[Federal Register: October 25, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 206)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 60593-60595]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr25oc07-23]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2007-27785; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-267-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
(EMBRAER) Model ERJ 170 Airplanes and Model ERJ 190 Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of
comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier NPRM for the products listed above.
This action revises the earlier NPRM by expanding the scope. 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:
It has been found that some ``caution'' messages issued by the
Flight Guidance Control System (FGCS) are not displayed on aircraft
equipped with [certain] EPIC software load[s] * * *. Therefore,
following a possible failure on one FGCS channel during a given
flight, such a failure condition will remain undetected * * *. If
another failure occurs on the second FGCS channel, the result may be
a command hardover by the autopilot.
A command hardover is a sudden roll, pitch, or yaw movement, which
could result in reduced controllability of the airplane. 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 November 19,
2007.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://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, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
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-2007-
27785; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-267-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://dms.dot.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
We proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 with an earlier NPRM for the
specified products, which was published in the Federal Register on
April 6, 2007 (72 FR 17042). That earlier NPRM proposed to require
actions intended to address the unsafe condition for the products
listed above.
Since that NPRM was issued, EMBRAER Model ERJ 190-200 STD, -200 LR,
and -200 IGW airplanes have been added to the U.S. type certificate
data sheet. We have determined that these airplane models are subject
to the unsafe condition and are included in the MCAI for Model 190
airplanes.
[[Page 60594]]
Comments
We have considered the following comments received on the earlier
NPRM.
Request to Add Optional Terminating Action
Two commenters, EMBRAER and the Air Transport Association (ATA) on
behalf of its member US Airways, have requested that an optional method
of compliance be added to the AD.
EMBRAER states that PRIMUS EPIC Field-Loadable Software Version
19.3 is available and that instructions for uploading this new software
are described in Service Bulletins 170-31-0019 and 190-31-0009, both
issued on May 4, 2007. EMBRAER continues that, as soon as this upload
is accomplished, the repetitive inspections described by service
bulletins 170-22-0003 and 190-22-0002 (cited in the original NPRM as
appropriate sources of service information) are no longer needed.
Consequently EMBRAER suggests that we revise the NPRM to include an
optional installation of software version 19.3 in lieu of the
repetitive inspections.
US Airways states that Embraer Service Bulletin 190-22-0002, dated
November 9, 2006, mandates testing of the FGCS channel engagement until
MAU PRIMUS EPIC software LOAD version 19.1 has been installed. US
Airways therefore requests that upload of PRIMUS EPIC Software Version
19.1 or higher be added to the final rule as an option to the
compliance requirements already stated in the NPRM.
We partially agree with this request. We have determined that
software LOAD version 19.1 will not address the unsafe condition
described in the supplemental NPRM. However, we have confirmed with
Embraer that software LOAD version 19.3 or higher is acceptable as an
optional terminating action for the repetitive functional checks. We
have therefore revised paragraph (f) into paragraph (f)(1) and
paragraph (f)(2) in the supplemental NPRM to provide for the optional
terminating action.
Request to Clarify Procedures
One commenter, Ranamdeep Singh, asks that we clarify or remove the
following statement from paragraph (f) of the NPRM: ``Before further
flight, do all applicable replacements of the actuator input-output
processor in accordance with the applicable service bulletin.'' The
commenter states that the MCAI specifies a functional check within 300
hours after the effective date of the MCAI, with repetitions every 600
hours thereafter, in accordance with EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-22-
0002, dated November 9, 2006, but does not require replacing the
actuator input-output processor before further flight. The commenter
continues that Service Bulletin 190-22-0002 provides an alternative
procedure to perform the functional check with the airplane in flight
rather than on the ground. The commenter states an intent to use this
alternative method due to a lack of ground equipment, but asserts that
the words ``before further flight'' in paragraph (f) of the NPRM mean
that the alternative method can not be used, which, therefore, causes
an excessive burden by forcing operators to perform the functional
check on the ground. The commenter therefore requests that we clarify
or remove the specified statement.
