```

[Federal Register: May 19, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 96)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 27961-27964]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr19my10-14]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0479 Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-220-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

 
Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Services B.V. Model F.28 Mark 
0070 and 0100 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

[[Page 27962]]

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the 
products listed above. This proposed 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: Recently, a brake fire was reported which was caused by a 
ruptured brake piston. The fire was quickly extinguished but caused 
damage to the paint and hydraulic/electrical harness and its 
components. Detailed investigation showed that a hydraulic lock must 
have been present close to the affected brake creating enough internal 
pressure to rupture the piston. The most probable scenario for the 
hydraulic lock is a loosened (not necessarily disconnected) brake QD 
[quick-disconnect] coupling. Further investigation of the service 
experience files at Fokker Services showed that more brake fires have 
occurred on aeroplanes in a pre-mod SBF100-32-127 configuration. The 
unsafe condition is loss of braking capability and possible brake 
fires, which could reduce the ability of the flightcrew to safely land 
the airplane. The proposed AD would require actions that are intended 
to address the unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 6, 2010.

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 W12-40, 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 
Fokker Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O. Box 231, 2150 AE 
Nieuw-Vennep, the Netherlands; telephone +31 (0)252-627-350; fax +31 
(0)252 627 211; e-mail technicalservices.fokkerservices@stork.com; 
Internet http://www.myfokkerfleet.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: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, 
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425) 
227-1137; 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-2010-0479; 
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-220-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 have lengthened the 30-day comment period for proposed ADs that 
address MCAI originated by aviation authorities of other countries to 
provide adequate time for interested parties to submit comments. The 
comment period for these proposed ADs is now typically 45 days, which 
is consistent with the comment period for domestic transport ADs.
    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 2009-0176, dated August 6, 2009 (referred to 
after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the 
specified products. The MCAI states:

    During 1995, several reports were received of brake QD [quick-
disconnect] couplings loosened and/or disconnected during operation. 
In a few cases, residual brake pressure was trapped in the affected 
brake, causing asymmetric braking and/or resulting in hot brakes. 
Loosened couplings may cause a hydraulic leak with the risk of a 
brake fire. Investigation revealed that the installation of the 
brake QD couplings must be done with care and that the locking teeth 
on the light alloy sleeve are prone to wear. The Fokker 70/100 
Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) has been revised to include 
additional information to ensure correct removal and installation of 
the couplings.
    In 1997, Fokker Services issued SBF100-32-106, recommending the 
introduction of QD couplings with corrosion resistant steel (CRES) 
sleeves that would prevent excessive wear of the locking teeth on 
the light alloy sleeve. In response to more reported cases of 
loosened QD couplings resulting in brake problems, further improved 
QD couplings were introduced in 2001 through SBF100-32-127. These 
couplings increase the reliability of the brake system.
    Recently, a brake fire was reported which was caused by a 
ruptured brake piston. The fire was quickly extinguished but caused 
damage to the paint and hydraulic/electrical harness and its 
components. Detailed investigation showed that a hydraulic lock must 
have been present close to the affected brake creating enough 
internal pressure to rupture the piston. The most probable scenario 
for the hydraulic lock is a loosened (not necessarily disconnected) 
brake QD coupling. Further investigation of the service experience 
files at Fokker Services showed that more brake fires have occurred 
on aeroplanes in a pre-mod SBF100-32-127 configuration.
    In order to reduce the probability of a fluid fire as described 
in CS (certification specification) 25.863, additional action is 
deemed necessary.
    For the reasons described above, this AD requires repetitive 
[detailed] inspections [for wear] of the affected brake QD couplings 
and replacement of the QD couplings with improved units. 
Installation of the improved QD couplings terminates the repetitive 
inspections requirements.

The unsafe condition is loss of braking capability and possible brake 
fires, which could reduce the ability of the flightcrew to safely land 
the airplane. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI 
in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Fokker Services B.V. has issued Service Bulletin SBF100-32-156, 
Revision 1, dated June 29, 2009. The actions described in this service 
information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in 
the MCAI.

[[Page 27963]]

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 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.

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 proposed different actions in this AD from those 
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are 
highlighted in a Note within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD 
would affect about 16 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that 
it would take about 4 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 $4,814 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 
costs. 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 $82,464, or $5,154 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); 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 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.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

Fokker Services B.V.: Docket No. FAA-2010-0479; Directorate 
Identifier 2009-NM-220-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by July 6, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Fokker Services B.V. Model F.28 Mark 0070 
and 0100 airplanes, certificated in any category, all serial 
numbers, with any brake quick-disconnect (QD) coupling having part 
number (P/N) AE70690E, AE70691E, AE99111E, or AE99119E installed.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32: Landing 
Gear.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) 
states:

    During 1995, several reports were received of brake QD couplings 
loosened and/or disconnected during operation. In a few cases, 
residual brake pressure was trapped in the affected brake, causing 
asymmetric braking and/or resulting in hot brakes. Loosened 
couplings may cause a hydraulic leak with the risk of a brake fire. 
