Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 185 / Monday, September 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules 58785 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

in any one year, and it will not 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. Therefore, no actions are 

necessary under the provisions of the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995. 

E. Executive Order 13132 

The rule will not have substantial 

direct effects 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. Therefore, in 

accordance with section 6 of Executive 

Order 13132, this rule does not have 

sufficient federalism implications to 

warrant the preparation of a federalism 

summary impact statement. 

V. Authority 

This change is proposed under the 

authority of 5 U.S.C. 301, 6 U.S.C. 112, 

203 and 211, 8 U.S.C. 1103 and 19 

U.S.C. 2, 66 and 1624. 

VI. Proposed Amendment to 

Regulations 

If the proposed closure of the border 

crossing of Jamieson Line, New York is 

adopted, CBP will amend the lists of 

CBP Customs stations at 19 CFR 101.4(c) 

and the CBP ports of entry at 8 CFR 

100.4(a) to reflect this change. 

Dated: September 19, 2012. 

Janet Napolitano, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2012–23498 Filed 9–21–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9111–14–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–1000; Directorate 

Identifier 2012–NM–065–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for all 

Airbus Model A300 B4–601, B4–603, 

B4–620, B4–605R, and B4–622R 

airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by a report that the door 

frame shells of passenger doors 2 and 4 

may not have sufficient structural 

strength to enable the airplane to 

operate safely. This proposed AD would 

require reinforcing of the door frame 

shells of passenger doors 2 and 4 on 

both sides of the fuselage. We are 

proposing this AD to prevent structural 

failure of the door frame shells, which 

could result in in-flight decompression 

of the airplane and consequent injury to 

passengers. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by November 8, 2012. 

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 W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Airbus SAS— 

EAW (Airworthiness Office), 1 Rond 

Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac 

Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 

96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email 

account.airworth-eas@airbus.com; 

Internet http://www.airbus.com. You 

may review copies of the 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. 

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: Dan 

Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; telephone 425–227–2125; 

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–2012–1000; Directorate Identifier 

2012–NM–065–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:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2012–0044, 

dated March 23, 2012 (referred to after 

this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe 

condition for the specified products. 

The MCAI states: 

As a result of the Extended Service Goal 2 

exercise (ESG2) it was shown that the door 

frame shells of passenger doors 2 and 4 (both 

sides of the aeroplane) may not have 

sufficient structural strength to enable the 

aeroplane to operate safety beyond ESG1 

(Extended Service Goal 1 equal to 42,500 

Flight Cycles—FC or 89,000 Flight Hours— 

FH) and up to ESG2 (Extended Service Goal 

2 equal to 51,000 FC or 89,000 FH) limits. 

This condition, if not corrected, could lead 

to structural failure of the affected door 

shells, possibly resulting in in-flight 

decompression of the aeroplane and 

consequent injury to occupants. 

For the reasons stated above, this [EASA] 

AD requires the reinforcement at door frame 

shells of passenger doors 2 and 4. 

You may obtain further information by 

examining the MCAI in the AD docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

Airbus has issued Service Bulletin 

A300–53–6170, dated May 16, 2011. 

The actions described in this service 

information are intended to correct the 

unsafe condition identified in the 

MCAI. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This Proposed AD 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of another 

country, and is approved for operation 

in the United States. Pursuant to our 

bilateral agreement with the State of 

Design Authority, we have been notified 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
58786 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 185 / Monday, September 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

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. 

Costs of Compliance 

Based on the service information, we 

estimate that this proposed AD would 

affect about 124 products of U.S. 

registry. We also estimate that it would 

take about 400 work-hours per product 

to comply with the basic requirements 

of this proposed AD. The average labor 

rate is $85 per work-hour. Required 

parts would cost about $10,000 per 

product. Where the service information 

lists required parts costs that are 

covered under warranty, we have 

assumed that there will be no charge for 

these parts. As we do not control 

warranty coverage for affected parties, 

some parties may incur costs higher 

than estimated here. Based on these 

figures, we estimate the cost of the 

proposed AD on U.S. operators to be 

$5,456,000, or $44,000 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 

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); 

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. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD and placed it in the 

AD docket. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new AD: 

Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2012–1000; 

Directorate Identifier 2012–NM–065–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by November 

8, 2012. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Airbus Model A300 B4– 

601, B4–603, B4–620, B4–605R, and B4–622R 

airplanes; certificated in any category; all 

serial numbers. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by a report that the 

door frame shells of passenger doors 2 and 

4 may not have sufficient structural strength 

to enable the airplane to operate safely. We 

are issuing this AD to prevent structural 

failure of the door frame shells, which could 

result in in-flight decompression of the 

airplane and consequent injury to passengers. 

(f) Compliance 

You are responsible for having the actions 

required by this AD performed within the 

compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

(g) Reinforcement 

Before the accumulation of 42,500 total 

flight cycles or within 2,000 flight cycles 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs later: Do the actions specified in 

paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD, as 

applicable. 