We partially agree with this request. It appears there is some
confusion regarding the procedures described in Service Bulletin 190-
22-0002. The original NPRM requires replacing the actuator input-output
processor before further flight after it has been determined that
replacement is applicable. The functional checks described in the
service bulletin, in paragraph 3.A.2 of the ground check and paragraphs
3.B.6(a) and (b) of the alternative check, all specify replacing the
actuator input-output processor if certain messages are displayed
during the functional check. The operator may use the alternative
method and perform the functional check in flight, but after the check
has been done, any defective actuator input-output processor must be
replaced before further flight after the airplane has landed. It is not
necessary to change the supplemental NPRM in this regard.
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.
Certain changes described above expand the scope of the earlier
NPRM. As a result, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen
the comment period to provide additional opportunity for the public to
comment on this proposed AD.
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 98 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 2 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 $15,680, or $160 per product.
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
Regulatory Findings
We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the
[[Page 60595]]
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new AD:
EMPRESA BRASILEIRA DE AERONAUTICA S.A. (EMBRAER): Docket No. FAA-
2007-27785; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-267-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments by November 19, 2007.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to all EMBRAER Model ERJ 170-100 LR, -100
STD, -100 SE, -100 SU, -200 LR, -200 STD, and -200 SU airplanes, and
Model ERJ 190-100 STD, -100 LR, -100 IGW, -200 STD, -200 LR, and -
200 IGW airplanes; certificated in any category.
Subject
(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 22: Auto
Flight.
Reason
(e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
for Model ERJ 170 airplanes states:
It has been found that some ``caution'' messages issued by the
Flight Guidance Control System (FGCS) are not displayed on aircraft
equipped with EPIC software load 17.3 or 17.5. Therefore, following
a possible failure on one FGCS channel during a given flight, such a
failure condition will remain undetected or latent in subsequent
flights. If another failure occurs on the second FGCS channel, the
result may be a command hardover by the autopilot.
The MCAI for Model ERJ 190 airplanes states:
It has been found that some ``caution'' messages issued by the
Flight Guidance Control System (FGCS) are not displayed on aircraft
equipped with EPIC software load 4.3, 4.4 or 4.5. Therefore,
following a possible failure on one FGCS channel during a given
flight, such a failure condition will remain undetected or latent in
subsequent flights. If another failure occurs on the second FGCS
channel, the result may be a command hardover by the autopilot.
A command hardover is a sudden roll, pitch, or yaw movement,
which could result in reduced controllability of the airplane. The
MCAI mandates a functional test of the flight guidance control
system channels engagement. The corrective action is replacement of
the actuator input-output processor if necessary.
Actions and Compliance
(f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
(1) Within 300 flight hours after the effective date of this AD,
do a functional check of the flight guidance control system (FGCS)
channels engagement, in accordance with EMBRAER Service Bulletin
170-22-0003 or EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-22-0002, both dated
November 9, 2006, as applicable. Repeat the functional check
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 600 flight hours, until the
optional terminating action described by paragraph (f)(2) of this AD
had been done. If any malfunction of the FGCS is discovered during
any functional check required by this paragraph, before further
flight, do all applicable replacements of the actuator input-output
processor in accordance with the applicable service bulletin.
Note 1: For the purpose of this AD, a functional check is: ``A
quantitative check to determine if one or more functions of an item
perform within specified limits.''
(2) Installing PRIMUS EPIC Field-Loadable Software Version 19.3,
in accordance with EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-31-0019, Revision
01, dated June 25, 2007; or Service Bulletin 190-31-0009, Revision
02, dated June 29, 2007, as applicable, ends the repetitive
functional checks required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD. If any
software versions higher than 19.3 are available, the latest of any
such versions is acceptable for the installation described in this
paragraph.
FAA AD Differences
Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: We have provided optional terminating action in
paragraph (f)(2) of this AD; this difference has been coordinated
with the Ag[ecirc]ncia Nacional de Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil
(ANAC).
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,
Attn: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-
116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington 98057-3356, has the authority to approve AMOCs
for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the
AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in
the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI,
your local FSDO.
(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
(3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.
Related Information
(h) Refer to MCAI Brazilian Airworthiness Directives 2006-11-02
and 2006-11-03, both effective November 16, 2006; EMBRAER Service
Bulletins 170-22-0003 and 190-22-0002, both dated November 9, 2006;
EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-31-0019, Revision 01, dated June 25,
2007; and EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-31-0009, Revision 02, dated
June 29, 2007; for related information.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 13, 2007.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Assistant Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E7-21008 Filed 10-24-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P