Airworthiness Directives; BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model BAe 146 and Avro 146-RJ70A, 146-RJ85A, and 146-RJ100A Airplanes, 1560-1563 [2010-381]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
1560
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
petitioner states it has been working
with the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency since 2002 to improve public
information about existing tritium exit
signs.
Background and Summary of
Petitioner’s Assertions
The petitioner performed an
evaluation on the lack of control of
tritium exit signs and contamination of
landfill leachate (the final report ‘‘Lack
of Tritium Exit Signs Control and
Contamination of Landfill Leachate,’’
dated July 2009, is included as part of
the petition), and stated that it found
that the majority of unaccounted for
tritium exit signs are disposed of in
solid waste landfills where they become
potential sources of groundwater and
surface water contamination. The
petitioner states that a minority of
tritium exit signs are returned to the
manufacturer for recycling, or disposed
of as low-level radioactive waste.
The petitioner asserts that from the
standpoint of the existing market,
specific changes to new tritium exit
signs will improve recognition and thus
accountability. The labeling should be
in several locations on the sign, with a
larger font, and the expiration date
should be distinctly legible to a fire or
building inspector without taking down
the sign. The petitioner also states that
manufacturers do not always
demonstrate accountability in
dispensing exit signs to the proper
recipients, and recipients are not
informed of proper ownership and
regulatory requirements provided in
NUREG–1556, Vol 16, Appendix L, and
10 CFR 31.5 of the NRC’s regulations.
The online vendors do not always
highlight that tritium is radioactive and
that it has special ‘‘general licensing’’
requirements. The petitioner asserts that
radiation trefoil should be displayed on
the front and back of advertisements.
The petitioner believes that, given the
recent Walmart experience with the
tritium exit signs, general licensing is
successful only when the user
understands that these devices are
radioactive and subject to controls.
Also, in light of the current general lack
of controls, specific licensee
manufacturers should be responsible for
informing customers of the proper
disposal of expired and used tritium
exit signs. From the standpoint of solid
waste management officials, the
petitioner believes that the NRC should
exercise its full regulatory authority to
prevent the disposal of tritium exit signs
in landfills.
The petitioner further asserts that,
though not in NRC’s purview, advances
in photo-luminescent technology over
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:05 Jan 11, 2010
Jkt 220001
the past decade have demonstrated
effective alternate technology for places
without electricity. Efficient Light
Emitting Diodes with backup batteries
are being used where electricity is
available. These technologies together
replace the need for tritium selfluminescent exit signs. The petitioner
states that solid waste management
officials simply want to stop tritium exit
sign disposal in landfills.
Proposed Action
The petitioner requests that the NRC
revise its regulations and/or guidance to
improve the labeling and accountability
of tritium exit signs. The petitioner
states that it would ideally like to see
tritium exit sign technology
immediately replaced by alternative
technologies.
The petitioner requests that NRC
revise its regulations and/or guidance to
state:
1. The labeling should be in several
locations on the sign, with larger font.
2. An expiration date should be
distinctly legible to a fire or building
inspector without taking down the sign.
3. The radiation trefoil should be
displayed on the front and back of
advertisements.
Also, the petitioner recommends a
national collection effort with distinct
milestones and goals should be
undertaken to consolidate all expired
and disused tritium exit signs. The
petitioner requests that NRC organize a
meeting with ASTSWMO and all
interested stakeholders to set a new path
forward on this issue.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day
of January 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010–347 Filed 1–11–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2009–1254; Directorate
Identifier 2009–NM–040–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; BAE
Systems (Operations) Limited Model
BAe 146 and Avro 146–RJ70A, 146–
RJ85A, and 146–RJ100A Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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: During the removal of the
wing removable leading edge on a BAe
146 aircraft for a repair (not related to
the subject addressed by this AD),
corrosion was found on the wing fixed
leading edge structure. The
investigation determined that the
existing scheduled environmental and
fatigue inspections would not have
detected the corrosion or fatigue
damage. Corrosion or fatigue damage in
this area, if not detected and corrected,
could lead to degradation of the
structural integrity of the wing.
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 February 26, 2010.
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.
