directive CF-2007-06, dated April 10, 2007, to ensure the 
continued airworthiness of these airplanes in Canada.

Levels of Corrosion

    The Canadian Airworthiness Directive refers to levels of corrosion. 
For the purposes of this proposed AD, the levels are defined in Part 1 
of the Bombardier (de Havilland) DHC-6 Twin Otter, Dash 7 & Dash 8 
Corrosion Prevention and Control Manual PSM 1-GEN-5, Revision 3, dated 
November 30, 1998, as follows:
     Level 1 corrosion:
    1. Occurs between repetitive inspections, is local, and can be 
reworked within certain limits; or
    2. Is local but exceeds allowable limits and is attributed to an 
event not typical of the usage of the other airplanes in the operator's 
fleet; or
    3. Exceeds allowable limits but for which only light corrosion has 
been found in previous inspections.
     Level 2 corrosion:
    1. Occurs between repetitive inspections and exceeds allowable 
limits, necessitating a repair or complete replacement of a structural 
significant element; or
    2. Occurs between repetitive inspections, is widespread, and 
requires a rework approaching allowable limits.
     Level 3 corrosion is found during initial or repetitive 
inspections and is determined to be a potentially urgent unsafe 
condition necessitating expeditious action.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    These airplanes are manufactured in Canada and are type 
certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of 
section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and 
the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to this 
bilateral airworthiness agreement, TCCA has kept the FAA informed of 
the situation described above. We have examined TCCA's findings, 
evaluated all pertinent information, and determined that we need to 
issue an AD for airplanes of this type design that are certificated for 
operation in the United States.
    Therefore, we are proposing this AD, which would require 
implementing a CPCP either by accomplishing specific tasks or by 
revising the maintenance inspection program to include a CPCP. The 
proposed AD would require you to use the manual described previously to 
perform these actions. The proposed AD also would require you to report 
findings of Level 3 corrosion to the airplane manufacturer and to the 
FAA.

[[Page 40780]]

Costs of Compliance

    This proposed AD would affect about 154 airplanes of U.S. registry. 
There are between 16 and 17 specific inspections, depending on the 
applicable manual identified in Table 1 of this AD. The proposed 
inspections would take about 53 work hours per airplane, per inspection 
cycle, at an average labor rate of $80 per work hour. Based on these 
figures, the estimated cost of the proposed AD for U.S. operators is 
$652,960, or $4,240 per airplane, per inspection cycle.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this 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 that the 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. See the 
ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by 
reference, 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 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by 
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly de Havilland, Inc.): Docket No. FAA-2009-
0712; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-152-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by September 
14, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Bombardier Model DHC-8-101, DHC-8-102, 
DHC-8-103, DHC-8-106, DHC-8-201, DHC-8-202, DHC-8-301, DHC-8-311, 
and DHC-8-315 airplanes, certificated in any category; serial 
numbers 003 and subsequent.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Codes 32: Landing 
Gear, 51: Standard Practices/Structures; 52: Doors; 53: Fuselage; 
54: Nacelles/Pylons; 55: Stabilizers; and 57: Wings.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from the determination that, as airplanes 
age, they are more likely to exhibit indications of corrosion. We 
are issuing this AD to prevent structural failure of the airplane 
due to corrosion.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this 
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the 
actions have already been done.

Manual References

    (g) This AD refers to the manuals listed in Table 1 of this AD.

                       Table 1--Applicable Manuals
------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Bombardier model                          Manual
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) DHC-8-101, -102, -103,     Part 1, Section 3, Structural Inspection
 and -106 airplanes.            Program, of the Dash 8 Maintenance
                                Program MRB (Maintenance Review Board)
                                Report Program Support Manual (PSM) 1-8-
                                7, Revision 22, dated November 1, 2008.
(2) DHC-8-201 and DHC-8-202    Part 1, Section 3, Structural Inspection
 airplanes.                     Program, of the Dash 8 Maintenance
                                Program MRB Report PSM 1-82-7, Revision
                                13, dated November 1, 2008.
(3) Model DHC-8-301, DHC-8-    Part 1, Section 3, Structural Inspection
 311, and DHC-8-315 airplanes.  Program, of the Dash 8 Maintenance
                                Program MRB Report PSM 1-83-7, Revision
                                22, dated November 1, 2008.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Inspections

    (h) At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and 
(h)(2) of this AD, do each of the Environmental Damage/Corrosion 
Protection and Control Program (ED/CPCP) inspections, including re-
protection tasks, as applicable, in accordance with the applicable 
manual identified in Table 1 of this AD. Except as provided by 
paragraph (i) of this AD, repeat each task thereafter at intervals 
not to exceed the compliance time specified in the ``Repeat'' column 
of the applicable manual identified in Table 1 of this AD.
    (1) Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) At the compliance time specified in the ``Threshold'' column 
of the applicable manual identified in Table 1 of this AD since the 
date of issuance of the original Canadian airworthiness certificate 
or the date of issuance of the original Canadian export certificate 
of airworthiness. If there is no value in the ``Threshold'' column, 
use the time specified in the ``Repeat'' column.
    (i) After accomplishment of each initial ED/CPCP task required 
by paragraph (h) of this AD, the FAA may approve the incorporation 
into the operator's approved maintenance/inspection program of the 
CPCP specified in the applicable manual identified in Table 1 of 
this AD; or the equivalent program that is approved in accordance 
with this AD. In all cases, the initial corrosion task for each 
airplane area must be completed by the initial compliance time 
specified in paragraph (h) of this AD.
    (1) Any operator complying with paragraph (i) of this AD may use 
an alternative recordkeeping method to that otherwise

