43322 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

may occur a few times when 

considering the total operational life of 

all airplanes of one type. Extremely 

remote conditions are those having an 

average probability per flight hour on 

the order of 1 × 10¥7 or less, but greater 

than on the order of 1 × 10¥9. 

(e) Extremely Improbable. Conditions 

that are so unlikely that they are not 

anticipated to occur during the entire 

operational life of all airplanes of one 

type. Extremely improbable conditions 

are those having an average probability 

per flight hour of the order of 1 × 10¥9

or less. 

2. Alternative Fuel Tank Structural 

Lightning Protection Requirements 

For lightning protection features that 

are integral to fuel tank basic airframe 

structure or permanent systems 

supporting structure, as defined in 

Special Condition No. 1, ‘‘Definitions,’’ 

for which Bombardier shows and the 

FAA finds compliance with 

§ 25.981(a)(3) to be impractical, the 

following requirements may be applied 

in lieu of the requirements of 

§ 25.981(a)(3): 

(a) Bombardier must show that the 

airplane design meets the requirements 

of part 25, appendix M, as amended by 

Amendment 25–125, for all fuel tanks 

installed on the airplane. 

(b) Bombardier must show that the 

design includes at least two 

independent, effective, and reliable 

lightning protection features (or sets of 

features) such that fault tolerance to 

prevent lightning-related ignition 

sources is provided for each area of the 

structural design proposed to be shown 

compliant with these special conditions 

in lieu of compliance with the 

requirements of § 25.981(a)(3). Fault 

tolerance is not required for any specific 

design feature if: 

(1) For that feature, providing fault 

tolerance is shown to be impractical, 

and 

(2) Fuel tank vapor ignition due to 

that feature and all other non-faulttolerant features, when their fuel tank 

vapor ignition event probabilities are 

summed, is shown to be extremely 

improbable. 

(c) Bombardier must perform an 

analysis to show that the design, 

manufacturing processes, and the 

airworthiness limitations section of the 

instructions for continued airworthiness 

include all practical measures to 

prevent, and detect and correct, failures 

of structural lightning protection 

features due to manufacturing 

variability, aging, wear, corrosion, and 

likely damage. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 6, 

2014. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–17517 Filed 7–24–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0483; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–NM–082–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 

Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2013–16– 

08 for 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. Since we issued 

AD 2013–16–08, we have determined 

that a certain part was incorrectly 

identified in a certain section of that 

AD. This proposed AD would continue 

to require inspection of the MLG 

retraction actuator components; 

corrective actions if necessary; and, for 

certain retraction actuators, installation 

of a new jam nut. We are proposing this 

AD to prevent disconnection of the MLG 

retraction actuator, which could result 

in extension of the MLG without 

damping, and consequent structural 

damage and collapse of the MLG during 

landing. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by September 8, 2014. 

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 Bombardier 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. 

For Goodrich service information 

identified in this proposed AD, contact 

Goodrich Corporation, Landing Gear, 

1400 South Service Road, West Oakville 

L6L 5Y7, Ontario, Canada; telephone 

905–825–1568; email jean.breed@

goodrich.com; Internet http://

www.goodrich.com/TechPubs. 

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. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2014– 

0483; 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 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, 

NY 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–2014–0483; Directorate Identifier 

2014–NM–082–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 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules 43323 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

On July 31, 2013, we issued AD 2013– 

16–08, Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 

51055, August 20, 2013). AD 2013–16– 

08 requires actions intended to address 

an unsafe condition on 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. 

Since we issued AD 2013–16–08, 

Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, 

August 20, 2013), we have determined 

that the MLG dressed shock strut was 

incorrectly identified as an MLG 

retraction actuator assembly in 

paragraph (k)(2) of the ‘‘Parts 

Installation Limitations’’ section in AD 

2013–16–08. We have revised paragraph 

(k)(2) of this proposed AD accordingly. 

In addition, we corrected a 

typographical error in the service 

bulletin number specified in paragraph 

(j)(1)(iii) of AD 2013–16–08, 

Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, 

August 20, 2013), under ‘‘Credit for 

Previous Actions.’’ Bombardier Service 

Bulletin ‘‘769BA–32–031’’ was changed 

to Bombardier Service Bulletin 

‘‘670BA–32–031.’’ 