(1) For Model A300 B4–622R airplanes: 

Reinforce the door frame shells of passenger 

doors 2 and 4 on both sides of the fuselage, 

in accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300– 

53–6170, dated May 16, 2011. 

(2) For Model A300 B4–601, B4–603, B4– 

620, and B4–605R airplanes: Reinforce the 

door frame shells of passenger doors 2 and 

4 on both sides of the fuselage, using a 

method approved by either the Manager, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European 

Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (or its 

delegated agent). 

(h) 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: 

Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; 

telephone 425–227–2125; 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) 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 FAAapproved 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. 

(i) Related Information 

(1) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness 

Directive 2012–0044, dated March 23, 2012; 

and Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6170, 

dated May 16, 2011; for related information. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Airbus SAS–EAW 

(Airworthiness Office), 1 Rond Point Maurice 

Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; 

telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 

93 44 51; email account.airwortheas@airbus.com; Internet http:// 

www.airbus.com. You may review copies of 

the 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. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 185 / Monday, September 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules 58787 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 12, 2012. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–23431 Filed 9–21–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–0997; Directorate 

Identifier 2012–NM–060–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, 

Inc. Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD) 

that applies to certain Bombardier, Inc. 

Model CL–600–2C10 (Regional Jet 

Series 700, 701, & 702) airplanes, Model 

CL–600–2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) 

airplanes, and Model CL–600–2D24 

(Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes. The 

existing AD currently requires repetitive 

inspections of the rudder travel limiter 

(RTL) return springs and primary 

actuator, and corrective actions if 

necessary. Since we issued that AD, 

terminating action has been developed 

which eliminates the need for the 

repetitive inspections. This proposed 

AD would require replacing certain RTL 

return springs, including doing related 

investigative and corrective actions, if 

necessary; and would also revise the 

applicability. We are proposing this AD 

to prevent failure of the RTL, which 

would permit an increase of rudder 

authority beyond normal structural 

limits and consequently affect the 

controllability of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by November 8, 2012. 

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 W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Bombardier, 

Inc., 400 Coˆte-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 

review copies of the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, Washington. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

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: 

Cesar Gomez, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe and Mechanical Systems 

Branch, ANE–171, FAA, New York 

Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 

Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, 

New York 11590; telephone (516) 228– 

7318; fax (516) 794–5531. 

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–2012–0997; Directorate Identifier 

2012–NM–060–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:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

On January 25, 2011, we issued AD 

2011–03–13, Amendment 39–16597 (76 

FR 6539, February 7, 2011). That AD 

required actions intended to address an 

unsafe condition on the products listed 

above. 

Since we issued AD 2011–03–13, 

Amendment 39–16597 (76 FR 6539, 

February 7, 2011), Transport Canada 

Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the 

airworthiness authority for Canada, has 

issued Canadian Airworthiness 

Directive CF–2010–18R1, dated March 

19, 2012 (referred to after this as ‘‘the 

MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition 

for the specified products. The MCAI 

states: 

Rudder Travel Limiter (RTL) return spring, 

part number (P/N) E0650–069–2750S, failed 

prior to completion of the required 

endurance test. In addition, the replacement 

RTL return spring, P/N 670–93465–1 (see 

Note) was found to be susceptible to chafing 

on the primary actuator, which could also 

result in eventual dormant spring failure. 

There are two return springs in the RTL and 

if both springs failed, a subsequent 

mechanical disconnect of the RTL 

components would result in an 

unannunciated failure of the RTL. This, in 

turn, would permit an increase of rudder 

authority beyond normal structural limits 

and, in the event of a strong rudder input, the 

controllability of the aeroplane could be 

affected. 

Note: RTL return springs, P/N 670–93465–1, 

were installed in production aeroplanes 

serial number 10266 (CL–600–2C10) and 

15182 (CL–600–2D24) respectively and were 

introduced in-service by [Bombardier] 

Service Bulletin (SB) 670BA–27–047. 

[Bombardier] SB 670BA–27–047 has since 

been superseded by [Bombardier] SB 670BA– 

27–055. 

This [TCCA] AD mandates repetitive 

[detailed] visual inspection of the RTL [for 

broken] return springs and [damage through 

the casing or chafing of the casing of the] 

primary actuator, [and] replacement of parts 

as necessary. 

This revision mandates the installation of the 

RTL return spring, P/N BA670–93468–1, as a 

terminating action to this [TCCA] AD. 

This proposed AD would expand the 

applicability by adding Model CL–600– 

2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 

702) airplane, serial number 10002. This 

proposed AD would also reduce the 

applicability by removing Model CL– 

600–2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, 

& 702) airplanes serial numbers 10334 

and subsequent; and also removes 

Model CL–600–2D15, serial numbers 

15289 and subsequent. The installation 

consists of replacing certain RTL return 

springs with new springs and doing 

related investigative and corrective 

actions, if necessary. The related 

investigative action is a detailed 

inspection of the casing of the primary 

actuator for signs of chafing or missing 

paint. Corrective actions include 

replacing any broken return spring with 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS