[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 150 (Thursday, August 5, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47190-47194]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-18398]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2009-0716; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-212-AD;
Amendment 39-16378; AD 2010-16-02]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
(EMBRAER) Model EMB-135 Airplanes; and Empresa Brasileira de
Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER) Model EMB-145, -145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -
145XR, -145MP, and -145EP Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This 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 the occurrence of corrosion on the Auxiliary
Power Unit (APU) mounting rods that could cause the APU rod to
break, affecting the APU support structure integrity.
APU support structure failure could result in loss of power of the APU
and possible loss of control of the airplane. We are issuing this AD to
require actions to correct the unsafe condition on these products.
DATES: This AD becomes effective September 9, 2010. The Director of the
Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain
publications listed in this AD as of September 9, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC.
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:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on August 19, 2009 (74
FR 41807). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:
It has been found the occurrence of corrosion on the Auxiliary
Power Unit (APU) mounting rods that could cause the APU rod to
break, affecting the APU support structure integrity.
APU support structure failure could result in loss of power of the APU
and possible loss of control of the airplane. The required action is
doing an external detailed inspection for corrosion of the APU
auxiliary and center mounting rods and rod ends, and corrective actions
if necessary. Corrective actions include removing corrosion, applying
anticorrosive treatment, and replacing mounting rods. You may obtain
further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comments received.
Request for Bridging Requirements for Previously Accomplished Actions
American Eagle Airlines (AEA) requests that we revise the NPRM to
include ``bridging requirements.'' AEA states that it agrees with the
repetitive inspections in the NPRM; however, AEA asserts that there are
no bridging requirements to reach the repetitive inspections for
airplanes that have already accomplished EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145-
49-0034, Revision 01, dated September 8, 2008. AEA states that bridging
requirements are necessary for initializing a repetitive inspection
with the initial compliance time of 500 flight hours or 2 months after
the effective date of this AD.
We agree with AEA that bridging requirements would be necessary
given the proposed compliance times. However, since the NPRM was
issued, we have received sufficient technical information to support an
extension of the proposed compliance time. We have determined that
changing the initial compliance time from 500 flight hours or 2 months
after the effective date of this AD to 1,500 flight hours or 180 days
after the effective date of this AD, will provide an acceptable level
of safety. The new compliance time correlates with Brazilian
Airworthiness Directive 2008-10-02, effective October 21, 2008. With
the extended compliance times, there should not be a need for bridging
requirements. If however, AEA believes that such requirements are still
necessary, it may apply for an alternative method of compliance (AMOC)
in accordance with the provisions specified in paragraph (g)(1) of this
AD.
Request To Revise the Unsafe Condition Specified in Paragraph (e) of
the NPRM
EMBRAER states that the undetectable fire condition described in
the NPRM is not verifiable since two events must happen for APU rod
breakage to occur.
EMBRAER states that the first event is a fire, because the rod
breakage by itself is not enough to promote sparks or overheating of
any kind. EMBRAER also states that the rod breakage has not been shown
to cause leakage of APU oil in the gearbox, or leakage of the fuel
lines in the compartment. EMBRAER states both ignition sources and
flammable fluids would be required to ignite a fire.
EMBRAER states that for the second event to occur, a fire must
start due to the unforeseeable scenario described previously, at which
time damage to the fire detector, located in the vicinity of the
combustion chamber and accessory gearbox, could occur. EMBRAER states
that in-service experience demonstrates that the fire detector must be
punctured or extensively crushed for it to lose its capability to
detect a fire. Even if that happens, EMBRAER states that the integrity
monitoring circuitry of the fire detector is capable of warning the
flightcrew if the detector becomes inoperative. EMBRAER also states
that in the event of fire detection failure,
[[Page 47191]]
annunciated on the engine indication crew alert system associated with
the APU event, the flight crew is required to carry out instructions in
the airplane flight manual section ``Abnormal Procedures'' to shut down
the APU and discharge the fire extinguishing agent to put out the fire.
From these statements we infer that EMBRAER requests that we revise
paragraph (e) of the NPRM to clarify the unsafe condition. We agree
with the scenarios EMBRAER has described previously in regards to an
undetected fire occurring in the tail cone of the airplane. Therefore,
we have changed the Summary section and paragraph (e) of this AD to
state, ``APU support structure failure could result in loss of power of
the APU and possible loss of control of the airplane.''