[[Page 40781]]

required by section 91.417 (``Maintenance records'') or section 
121.380 (``Maintenance recording requirements'') of the Federal 
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 91.417 or 14 CFR 121.380, respectively) 
for the actions required by this AD, provided that the recordkeeping 
method is approved by the FAA and is included in a revision to the 
maintenance/inspection program. For the purposes of this paragraph, 
``the FAA'' is defined as the cognizant Principal Maintenance 
Inspector (PMI) for operators that are assigned a PMI (i.e., part 
121, 125, and 135 operators), and the cognizant Flight Standards 
District Office for other operators (i.e., part 91 operators).
    (2) After the initial accomplishment of the ED/CPCP tasks 
required by paragraph (h) of this AD, any extension of the 
repetitive intervals specified in the manual must be approved by the 
Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA.

Corrective Actions

    (j) If any corrosion is found during accomplishment of any 
action required by paragraph (h) of this AD: Before further flight, 
rework, repair, or replace, as applicable, in accordance with a 
method approved by either the Manager, New York ACO, FAA; or 
Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA) (or its delegated agent).

Reporting Requirements for Level 3 Corrosion Findings

    (k) If any Level 3 corrosion, as defined in Part 1 of the 
Bombardier (de Havilland) DHC-6 Twin Otter, Dash 7 & Dash 8 
Corrosion Prevention and Control Manual PSM 1-GEN-5, Revision 3, 
dated November 30, 1998, is found during the accomplishment of any 
action required by this AD, do paragraphs (k)(1), (k)(2), and (k)(3) 
of 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.
    (1) Within 3 days after the finding of Level 3 corrosion, report 
findings to the Manager, New York ACO, FAA, in accordance with the 
Bombardier (de Havilland) DHC-6 Twin Otter, Dash 7 & Dash 8 
Corrosion Prevention and Control Manual PSM 1-GEN-5, Revision 3, 
dated November 30, 1998.
    (2) Within 10 days after the finding of Level 3 corrosion, 
either submit a plan to the FAA to identify a schedule for 
accomplishing the applicable CPCP task on the remainder of the 
airplanes in the operator's fleet that are subject to this AD, or 
provide data substantiating that the Level 3 corrosion that was 
found is an isolated case. The FAA may impose a schedule other than 
that proposed in the plan upon finding that a change to the schedule 
is needed to ensure that any other Level 3 corrosion is detected in 
a timely manner. For the purposes of this paragraph, ``the FAA'' is 
defined as the cognizant Principal Maintenance Inspector (PMI) for 
operators that are assigned a PMI (i.e., part 121, 125, and 135 
operators), and the cognizant Flight Standards District Office for 
other operators (i.e., part 91 operators).
    (3) Within the time schedule approved in accordance with 
paragraph (k)(2) of this AD, accomplish the applicable task on the 
remainder of the airplanes in the operator's fleet that are subject 
to this AD.

Limiting Future Corrosion Findings

    (l) If corrosion findings that exceed Level 1 are found in any 
area during any repeat of any CPCP task after the initial 
accomplishment required by paragraph (h) of this AD: Within 60 days 
after such finding, implement a means approved by the FAA to reduce 
future findings of corrosion in that area to Level 1 or better. For 
the purposes of this paragraph, ``the FAA'' is defined as the 
cognizant PMI for operators that are assigned a PMI (i.e., part 121, 
125, and 135 operators), and the cognizant Flight Standards District 
Office for other operators (i.e., part 91 operators).

Scheduling Corrosion Tasks for Transferred Airplanes

    (m) Before any airplane subject to this AD is transferred and 
placed into service by an operator: Establish a schedule for 
accomplishing the CPCP tasks required by this AD in accordance with 
paragraph (m)(1) or (m)(2) of this AD, as applicable.
    (1) For airplanes on which the CPCP tasks required by this AD 
have been accomplished previously at the schedule established by 
this AD: Perform the first CPCP task in each area in accordance with 
the previous operator's schedule, or in accordance with the new 
operator's schedule, whichever results in an earlier accomplishment 
of that CPCP task. After the initial accomplishment of each CPCP 
task in each area as required by this paragraph, repeat each CPCP 
task in accordance with the new operator's schedule.
    (2) For airplanes on which the CPCP tasks required by this AD 
have not been accomplished previously, or have not been accomplished 
at the schedule established by this AD: The new operator must 
perform each initial CPCP task in each area before further flight or 
in accordance with a schedule approved by the FAA. For the purposes 
of this paragraph, ``the FAA'' is defined as the cognizant Principal 
Maintenance Inspector (PMI) for operators that are assigned a PMI 
(i.e., part 121, 125, and 135 operators), and the cognizant Flight 
Standards District Office for other operators (i.e., part 91 
operators).

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (n)(1) The Manager, New York 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: Pong K. Lee, Aerospace 
Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New 
York Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, 
Westbury, New York 11590; telephone (516) 228-7324; fax (516) 794-
5531.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different 
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19. 
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC 
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or 
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a 
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office. 
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

Related Information

    (o) Canadian airworthiness directive CF-2007-06, dated April 10, 
2007, also addresses the subject of this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 3, 2009.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-19420 Filed 8-12-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.