### 51077 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

effective date of this AD using Embraer Alert Service Bulletin 145LEG–53–A032, dated September 20, 2013, which is not incorporated by reference in this AD.
(j) Other FAA AD Provisions

The following provisions also apply to this
AD:

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; telephone 425–227–1175; fax 425–227–1149. Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-116- AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM– 116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or ANAC; or ANAC’s authorized Designee. If approved by the ANAC Designee, the approval must include the Designee’s authorized signature.

(k) Related Information

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2013–10–02, dated October 23, 2013, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations. gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-0234-

0002.

(2) Service information identified in this AD that is not incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in paragraphs (l)(3) and (l)(4) of this AD.
(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.

(i) Embraer Alert Service Bulletin 145LEG– 53–A032, Revision 01, dated September 24,

2013.

(ii) Reserved. (3) 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 Sa  ̃ o Jose dos Campos—SP—BRASIL; telephone +55 12 3927–5852 or +55 12 3309–0732; fax +55 12 3927–7546; email distrib@ embraer.com.br; Internet http://www. flyembraer.com.

(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.

(5) You may view this 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/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 7, 2014. Victor Wicklund, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 2014–19683 Filed 8–26–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2014–0258; Directorate Identifier 2013–NM–065–AD; Amendment**  **39–17950; AD 2014–16–26]**

**RIN 2120–AA64**

**Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation Airplanes** 

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

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 900EX airplanes. This AD was prompted by our determination to introduce a corrosion prevention control program, among other changes, to the maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations. This AD requires revising the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to include the maintenance tasks and airworthiness limitations specified in the Airworthiness Limitations section of the airplane maintenance manual. We are issuing this AD to prevent reduced structural integrity and reduced controllability of the airplane.

**DATES :**  This AD becomes effective October 1, 2014.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of October 1, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA2014-0258 or in person at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.

For service information identified in this AD, contact Dassault Falcon Jet, P.O. Box 2000, South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone 201–440–6700;
Internet http://www.dassaultfalcon.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; telephone 425–227–1137; fax 425–227–1149.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 

Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 900EX airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on May 2, 2014 (79 FR 25033). The NPRM was prompted by our determination to introduce a corrosion prevention control program, among other changes, to the maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations. The NPRM proposed to require revising the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to include the maintenance tasks and airworthiness limitations specified in the Airworthiness Limitations section of the airplane maintenance manual. We are issuing this AD to prevent reduced structural integrity and reduced controllability of the airplane.

The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2013–0051, dated March 4, 2013 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition for Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 900EX airplanes. The MCAI states:

The airworthiness limitations and maintenance requirements for the Falcon 900EX type design are included in Dassault Aviation Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) chapter 5–40 and are approved by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA).

EASA issued AD 2008–0221 [ http://ad. easa.europa.eu/blob/easa

_ ad

_ 2008

_ 0221

_ Corrected.pdf/AD

_ 2008

_ 0221

_ 1 ] to require accomplishment of the maintenance


### 51078 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

tasks, and implementation of the airworthiness limitations, as specified in Dassault Aviation F900EX AMM chapter 5– 40 referenced DGT 113874 at revision 8.

Since that [EASA] AD was issued, Dassault Aviation issued revision 12 of F900EX AMM chapter 5–40 which contains new or more restrictive maintenance requirements and/or airworthiness limitations and introduces, among others, the following changes: —Tasks renumbering, —Introduction of a Corrosion Prevention

Control Program (CPCP), —Upgrade of screwjack of flap actuators from

the older to the latest -3 version; —Revised Time Between Overhaul for

screwjack of flap actuators -3 version; —Revised interval for checking the screw/nut

play on screwjack of flap actuators -3 version; —Removal of service life limit for screwjack

of flap actuators; —Test of flap asymmetry protection system.

Compliance with this test is required by [a certain French AD ***, which corresponds to FAA AD 2002–23–20, Amendment 39– 12964 (67 FR 71098, November 29, 2002)], but F900EX AMM chapter 5–40 at revision 12 introduces an extended inspection interval; —Inspection procedures of fuselage and

wings; —Check of overpressure tightness on

pressurization control regulating valves. Compliance with this check is required by EASA AD 2008–0072 [ http://ad.easa. europa.eu/blob/easa

_ ad

_ 2008

_ 0072.pdf/
AD

_ 2008–0072

_ 1, which corresponds to FAA AD 2010–26–05, Amendment 39– 16544 (75 FR 79952, December 21, 2010)], but F900EX AMM chapter 5–40 at revision 12 introduces an extended inspection interval; —Check of overpressure relief valve vacuum

supply lines. The maintenance tasks and airworthiness limitations, as specified in the F900EX AMM chapter 5–40, have been identified as mandatory actions for continued airworthiness of the F900EX type design. Failure to comply with AMM chapter 5–40 at revision 12 may result in an unsafe condition [e.g., reduced structural integrity and reduced controllability of the airplane].

