[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 183 (Wednesday, September 22, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57666-57669]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-22849]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2009-0715; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-211-AD;
Amendment 39-16432; AD 2010-19-04]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
(EMBRAER) Model EMB-120, -120ER, -120FC, -120QC, and -120RT 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 October 27, 2010.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of October 27,
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 41805). 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.
[[Page 57667]]
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.
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 their respective ADs. EMBRAER states that not one APU
rod was removed due to moderate or heavy corrosion, with the exception
of one event of corrosion reported at the rod terminal. EMBRAER also
states that there is no evidence that Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica
S.A. (EMBRAER) Model EMB-120, -120ER, -120FC, -120QC, and -120RT
airplanes are prone to the corrosion event.
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 120 fleet, the
initial compliance time of 500 flight hours or 2 months after the
effective date of the AD is too conservative. 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
2008-08-01, dated October 21, 2008; and EMBRAER Service Bulletin 120-
49-0023, Revision 01, dated June 30, 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.
We infer that EMBRAER requests that we extend the proposed
compliance time specified in the NPRM. We agree with the commenter's
request. Since the NPRM has been published, we have determined that the
compliance time can be extended as the inspection reports received
provided sufficient technical information to do so. We have revised the
initial compliance time in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD from 500 flight
hours or 2 months after the effective date of this AD to 1,500 flight
hours or 6 months (whichever occurs first) after the effective date of
this AD. The revised compliance time correlates with Brazilian
Airworthiness Directive 2008-08-01, dated October 21, 2008.
Request To Eliminate Repetitive Detailed Inspections
EMBRAER states that the repetitive inspection interval currently
required by the maintenance review board (MRB) report for C-Checks
(4,000 flight cycles) states:
Zonal Inspection Task 313-01Z Tail Cone Fairing (APU installed).
Inspection of the APU mounting structure for condition, security of
installation or chafing.
EMBRAER states that these findings demonstrate that the inspection
interval in the MRB report is adequate. EMBRAER also states that few
APU rods are reportedly replaced over time, apart from this proposed
AD, demonstrating the MRB task is effective for the repetitive
inspections. EMBRAER states that the repetitive detailed inspections in
the NPRM are more restrictive than the general visual inspection
specified in the MRB report.
Ameriflight, LLC, states that the repetitive inspection interval of
``not to exceed 1,500 flight hours or 6 months, whichever occurs
first,'' is adding an additional inspection item outside the scope of
the EMBRAER EMB120 MRB. Ameriflight, LLC, states that due to the fact
that all of the corrosion control and corrosion prevention items
contained in the MRB report are calendar driven, it would seem relevant
to have the repetitive APU mounting rod corrosion inspection interval
come due at a calendar limit rather than on an hourly basis.
Ameriflight, LLC, also states that the MRB report contains a 12-month
inspection for the airplane, and that the repetitive inspection of the
APU mounting rods should be completed at a 12-month interval so it
could be completed during the normal inspection cycle contained in the
MRB report.
From these statements, we infer that EMBRAER and Ameriflight, LLC,
believe that the repetitive detailed inspections specified in the NPRM
are more restrictive than the repetitive inspections in the MRB report,
and that Ameriflight, LLC, believes that the repetitive inspections
could be completed during the same inspection cycle specified in the
MRB report.
We agree with EMBRAER and Ameriflight, LLC, that the repetitive
detailed inspection proposed in the NPRM is more conservative than the
inspection in the MRB report. Since the NPRM was published, we have
determined that the proposed repetitive inspections are no longer
necessary as the inspection reports received provided sufficient
technical information to remove the requirement. Therefore, the
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 46
percent of the total fleet, meaning nearly 50 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 100 flight hours per month fleet usage, it
would take more than 5 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 the unnecessary labor burden and processing for
the operators.
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 those data might not be available through
other established means. This information is necessary to ensure that
[[Page 57668]]
proper corrective action will be taken. We have not changed this AD
regarding this issue.
Removal of Reporting Requirement for Light Corrosion
Since the NPRM was issued, we have received sufficient technical
information to remove the reporting requirement for light corrosion
only (characterized by discoloration or pitting). We have revised
paragraph (f)(3) of this AD to remove light corrosion from the
reporting requirement of this AD. In addition, EMBRAER has provided us
with an e-mail address for submission of reports. We have added that e-
mail address to paragraph (f)(3) 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 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 90 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 $61,200, 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:
2010-19-04 Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER):
Amendment 39-16432. Docket No. FAA-2009-0715; Directorate Identifier
2008-NM-211-AD.
Effective Date
(a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective October
27, 2010.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
(EMBRAER) Model EMB-120, -120ER, -120FC, -120QC, and -120RT
airplanes, certified in any category; as identified in EMBRAER
Service Bulletin 120-49-0023, Revision 01, dated June 30, 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 6 months after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first, do an external detailed
inspection for corrosion of the APU, auxiliary
[[Page 57669]]
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 120-49-0023, Revision 01, dated June 30, 2008.
(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 of 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 120-49-0023,
dated April 18, 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 on corrosion can be found in Chapter
51-11-01 of the EMBRAER Corrosion Prevention Manual) of the
inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD to Mr. Antonio
Claret--Customer Support Group, Embraer Aircraft Holding, Inc, 276
S.W 34th Street Fort Lauderdale, FL 33315--USA; telephone (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 2008-08-01, dated
October 21, 2008, does not include a reporting requirement, the
service bulletin identified in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD does
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 ANAC.
(2) Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2008-08-01, dated October
21, 2008, allows replacement of the affected APU mounting rods by
``new ones bearing a new P/N [part number] approved by ANAC
[Ag[ecirc]ncia Nacional de Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil].'' 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 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 2008-08-01,
dated October 21, 2008; and EMBRAER Service Bulletin 120-49-0023,
Revision 01, dated June 30, 2008; for related information.
Material Incorporated by Reference
(i) You must use EMBRAER Service Bulletin 120-49-0023, Revision
01, dated June 30, 2008, 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 August 30, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-22849 Filed 9-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P