Investigation revealed that the installation of the brake QD 
couplings must be done with care and that the locking teeth on the 
light alloy sleeve are prone to wear. The Fokker 70/100 Aircraft 
Maintenance Manual (AMM) has been revised to include additional 
information to ensure correct removal and installation of the 
couplings.
    In 1997, Fokker Services issued SBF100-32-106, recommending the 
introduction of QD couplings with corrosion resistant steel (CRES) 
sleeves that would prevent excessive wear of the locking teeth on 
the light alloy sleeve. In response to more reported cases of 
loosened QD couplings resulting in brake problems, further improved 
QD couplings were introduced in 2001 through SBF100-32-127. These 
couplings increase the reliability of the brake system.
    Recently, a brake fire was reported which was caused by a 
ruptured brake piston. The fire was quickly extinguished but caused 
damage to the paint and hydraulic/electrical harness and its 
components. Detailed investigation showed that a hydraulic lock must 
have been present close to the affected brake creating enough 
internal pressure to rupture the piston. The most probable scenario 
for the hydraulic lock is a loosened (not necessarily disconnected) 
brake QD coupling. Further investigation of the service experience 
files at Fokker Services showed that more brake fires have occurred 
on aeroplanes in a pre-mod SBF100-32-127 configuration.
    In order to reduce the probability of a fluid fire as described 
in CS (certification specification) 25.863, additional action is 
deemed necessary.
    For the reasons described above, this AD requires repetitive 
[detailed] inspections [for wear] of the affected brake QD couplings 
and replacement of the QD couplings with improved units. 
Installation of the improved QD couplings terminates the repetitive 
inspections requirements.

[[Page 27964]]

The unsafe condition is loss of braking capability and possible 
brake fires, which could reduce the ability of the flightcrew to 
safely land the airplane.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this 
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the 
actions have already been done.

Actions

    (g) Do the following actions.
    (1) Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, do a 
detailed inspection for wear of the brake QD couplings by measuring 
dimension ``A,'' in accordance with Part 1 of the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF100-32-156, Revision 1, 
dated June 29, 2009. Repeat the inspection thereafter at the 
applicable intervals specified in Table 1 of this AD, except as 
required by paragraph (g)(2) of this AD.

                Table 1--Repetitive Inspection Intervals
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Repeat the inspection at intervals
       If dimension ``A'' is--                  not to exceed--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greater than or equal to 0.76 mm....  6 months.
Less than 0.76 mm but greater than    3 months.
 or equal to 0.72 mm.
Less than 0.72 mm but greater than    30 days.
 or equal to 0.68 mm.
Less than 0.68 mm but greater than    7 days.
 or equal to 0.61 mm.
Less than 0.61 mm but greater than    24 hours.
 0.53 mm.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) of 
this AD, dimension ``A'' on any brake QD coupling is less than or 
equal to 0.53 mm, before further flight, replace the affected brake 
QD coupling with an improved unit having P/N AE73059E or P/N 
AE73091E, as applicable, in accordance with Part 2 of the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker Service Bulletin SBF100-32-
156, Revision 1, dated June 29, 2009.
    (3) Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD, 
replace all remaining brake QD couplings having P/N AE70690E, P/N 
AE70691E, P/N AE99111E, and P/N AE99119E with improved units, in 
accordance with Part 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Fokker 
Service Bulletin SBF100-32-156, Revision 1, dated June 29, 2009.
    (4) Installation of brake QD couplings with an improved unit 
having P/N AE73059E or P/N AE73091E at all locations terminates the 
repetitive inspections required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.
    (5) Replacing the brake QD couplings is also acceptable for 
compliance with the corresponding requirements of paragraphs (g)(1), 
(g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD if done before the effective date of 
this AD, in accordance with any of the service bulletins specified 
in Table 2 of this AD:

                Table 2--Fokker Credit Service Bulletins
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Fokker Service Bulletins        Revision                Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fokker Service Bulletin        Original........  July 20, 2001.
 SBF100-32-127.
Fokker Service Bulletin        1...............  March 6, 2009.
 SBF100-32-127.
Fokker Service Bulletin        Original........  March 6, 2009.
 SBF100-32-156.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1:  This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service 
information as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (h) 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: Tom 
Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, 
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 
Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425) 227-1137; 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.

Related Information

    (i) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness Directive 2009-0176, dated 
August 6, 2009; and Fokker Service Bulletin SBF100-32-156, Revision 
1, dated June 29, 2009; for related information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 4, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-11904 Filed 5-18-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```