For service information identified in
this proposed AD, contact BAE Systems
Regional Aircraft, 13850 McLearen
Road, Herndon, Virginia 20171;
telephone 703–736–1080; e-mail
raebusiness@baesystems.com; Internet
https://www.baesystems.com/Businesses/
RegionalAircraft/index.htm. 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 Operations office between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules
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:
Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM–116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057–3356; telephone
(425) 227–1175; fax (425) 227–1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
inspections would not have detected the
corrosion or fatigue damage.
Corrosion or fatigue damage in this area, if
not detected and corrected, could lead to
degradation of the structural integrity of the
wing.
For the reason described above, this AD
requires repetitive inspections of the wing
fixed leading edge and front spar structure
for corrosion and/or fatigue damage [e.g.,
cracking] and repair, depending on findings.
Comments Invited
Relevant Service Information
BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
has issued Inspection Service Bulletin
ISB.57–072, Revision 1, dated
September 25, 2008. The actions
described in this service information are
intended to correct the unsafe condition
identified in the MCAI.
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–2009–1254; Directorate Identifier
2009–NM–040–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 have lengthened the 30-day
comment period for proposed ADs that
address MCAI originated by aviation
authorities of other countries to provide
adequate time for interested parties to
submit comments. The comment period
for these proposed ADs is now typically
45 days, which is consistent with the
comment period for domestic transport
ADs.
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.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Discussion
The European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA), which is the Technical Agent
for the Member States of the European
Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2009–0014,
dated January 21, 2009 (referred to after
this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe
condition for the specified products.
The MCAI states:
During the removal of the wing removable
leading edge on a BAe 146 aircraft for a
repair (not related to the subject addressed by
this AD), corrosion was found on the wing
fixed leading edge structure. The
investigation determined that the existing
scheduled environmental and fatigue
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:05 Jan 11, 2010
Jkt 220001
There are two alternative inspection
methods: Method 1 is a combination of
a detailed visual inspection and a visual
inspection; Method 2 is a detailed visual
inspection. You may obtain further
information by examining the MCAI in
the AD docket.
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 1 product of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it would take
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1561
about 12 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of
this proposed AD. The average labor
rate is $80 per work-hour. Based on
these figures, we estimate the cost of the
proposed AD on U.S. operators to be
$960.
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, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
1562
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules
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:
BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited: Docket
No. FAA–2009–1254; Directorate
Identifier 2009–NM–040–AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments by February
26, 2010.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to BAE SYSTEMS
(Operations) Limited Model BAe 146–100A,
–200A, and –300A series airplanes; and
Model Avro 146–RJ70A, 146–RJ85A, and
146–RJ100A airplanes; certificated in any
category, all serial numbers.
Subject
(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of
America Code 57: Wings.
Reason
(e) The mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) states:
During the removal of the wing removable
leading edge on a BAe 146 aircraft for a
repair (not related to the subject addressed by
this AD), corrosion was found on the wing
fixed leading edge structure. The
investigation determined that the existing
scheduled environmental and fatigue
inspections would not have detected the
corrosion or fatigue damage.
Corrosion or fatigue damage in this area, if
not detected and corrected, could lead to
degradation of the structural integrity of the
wing.
For the reason described above, this AD
requires repetitive inspections of the wing
fixed leading edge and front spar structure
for corrosion and/or fatigue damage [e.g.,
cracking] and repair, depending on findings.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
There are two alternative inspection
methods: Method 1 is a combination of a
detailed visual inspection and a visual
inspection; Method 2 is a detailed visual
inspection.
Actions and Compliance
(f) Unless already done, do the following
actions.
(1) At the applicable time identified in
paragraph (f)(1)(i), (f)(1)(ii), or (f)(1)(iii) of
this AD: Perform a detailed visual inspection
and visual inspection (Method 1) or a
detailed visual inspection (Method 2) for
cracking and corrosion of the wing fixed
leading edge and front spar structure, in
accordance with paragraph 2.C. or 2.D., as
applicable, of the Accomplishment
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:05 Jan 11, 2010
Jkt 220001
Instructions of BAE SYSTEMS (Operations)
Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57–
072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008.
(i) For airplanes with less than 9 years
since date of issuance of the original
airworthiness certificate or the date of
issuance of the original export certificate of
airworthiness as of the effective date of this
AD: Within 18 months after the effective date
of this AD.