For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires the implementation of the maintenance tasks and airworthiness limitations, as specified in the Dassault Aviation F900EX AMM chapter 5–40 DGT
113874 at revision 12.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www. regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=
FAA-2014-0258-0002.

Comments

We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM (79 FR 25033, May 2, 2014) or on the determination of the cost to the public. ‘‘Contacting the Manufacturer’’ Paragraph in This AD

Since late 2006, we have included a standard paragraph titled ‘‘Airworthy Product’’ in all MCAI ADs in which the FAA develops an AD based on a foreign authority’s AD.

We have become aware that some operators have misunderstood or misinterpreted the Airworthy Product paragraph to allow the owner/operator to use messages provided by the manufacturer as approval of deviationsduring the accomplishment of an ADmandated action. The Airworthy Product paragraph does not approve messages or other information provided by the manufacturer for deviations to the requirements of the AD-mandated actions. The Airworthy Product paragraph only addresses the requirement to contact the manufacturer for corrective actions for the identified unsafe condition and does not cover deviations from other AD requirements. However, deviations to AD-required actions are addressed in 14 CFR 39.17, and anyone may request the approval for an alternative method of compliance to the AD-required actions using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

To address this misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the Airworthy Product paragraph, we have changed the paragraph and retitled it ‘‘Contacting the Manufacturer.’’ This paragraph now clarifies that for any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the actions must be accomplished using a method approved by the FAA, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), or Dassault Aviation’s EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).

The Contacting the Manufacturer paragraph also clarifies that, if approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature. The DOA signature indicates that the data and information contained in the documentare EASA-approved, which is also FAAapproved. Messages and other information provided by themanufacturer that do not contain DOAauthorized signature approval are not EASA-approved, unless EASA directly approves the manufacturer’s message or other information.

This clarification does not remove flexibility previously afforded by the Airworthy Product paragraph. Consistent with long-standing FAA policy, such flexibility was never intended for required actions. This is also consistent with the recommendation of the Airworthiness Directive Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee to increase flexibility in complying with ADs by identifying those actions in manufacturers’ service instructions that are ‘‘Required for Compliance’’ with ADs. We continue to work with manufacturers to implement this recommendation. But once we determine that an action is required, any deviation from the requirement must be approved as an alternative method of compliance.

Conclusion

We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:

• Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 25033, May 2, 2014) for correcting the unsafe condition; and

• Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 25033, May 2, 2014).

We also determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.
Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 72 airplanes of U.S. registry.

We also estimate that it will take about 1 work-hour per product to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $0 per product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. operators to be $6,120, or $85 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.


### 51079 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

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 that 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);

3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and

4. 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.
Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations. gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0258; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this 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.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 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 airworthiness directive (AD):

2014–16–26 Dassault Aviation: Amendment 39–17950. Docket No. FAA–2014–0258; Directorate Identifier
2013–NM–065–AD.

(a) Effective Date

This AD becomes effective October 1, 2014. (b) Affected ADs
This AD affects AD 2002–23–20, Amendment 39–12964 (67 FR 71098, November 29, 2002); and AD 2010–26–05, Amendment 39–16544 (75 FR 79952, December 21, 2010).
(c) Applicability

This AD applies to Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 900EX airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 1 through 96 inclusive, and serial numbers 98 through 119 inclusive.
(d) Subject

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Time Limits/Maintenance Checks.

(e) Reason

This AD was prompted by our determination to introduce a corrosion prevention control program, among other changes, to the maintenance requirements and airworthiness limitations. We are issuing this AD to prevent reduced structural integrity and reduced controllability of the airplane.
(f) Compliance

Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
(g) Revision of Maintenance or Inspection Program

Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate the information specified in Chapter 5–40, Airworthiness Limitations, DGT 113874, Revision 12, dated September 2012, of the Falcon 900EX Maintenance Manual. The initial compliance time for accomplishing the actions specified in Chapter 5–40, Airworthiness Limitations, DGT 113874, Revision 12, dated September 2012, of the Falcon 900EX Maintenance Manual, is within the applicable times specified in the maintenance manual, or 30 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, except as provided by paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(4) of this AD.

(1) The term ‘‘LDG’’ in the ‘‘First Inspection’’ column of any table in the service information means total airplane landings.

(2) The term ‘‘FH’’ in the ‘‘First Inspection’’ column of any table in the service information means total flight hours.

(3) The term ‘‘FC’’ in the ‘‘First Inspection’’ column of any table in the service information means total flight cycles.