Request To Extend the Proposed Initial Compliance Time
EMBRAER states that the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and
the Ag[ecirc]ncia Nacional de Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil (ANAC) fleets
have accomplished the respective ADs. This resulted in an approximately
2.5 percent removal rate of the rods, including many unnecessary
removals that had no moderate or heavy corrosion at the rod, but mostly
corrosion on the rod terminal. EMBRAER states that, in total, only
eight rods were conclusively removed due to the meaning of this
inspection out of more than 2,200 rods inspected, leading to a rate of
0.35 percentage findings. EMBRAER also states that there were instances
of more than one rod removed from the same airplane, conclusively
demonstrating that the removal criterion was over-estimated. EMBRAER
states that one heavily corroded rod was found on one airplane, and
further corrosion could not be found on any other similarly installed
rods.
EMBRAER states that with the considerations stated previously,
meaning lack of real fire in the compartment, and lack of evidence or
reports of corrosion spreading in the current Model EMB 145 fleet, the
initial compliance time of 500 flight hours or 2 months after the
effective date of the AD is too conservative of an approach. EMBRAER
states that this leads to extensive burden and labor costs on
operators, and does not lead to a real increased margin of safety
levels related to this issue. EMBRAER states that, according to
Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2008-10-02, effective October 21,
2008; and EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145-49-0034, Revision 01, dated
September 8, 2008; an adequate approach could be taken within 1,500
flight hours or 6 months from the effective date of the AD, whichever
occurs first. EMBRAER states that the same is true for the Legacy fleet
in regards to EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145LEG-49-0008, Revision 02,
dated September 8, 2008.
We infer that EMBRAER requests that we extend the proposed
compliance time specified in the NPRM. We agree that the proposed
compliance times are conservative. As we explained previously, since
the NPRM has been published, we have determined that the compliance
times proposed in the NPRM are no longer necessary as the inspection
reports received provided sufficient technical information to extend
the compliance time. We are changing the initial compliance time from
500 flight hours or 2 months after the effective date of this AD to
1,500 flight hours or 180 days after the effective date of this AD. The
new compliance time correlates with Brazilian Airworthiness Directive
2008-10-02, effective October 21, 2008. No additional changes to the AD
are necessary in this regard.
Request To Eliminate Repetitive Detailed Inspections in the AD
EMBRAER states that the repetitive inspection interval currently
required by the maintenance review board (MRB) report for C-Check
(5,000 flight cycles) states:
Zonal Inspection Task 53-Z313-214-001-A00 Internal General
Visual Inspection of the Tail Cone Fairing at C-Check (5,000 FH).
Examine the fuselage zone for loose rivets, nicks, cracks, dents,
erosion, corrosion, deteriorated protective treatment, foreign
objects, and deformation.
EMBRAER states that inspections accomplished in accordance with EMBRAER
Service Bulletin 145-49-0034, Revision 01, dated September 8, 2008; and
EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145LEG-49-0008, Revision 02, dated September
8, 2008; revealed rods with moderate to heavy corrosion on airplanes
between 9,482 total flight hours and 21,506 total flight hours. EMBRAER
states that these findings demonstrate that the inspection interval in
the MRB is adequate to fully address the issue, or any other
operational mishap that might occur at APU removal/installation.
EMBRAER also states that a few APU rods are reportedly replaced over
time, apart from this AD, demonstrating the MRB task is effective for
the repetitive inspections. EMBRAER states that the repetitive detailed
inspection in the NPRM is more restrictive than the general visual
inspection specified in the MRB.
From these statements, we infer that EMBRAER requests that we
eliminate the repetitive detailed inspections specified in the NPRM. We
agree with EMBRAER that the repetitive detailed inspection proposed in
the NPRM is more conservative than the inspection in the MRB. Since the
NPRM was published, we have determined that the repetitive inspections
proposed in the NPRM are no longer necessary as the inspection reports
received provided sufficient technical information to remove the
proposed requirement. The proposed repetitive inspections have been
removed from this AD.