(ii) For airplanes with 9 years or more, but
less than 15 years, since date of issuance of
the original airworthiness certificate or the
date of issuance of the original export
certificate of airworthiness as of the effective
date of this AD: Within 18 months after the
effective date of this AD or within 16 years
since date of issuance of the original
airworthiness certificate or the date of
issuance of the original export certificate of
airworthiness, whichever occurs first.
(iii) For airplanes with 15 years or more
since entry into service as of the effective
date of this AD: Within 6 months after the
effective date of this AD.
Note 1: Where BAE SYSTEMS (Operations)
Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57–
072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008,
refers to a ‘‘visual inspection,’’ this term
describes an inspection using visual
inspection equipment as defined in
Appendix 3 of the service bulletin. In other
BAE SYSTEMS instructions for continued
airworthiness, including the MPD and the
CPCP, such an inspection is referred to as a
‘‘Special Detailed Inspection’’ (SDI).
Note 2: At the discretion of the aircraft
owner/operator, corrosion protection may be
embodied on those areas subject to a detailed
visual inspection, in accordance with
paragraph 2.E. or paragraph 2.F. of BAE
SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Inspection
Service Bulletin ISB.57–072, Revision 1,
dated September 25, 2008. Embodiment of
enhanced corrosion protection in accordance
with paragraph 2.E. BAE SYSTEMS
(Operations) Limited Inspection Service
Bulletin ISB.57–072, Revision 1, dated
September 25, 2008, allows the interval of
the repetitive inspection (as required by
paragraph (f)(2) of this AD) to be extended in
the area(s) of application in accordance with
paragraph (f)(2)(i) or (f)(2)(ii) of this AD, as
applicable.
(2) After doing the initial inspection
required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, at the
applicable intervals specified in paragraph
(f)(2)(i) or (f)(2)(ii) of this AD, accomplish the
repetitive inspections of the wing fixed
leading edge and front spar structure for
cracking and corrosion in the ‘‘area of
inspection’’ specified in Table 1 of paragraph
1.D., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of BAE SYSTEMS
(Operations) Limited Inspection Service
Bulletin ISB.57–072, Revision 1, dated
September 25, 2008. Do the inspections in
accordance with paragraph 2.C. (Method 1)
or paragraph 2.D. (Method 2) of BAE
SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Inspection
Service Bulletin ISB.57–072, Revision 1,
dated September 25, 2008. Where previously
applied, enhanced corrosion protection may
then be re-applied, as an option, in
accordance with paragraph 2.E. of BAE
SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Inspection
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Service Bulletin ISB.57–072, Revision 1,
dated September 25, 2008. Perform the
repetitive inspections at the times specified
in paragraph (f)(2)(i) or (f)(2)(ii) of this AD,
as applicable.
(i) For airplanes having enhanced
corrosion protection that was applied during
the previous inspection: Inspect at intervals
not to exceed 144 months.
(ii) For airplanes not having enhanced
corrosion protection that was applied during
the previous inspection: Inspect at intervals
not to exceed 72 months.
(3) After doing the initial inspection
required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, at
intervals not to exceed 36,000 flight cycles,
accomplish fatigue inspections in accordance
with paragraph 2.C. (Method 1) or paragraph
2.D. (Method 2) of BAE SYSTEMS
(Operations) Limited Inspection Service
Bulletin ISB.57–072, Revision 1, dated
September 25, 2008.
(4) If any cracking or corrosion is found
during any inspection required by this AD,
before further flight, repair in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of
BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57–072,
Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008.
(5) No repair terminates the inspection
requirements of this AD.
(6) Actions done before the effective date
of this AD in accordance with BAE Systems
(Operations) Limited Inspection Service
Bulletin ISB.57–072, dated September 25,
2008, are considered acceptable for
compliance with the corresponding actions
specified in this AD.
(7) Submit a report of the findings (both
positive and negative) of the inspection
required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD to
Customer Liaison, Customer Support
(Building 37), BAE Systems (Operations)
Limited, Prestwick International Airport,
Ayrshire, KA9 2RW, Scotland; fax +44 (0)
1292 675432; e-mail
raengliaison@baesystems.com, at the
applicable time specified in paragraphs
(f)(7)(i) and (f)(7)(ii) of this AD. The report
must include the inspection results, a
description of any discrepancies found, the
airplane serial number, and the number of
landings and flight hours on the airplane.