(4) The term ‘‘M’’ in the ‘‘First Inspection’’ column of any table in the service information means months.
(h) Terminating Action

Accomplishing paragraph (g) of this AD terminates the requirements of AD 2002–23– 20, Amendment 39–12964 (67 FR 71098, November 29, 2002); and paragraph (g)(1) of AD 2010–26–05, Amendment 39–16544 (75 FR 79952, December 21, 2010); for Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 900EX airplanes, serial numbers 1 through 96 inclusive, and serial numbers 98 through 119 inclusive. (i) No Alternative Actions and Intervals After accomplishing the revision required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals may be used unless the actions or intervals are approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD.
(j) Other FAA AD Provisions

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. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; telephone 425–227–1137; fax 425–227–1149. Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-116- AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM– 116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Dassault Aviation’s EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(k) Related Information

Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2013–0051, dated March 4, 2013, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/# !documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-0258-0002.
(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.

(i) Chapter 5–40, Airworthiness Limitations, DGT 113874, Revision 12, dated September 2012, of the Falcon 900EX Maintenance Manual. The document revision level is identified only on the title page and page 2.

(ii) Reserved. (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Dassault Falcon Jet, P.O. Box


### 51080 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

2000, South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone 201–440–6700; Internet http:// www.dassaultfalcon.com.

(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.

(5) You may view this 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/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 7, 2014. Victor Wicklund, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 2014–19678 Filed 8–26–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2014–0175; Directorate Identifier 2014–NM–014–AD; Amendment**  **39–17957; AD 2014–17–04]**

**RIN 2120–AA64**

**Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes** 

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

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL–600–2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports that elevator power control unit (PCU) shear pins may fail prematurely. This AD requires repetitive replacement of the elevator PCU shear pins. We are issuing this AD to prevent premature elevator PCU shear pin failure. If all pins fail on one elevator, the elevator surface would become inoperative, which could reduce the controllability of the airplane and could result in a loss of redundancy for flutter prevention.

**DATES :**  This AD becomes effective October 1, 2014.

The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of October 1, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA2014-0175; or in person at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.

For service information identified in this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Co

ˆ te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Que  ́ bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone 514–855– 5000; fax 514–855–7401; email thd.crj@ aero.bombardier.com; Internet http:// www.bombardier.com. You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Cesar Gomez, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE–171, FAA, New York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516–228–7318; fax

516–794–5531.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 

Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL–600–2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on March 28, 2014 (79 FR 17453).

Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF–2014–04, dated January 13, 2014 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL– 600–2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes. The MCAI states:

It was found that the elevator power control unit (PCU) shear pins may fail prematurely. The failure of an elevator PCU shear pin is dormant. There are three PCUs on each elevator. If all three PCU shear pins failed on one elevator, the elevator surface would become inoperative, which could reduce the controllability of the aeroplane and could result in a loss of redundancy for flutter prevention.

This [Canadian] AD mandates the repetitive replacement of the elevator PCU shear pins to prevent premature elevator PCU shear pin failures.

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;
D=FAA-2014-0175-0002.

Comments

We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM (79 FR 17453, March 28, 2014) and the FAA’s response to each comment.
Request To Delete the Repetitive Requirement

Air Wisconsin Airlines Corporation (AWAC) requested that we revise the NPRM (79 FR 17453, March 28, 2014) to delete the repetitive actions required by paragraph (g) of the NPRM. AWAC pointed out that, typically, when the design approval holder determines that a repetitive action for a task is required, the repetitive action is normally published in the maintenance requirements manual as an airworthiness limitation, a certification maintenance requirement, or a systems and powerplant program task. AWAC notes that the design approval holder has no such requirement in its proposed or published documents, and that the service information identified in the NPRM states that it does not affect airworthiness limitations or damage tolerance inspections.

As an alternative to removing the repetitive requirement specified in paragraph (g) of the NPRM (79 FR 17453, March 28, 2014), AWAC requested that, if we do not agree to revise the NPRM as requested, we remove the compliance time of 48 months for the repetitive replacement. AWAC questioned why the repetitive replacements should be required, if the airplane has not been regularly operated. For example, an airplane on which the replacement task was previously performed, that has subsequently been sitting in storage in the desert for 3–4 years would not have any stress.

We disagree to delete the repetitive replacements required by paragraph (g) of this final rule. There are various contributing factors to the premature failure of the elevator PCU shear pins, and corrosion is one of those factors. The repetitive replacement interval was determined by the design approval holder and certifying authority. And, because corrosion is generally a function of time and exposure to the environment, rather than number of flights, we have determined that a specific interval of calendar time is required to address this failure mode. Bombardier indicated that it did not wish to state a repetitive action within its service bulletin, as operators preferservice bulletins that are not left openended.

We also do not agree to remove the 48-month compliance time. The 48- month compliance time is necessary to address the identified unsafe condition