Request To Extend the Compliance Time for the Reporting Requirement
EMBRAER states that the EASA and ANAC ADs were issued in advance of
this proposed NPRM. EMBRAER also states that the current status of U.S.
operators that have proactively started inspecting their fleets is 55
percent of the total fleet, meaning nearly 380 airplanes have already
been inspected. EMBRAER states that since the proposed compliance time
for the initial inspection specified in the NPRM is 500 flight hours,
with the current average of 120 flight hours per month fleet usage, it
would take more than 4 months to complete the first inspection. EMBRAER
states that, since the results remain unchanged with time, it is
recommended that the 30-day reporting requirement be extended to 120
days minimum, reducing unnecessary labor burden and processing for the
operators.
From these statements, we infer that EMBRAER requests that we
extend the compliance time for submitting the inspection results from
30 days to 120 days. We disagree with extending the compliance time for
submitting the inspection results. We also disagree that the report is
an undue burden to the operator. A reporting requirement is
instrumental in ensuring that we can gather as much information as
possible regarding the extent and nature of the problem, especially
when findings of corrosion are involved and in cases where that data
might not be available through other established means. This
information is necessary to ensure that proper corrective action will
be taken. We have not changed this AD regarding this issue.
Request To Change Proposed Compliance Time Frame
Trans States Airlines requests a change in the proposed compliance
time for the initial inspection from 2 months to 60 days after the
effective date of the AD. Trans States Airlines states that 60 days is
an exact period where 2 months
[[Page 47192]]
will vary based on the months involved. Trans States Airlines also
requests that the repetitive requirements read ``1,500 flight hours, or
180 days after the effective date of this AD,'' instead of ``1,500
flight hours, or 6 months after the date of this AD,'' for the same
reason.
We agree with Trans States Airlines' request to use number of days
instead of months. Trans States Airlines is correct in stating that
days are more definitive time than months. We also have determined that
changing the initial compliance time from 500 flight hours or 2 months
after the effective date of this AD to 1,500 flight hours or 180 days
after the effective date of this AD, will provide an acceptable level
of safety. We have changed the final rule regarding this issue.
In regards to using days versus months for the repetitive
inspections, as we stated previously, we have determined that the
repetitive inspections proposed in the NPRM are no longer necessary and
have been removed from this AD. No further change to this AD is
necessary in this regard.
Request To Allow Additional Part Numbers
Trans States Airlines requests that we revise the NPRM to allow
mounting rods with part number -001 or -005 as an acceptable method of
compliance for replacement of the rod as allowed in the EMBRAER EMB-
135/-145 Illustrated Parts Catalog.
We disagree with Trans State Airlines' request to use part number -
001 or -005 as an acceptable method of compliance for replacing the
mounting rods. The illustrated parts catalog is not regulated by the
FAA, and EMBRAER did not provide us with information to ensure that
these parts adequately address the unsafe condition. However, operators
may apply to use an AMOC for this AD, as specified in paragraph (g)(1)
of this AD. Because of the unsafe condition that exists, Brazilian
Airworthiness Directive 2008-10-02, effective October 21, 2008; EMBRAER
Service Bulletin 145-49-0034, Revision 01, dated September 8, 2008; and
EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145LEG-49-0008, Revision 02, dated September
8, 2008; specify that if moderate corrosion is found, the affected
mounting rod is to be replaced with a new mounting rod having the same
part number. We have not changed this AD regarding this issue.
Request for Removal of Reporting Requirement
Trans States Airlines states that the reporting requirement is an
undue burden on the operator. Trans States Airlines states that, of the
50 mounting rods removed for corrosion, only two were found to have
actually had corrosion. Trans States Airlines states that more than
2,000 rods have already been inspected, and it believes sufficient data
already exist to determine the need for further rulemaking.
From these statements, we infer that Trans States Airlines is
asking that we remove the proposed reporting requirement from the NPRM.
We have obtained further information from EMBRAER regarding the
reporting requirement. EMBRAER states that the report is necessary so
that more comprehensive data can be aquired. We disagree with Trans
States Airlines in removing the reporting requirement and that the
report is an undue burden to the operator. A reporting requirement is
instrumental in ensuring that we can gather as much information as
possible regarding the extent and nature of the problem, especially in
cases where that data might not be available through other established
means. This information is necessary to ensure that proper corrective
action will be taken. We have not changed this AD regarding this issue.
