```

[Federal Register: August 5, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 150)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 47190-47194]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05au10-7]                         

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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 structure@embraer.com.br; 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: 
distrib@embraer.com.br; 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
```