(i) If the inspection was done on or after
the effective date of this AD: Submit the
report within 30 days after the inspection.
(ii) If the inspection was done before the
effective date of this AD: Submit the report
within 30 days after the effective date of this
AD.
Note 3: The inspections required by this
AD prevail over the Maintenance Review
Board Report (MRBR), Maintenance Planning
Document (MPD), Corrosion Prevention and
Control Programme (CPCP), and
Supplemental Structural Inspection
Document (SSID) inspections defined in
paragraph 1.C.(3) of BAE Systems
(Operations) Limited Inspection Service
Bulletin ISB.57–072, Revision 1, dated
September 25, 2008.
FAA AD Differences
Note 4: This AD differs from the MCAI
and/or service information as follows: Where
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules
the EASA AD refers to ‘‘since entry into
service,’’ this AD specifies the date of
issuance of the original airworthiness
certificate or the date of issuance of the
original export certificate of airworthiness.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Other FAA AD Provisions
[Docket No. FAA–2009–1250; Directorate
Identifier 2008–NM–169–AD]
(g) The following provisions also apply to
this AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs): The Manager, International
Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 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: Todd Thompson,
Aerospace Engineer, International Branch,
ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate,
FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425)
227–1175; 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.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically
reference this AD.
(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
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection
requirements and has assigned OMB Control
Number 2120–0056.
Related Information
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
(h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation
Safety Agency Airworthiness Directive 2009–
0014, dated January 21, 2009; and BAE
SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Inspection
Service Bulletin ISB.57–072, Revision 1,
dated September 25, 2008; for related
information.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on January
6, 2010.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–381 Filed 1–11–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:05 Jan 11, 2010
Jkt 220001
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; BAE
Systems (Operations) Limited Model
BAe 146–100A, –200A, and –300A
Series Airplanes, and Model Avro 146–
RJ70A, 146–RJ85A, and 146–RJ100A
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 that would
supersede an existing AD. 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: In 1991, the UK
Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) issued
AD 015–08–91 [which corresponds to
FAA AD 93–01–11], requiring the
accomplishment of inspections of, and
in case of crack findings, corrective
actions on, the wing top skin at rib ‘0’
of pre-modification HCM00851C BAe
146 series aircraft in accordance with
British Aerospace Service Bulletin (SB)
57–41 dated 26 July 1991. Recently,
BAE Systems (Operations) Ltd has
determined that a revised inspection
programme for the wing top skin and
joint strap at rib ‘0’ on all BAe 146 and
AVRO 146–RJ aircraft is necessary to
assure the continued structural integrity
of this area. Cracking of the wing centre
section top skin, if undetected, could
lead to structural failure and consequent
loss of the aircraft.
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 February 26, 2010.
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1563
• 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.
For service information identified in
this proposed AD, contact BAE Systems
Regional Aircraft, 13850 McLearen
Road, Herndon, Virginia 20171;
telephone 703–736–1080; e-mail
raebusiness@baesystems.com; Internet
https://www.baesystems.com/Businesses/
RegionalAircraft/index.htm. 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 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:
Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM–116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057–3356; telephone
(425) 227–1175; fax (425) 227–1149.
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–2009–1250; Directorate Identifier
2008–NM–169–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 have lengthened the 30-day
comment period for proposed ADs that
address MCAI originated by aviation
authorities of other countries to provide
adequate time for interested parties to
submit comments. The comment period
E:\FR\FM\12JAP1.SGM
12JAP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 7 (Tuesday, January 12, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1560-1563]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-381]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2009-1254; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-040-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model
BAe 146 and Avro 146-RJ70A, 146-RJ85A, and 146-RJ100A 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: During the removal of the wing removable leading edge on
a BAe 146 aircraft for a repair (not related to the subject addressed
by this AD), corrosion was found on the wing fixed leading edge
structure. The investigation determined that the existing scheduled
environmental and fatigue inspections would not have detected the
corrosion or fatigue damage. Corrosion or fatigue damage in this area,
if not detected and corrected, could lead to degradation of the
structural integrity of the wing.
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 February 26,
2010.
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.
For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact BAE
Systems Regional Aircraft, 13850 McLearen Road, Herndon, Virginia
20171; telephone 703-736-1080; e-mail raebusiness@baesystems.com;
Internet https://www.baesystems.com/Businesses/RegionalAircraft/index.htm. 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 Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
[[Page 1561]]
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: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1175; fax (425) 227-1149.
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-2009-1254;
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-040-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 have lengthened the 30-day comment period for proposed ADs that
address MCAI originated by aviation authorities of other countries to
provide adequate time for interested parties to submit comments. The
comment period for these proposed ADs is now typically 45 days, which
is consistent with the comment period for domestic transport ADs.
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
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2009-0014, dated January 21, 2009 (referred to
after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:
During the removal of the wing removable leading edge on a BAe
146 aircraft for a repair (not related to the subject addressed by
this AD), corrosion was found on the wing fixed leading edge
structure. The investigation determined that the existing scheduled
environmental and fatigue inspections would not have detected the
corrosion or fatigue damage.
Corrosion or fatigue damage in this area, if not detected and
corrected, could lead to degradation of the structural integrity of
the wing.
For the reason described above, this AD requires repetitive
inspections of the wing fixed leading edge and front spar structure
for corrosion and/or fatigue damage [e.g., cracking] and repair,
depending on findings.
There are two alternative inspection methods: Method 1 is a combination
of a detailed visual inspection and a visual inspection; Method 2 is a
detailed visual inspection. You may obtain further information by
examining the MCAI in the AD docket.
Relevant Service Information
BAE Systems (Operations) Limited has issued Inspection Service
Bulletin ISB.57-072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008. 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 1 product of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it
would take about 12 work-hours per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per
work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed
AD on U.S. operators to be $960.
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, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator,
[[Page 1562]]
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:
BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited: Docket No. FAA-2009-1254;
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-040-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments by February 26, 2010.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Model
BAe 146-100A, -200A, and -300A series airplanes; and Model Avro 146-
RJ70A, 146-RJ85A, and 146-RJ100A airplanes; certificated in any
category, all serial numbers.
Subject
(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57: Wings.
Reason
(e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
During the removal of the wing removable leading edge on a BAe
146 aircraft for a repair (not related to the subject addressed by
this AD), corrosion was found on the wing fixed leading edge
structure. The investigation determined that the existing scheduled
environmental and fatigue inspections would not have detected the
corrosion or fatigue damage.
Corrosion or fatigue damage in this area, if not detected and
corrected, could lead to degradation of the structural integrity of
the wing.
For the reason described above, this AD requires repetitive
inspections of the wing fixed leading edge and front spar structure
for corrosion and/or fatigue damage [e.g., cracking] and repair,
depending on findings.
There are two alternative inspection methods: Method 1 is a
combination of a detailed visual inspection and a visual inspection;
Method 2 is a detailed visual inspection.
Actions and Compliance
(f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
(1) At the applicable time identified in paragraph (f)(1)(i),
(f)(1)(ii), or (f)(1)(iii) of this AD: Perform a detailed visual
inspection and visual inspection (Method 1) or a detailed visual
inspection (Method 2) for cracking and corrosion of the wing fixed
leading edge and front spar structure, in accordance with paragraph
2.C. or 2.D., as applicable, of the Accomplishment Instructions of
BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57-
072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008.
(i) For airplanes with less than 9 years since date of issuance
of the original airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of
the original export certificate of airworthiness as of the effective
date of this AD: Within 18 months after the effective date of this
AD.
(ii) For airplanes with 9 years or more, but less than 15 years,
since date of issuance of the original airworthiness certificate or
the date of issuance of the original export certificate of
airworthiness as of the effective date of this AD: Within 18 months
after the effective date of this AD or within 16 years since date of
issuance of the original airworthiness certificate or the date of
issuance of the original export certificate of airworthiness,
whichever occurs first.
(iii) For airplanes with 15 years or more since entry into
service as of the effective date of this AD: Within 6 months after
the effective date of this AD.
Note 1: Where BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Inspection
Service Bulletin ISB.57-072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008,
refers to a ``visual inspection,'' this term describes an inspection
using visual inspection equipment as defined in Appendix 3 of the
service bulletin. In other BAE SYSTEMS instructions for continued
airworthiness, including the MPD and the CPCP, such an inspection is
referred to as a ``Special Detailed Inspection'' (SDI).
Note 2: At the discretion of the aircraft owner/operator,
corrosion protection may be embodied on those areas subject to a
detailed visual inspection, in accordance with paragraph 2.E. or
paragraph 2.F. of BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Inspection
Service Bulletin ISB.57-072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008.
Embodiment of enhanced corrosion protection in accordance with
paragraph 2.E. BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Inspection Service
Bulletin ISB.57-072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008, allows
the interval of the repetitive inspection (as required by paragraph
(f)(2) of this AD) to be extended in the area(s) of application in
accordance with paragraph (f)(2)(i) or (f)(2)(ii) of this AD, as
applicable.
(2) After doing the initial inspection required by paragraph
(f)(1) of this AD, at the applicable intervals specified in
paragraph (f)(2)(i) or (f)(2)(ii) of this AD, accomplish the
repetitive inspections of the wing fixed leading edge and front spar
structure for cracking and corrosion in the ``area of inspection''
specified in Table 1 of paragraph 1.D., ``Compliance,'' of BAE
SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57-072,
Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008. Do the inspections in
accordance with paragraph 2.C. (Method 1) or paragraph 2.D. (Method
2) of BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin
ISB.57-072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008. Where previously
applied, enhanced corrosion protection may then be re-applied, as an
option, in accordance with paragraph 2.E. of BAE SYSTEMS
(Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57-072,
Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008. Perform the repetitive
inspections at the times specified in paragraph (f)(2)(i) or
(f)(2)(ii) of this AD, as applicable.
(i) For airplanes having enhanced corrosion protection that was
applied during the previous inspection: Inspect at intervals not to
exceed 144 months.
(ii) For airplanes not having enhanced corrosion protection that
was applied during the previous inspection: Inspect at intervals not
to exceed 72 months.
(3) After doing the initial inspection required by paragraph
(f)(1) of this AD, at intervals not to exceed 36,000 flight cycles,
accomplish fatigue inspections in accordance with paragraph 2.C.
(Method 1) or paragraph 2.D. (Method 2) of BAE SYSTEMS (Operations)
Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57-072, Revision 1, dated
September 25, 2008.
(4) If any cracking or corrosion is found during any inspection
required by this AD, before further flight, repair in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of BAE Systems (Operations)
Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57-072, Revision 1, dated
September 25, 2008.
(5) No repair terminates the inspection requirements of this AD.
(6) Actions done before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Inspection Service
Bulletin ISB.57-072, dated September 25, 2008, are considered
acceptable for compliance with the corresponding actions specified
in this AD.
(7) Submit a report of the findings (both positive and negative)
of the inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD to
Customer Liaison, Customer Support (Building 37), BAE Systems
(Operations) Limited, Prestwick International Airport, Ayrshire, KA9
2RW, Scotland; fax +44 (0) 1292 675432; e-mail
raengliaison@baesystems.com, at the applicable time specified in
paragraphs (f)(7)(i) and (f)(7)(ii) of this AD. The report must
include the inspection results, a description of any discrepancies
found, the airplane serial number, and the number of landings and
flight hours on the airplane.
(i) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the inspection.
(ii) If the inspection was done before the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the effective date
of this AD.
Note 3: The inspections required by this AD prevail over the
Maintenance Review Board Report (MRBR), Maintenance Planning
Document (MPD), Corrosion Prevention and Control Programme (CPCP),
and Supplemental Structural Inspection Document (SSID) inspections
defined in paragraph 1.C.(3) of BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57-072, Revision 1, dated September
25, 2008.
FAA AD Differences
Note 4: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: Where
[[Page 1563]]
the EASA AD refers to ``since entry into service,'' this AD
specifies the date of issuance of the original airworthiness
certificate or the date of issuance of the original export
certificate of airworthiness.
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, Transport Airplane Directorate, 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: Todd
Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425) 227-1175; 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.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
(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 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), 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 Airworthiness
Directive 2009-0014, dated January 21, 2009; and BAE SYSTEMS
(Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57-072,
Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008; for related information.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 6, 2010.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-381 Filed 1-11-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