Clarification of the Retention Requirements for the Reporting
Requirement
Trans States Airlines requests clarification for the retention
requirements for the proposed reporting requirement specified in the
NPRM.
We agree to clarify the retention requirements for the reporting
requirement specified in paragraph (g)(3) of this AD. We have obtained
further information from Trans States Airlines. Trans States Airlines
questions how long it must prove that it has complied with the
reporting requirement in the AD, since the report is not considered
part of the maintenance records.
Only one report is required by this AD. Once the report has been
submitted, no further action is required by this AD. We have not
changed this AD regarding this issue.
Request To Add an E-Mail Address to the Reporting Address
Trans States Airlines states that including EMBRAER's mailing
address and telephone number in paragraph (f)(3) of the NPRM, makes
those the only approved methods for reporting, and that e-mail would
not be an acceptable method for reporting inspection findings.
From this statement, we infer that Trans States Airlines requests
that for the reporting requirement in paragraph (f)(3) of the NPRM, we
include an e-mail address in the contact information.
We agree with Trans States Airlines' request to include an e-mail
address in the contact information. We have determined that an e-mail
is an acceptable method of compliance for reporting inspection findings
to EMBRAER. EMBRAER has provided us with an e-mail address and we have
added that address to paragraph (f)(3) of this AD.
Request To Exclude Light Corrosion From the Reporting Requirement
Expressjet Airlines requests that the light corrosion findings be
removed from the reporting requirement in the NPRM. Expressjet Airlines
states that paragraph (f)(3) of the NPRM states to send a report of the
positive findings, including level of corrosion, such as light,
moderate, or heavy, to EMBRAER. Expressjet Airlines also states that
EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145-49-0034, Revision 01, dated September 8,
2008, requires only that moderate or heavy corrosion be reported.
We agree with Expressjet Airlines that reporting of light corrosion
is not necessary. Since the NPRM was issued, we have received
sufficient technical information to remove the reporting requirement
for light corrosion. We have revised paragraph (f)(3) of this AD to
remove light corrosion from the reporting requirement of this AD.
Conclusion
We reviewed the available data, including the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD with the changes described previously. We determined that these
changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or
increase the scope of the 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 required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow our FAA
[[Page 47193]]
policies. Any such differences are highlighted in a NOTE within the AD.
Explanation of Changes to Costs of Compliance
Since issuance of the NPRM, we have increased the labor rate used
in the Costs of Compliance from $80 per work-hour to $85 per work-hour.
The Costs of Compliance information, below, reflects this increase in
the specified hourly labor rate.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD will affect 761 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take about 8 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of
this AD to the U.S. operators to be $517,480, or $680 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 AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
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 AD and placed it in the AD docket.
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 the NPRM, 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.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
0
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new AD:
2010-16-02 Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER):
Amendment 39-16378. Docket No. FAA-2009-0716; Directorate Identifier
2008-NM-212-AD.
Effective Date
(a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective
September 9, 2010.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
(EMBRAER) Model EMB-135BJ, -135ER, -135KE, -135KL, and -135LR
airplanes; and Model EMB-145, -145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145XR, -
145MP, and -145EP airplanes; certified in any category; as
identified EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145-49-0034, Revision 01, dated
September 8, 2008; and EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145LEG-49-0008,
Revision 02, dated September 8, 2008.
Subject
(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 49: Airborne
Auxiliary Power.
Reason
(e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
It has been found the occurrence of corrosion on the Auxiliary
Power Unit (APU) mounting rods that could cause the APU rod to
break, affecting the APU support structure integrity.
APU support structure failure could result in loss of power of the
APU and possible loss of control of the airplane. The required
action is doing an external detailed inspection for corrosion of the
APU auxiliary and center mounting rods and rod ends, and corrective
actions if necessary. Corrective actions include removing corrosion,
applying anticorrosive treatment, and replacing mounting rods.
Actions and Compliance
(f) Unless already done do the following actions:
(1) Within 1,500 flight hours or 180 days after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first, do an external detailed
inspection for corrosion of the APU, auxiliary and center mounting
rods, and rod ends. If any corrosion is found during any inspection,
before further flight, do the actions required by paragraphs
(f)(1)(i), (f)(1)(ii), and (f)(1)(iii) of this AD, as applicable. Do
all actions required by this paragraph in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145-49-0034,
Revision 01, dated September 8, 2008; or EMBRAER Service Bulletin
145LEG-49-0008, Revision 02, dated September 8, 2008; as applicable.
(i) If light corrosion (characterized by discoloration or
pitting) is found on a mounting rod, remove the corrosion and apply
an anticorrosive treatment.
(ii) If moderate corrosion (characterized by surface blistering
or evidence of scaling and flaking), or heavy corrosion
(characterized by severe blistering exfoliation, scaling and
flaking) is found, replace the affected mounting rod with a new
mounting rod having the same part number.
(iii) If any corrosion is detected on the rod ends, remove the
corrosion and apply an anticorrosive treatment.
(2) Accomplishing the inspection and corrective actions required
by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD before the effective date of this AD
in accordance with EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145-49-0034, dated April
18, 2008; EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145LEG-49-0008, dated April 18,
2008; or EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145LEG-49-0008, Revision 01, dated
May 26, 2008; is acceptable for compliance with the corresponding
requirements of paragraph (f)(1) of this AD.
(3) For mounting rods with moderate or heavy corrosion, submit a
report of the positive findings (including level of corrosion such
as Moderate or Heavy; guidance is provided in EMBRAER Corrosion
Prevention Manual (CPM) 51-11-01) on the external surface of the
rods as well as the rod ends) of the inspection required by
paragraph (f)(1) of this AD to the ATTN: Mr. Antonio Claret--
Customer Support Group, EMBRAER Aircraft Holding, Inc., 276 SW. 34th
Street, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33315; telephone
[[Page 47194]]
(954) 359-3826; e-mail [email protected]; at the applicable
time specified in paragraph (f)(3)(i) or (f)(3)(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 accomplished prior to the effective
date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the
effective date of this AD.
FAA AD Differences
Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows:
(1) Although Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2008-10-02,
effective October 21, 2008, does not include a reporting
requirement, the service bulletins identified in paragraph (f)(1) of
this AD do specify reporting findings to EMBRAER. This AD requires
that operators report the results of the inspections to EMBRAER
because the required inspection report will help determine the
extent of the corrosion in the affected fleet, from which we will
determine if further corrective action is warranted. This difference
has been coordinated with Ag[ecirc]ncia Nacional de
Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil (ANAC).
(2) Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2008-10-02, effective
October 21, 2008, allows replacement of the affected APU mounting
rods by ``new ones bearing a new P/N [part number] approved by
ANAC.'' However, paragraph (f)(1)(ii) of this AD requires replacing
the affected mounting rod only with a new mounting rod having the
same part number. Operators may request approval of an alternative
method of compliance in order to install a new part number in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (g)(1) of this
AD. This difference has been coordinated with 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,
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.
(4) Special Flight Permits: Special flight permits may be issued
in accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the
airplane to a location where the airplane can be modified (if the
operator elects to do so), except if two or more center mounting
rods or rod ends are heavily corroded or broken, a special flight
permit is not permitted.
Related Information
(h) Refer to MCAI Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2008-10-02,
effective October 21, 2008; EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145-49-0034,
Revision 01, dated September 8, 2008; and EMBRAER Service Bulletin
145LEG-49-0008, Revision 02, dated September 8, 2008; for related
information.
Material Incorporated by Reference
(i) You must use EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145-49-0034, Revision
01, dated September 8, 2008; or EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145LEG-49-
0008, Revision 02, dated September 8, 2008; as applicable; to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER), Technical
Publications Section (PC 060), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 2170-
Putim-12227-901 S[atilde]o Jose dos Campos-SP-BRASIL; telephone: +55
12 3927-5852 or +55 12 3309-0732; fax: +55 12 3927-7546; e-mail:
[email protected]; Internet: http://www.flyembraer.com.
(3) You may review copies of the 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.
(4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 16, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-18398 Filed 8-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P