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. 

‘‘Contacting the Manufacturer’’ 

Paragraph in This Proposed 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. 

The MCAI or referenced service 

information in an FAA AD often directs 

the owner/operator to contact the 

manufacturer for corrective actions, 

such as a repair. Briefly, the Airworthy 

Product paragraph allowed owners/

operators to use corrective actions 

provided by the manufacturer if those 

actions were FAA-approved. In 

addition, the paragraph stated that any 

actions approved by the State of Design 

Authority (or its delegated agent) are 

considered to be FAA-approved. 

In an NPRM having Directorate 

Identifier 2012–NM–101–AD (78 FR 

78285, December 26, 2013), we 

proposed to prevent the use of repairs 

that were not specifically developed to 

correct the unsafe condition, by 

requiring that the repair approval 

provided by the State of Design 

Authority or its delegated agent 

specifically refer to the FAA AD. This 

change was intended to clarify the 

method of compliance and to provide 

operators with better visibility of repairs 

that are specifically developed and 

approved to correct the unsafe 

condition. In addition, we proposed to 

change the phrase ‘‘its delegated agent’’ 

to include a design approval holder 

(DAH) with State of Design Authority 

design organization approval (DOA), as 

applicable, to refer to a DAH authorized 

to approve required repairs for the 

proposed AD. 

One commenter to the NPRM having 

Directorate Identifier 2012–NM–101–AD 

(78 FR 78285, December 26, 2013) stated 

the following: ‘‘The proposed wording, 

being specific to repairs, eliminates the 

interpretation that Airbus messages are 

acceptable for approving minor 

deviations (corrective actions) needed 

during accomplishment of an AD 

mandated Airbus service bulletin.’’ 

This comment has made the FAA 

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 deviations during the 

accomplishment of an AD-mandated 

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 

proposed AD to obtain corrective 

actions from a manufacturer, the action 

must be accomplished using a method 

approved by the FAA, Transport Canada 

Civil Aviation (TCCA), or Bombardier’s 

TCCA Design Approval Organization 

(DAO). 

The Contacting the Manufacturer 

paragraph also clarifies that, if approved 

by the DAO, the approval must include 

the DAO-authorized signature. The DAO 

signature indicates that the data and 

information contained in the document 

are TCCA-approved, which is also FAAapproved. Messages and other 

information provided by the 

manufacturer that do not contain the 

DAO-authorized signature approval are 

not TCCA-approved, unless TCCA 

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. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 391 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

The actions that were required by AD 

2013–16–08, Amendment 39–17546 (78 

FR 51055, August 20, 2013), that are 

retained in this proposed AD take up to 

16 work-hours per product, at an 

average labor rate of $85 per work-hour. 

Required parts cost about $1,018 per 

product. Based on these figures, the 

estimated cost of the actions that are 

required by AD 2013–16–08 is $2,378 

per product. 

The new requirements of this AD add 

no additional economic burden. 

According to the manufacturer, some 

of the costs of this proposed AD may be 

covered under warranty, thereby 

reducing the cost impact on affected 

individuals. We do not control warranty 

coverage for affected individuals. As a 

result, we have included all costs in our 

cost estimate. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
43324 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

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. 

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 

removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 

2013–16–08, Amendment 39–17546 (78 

FR 51055, August 20, 2013), and adding 

the following new AD: 

Bombardier, Inc.: Docket No. FAA–2014– 

0483; Directorate Identifier 2014–NM– 

082–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by September 

8, 2014. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD replaces AD 2013–16–08, 

Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, August 

20, 2013). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to the airplanes specified 

in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, 

certificated in any category. 

(1) Bombardier, Inc. Model CL–600–2C10 

(Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702) 

airplanes, serial numbers 10002 and 

subsequent. 

(2) Bombardier, Inc. Model CL–600–2D15 

(Regional Jet Series 705) and CL–600–2D24 

(Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, serial 

numbers 15001 and subsequent. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 32: Landing Gear. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by a report of 

corrosion of the components of the main 

landing gear (MLG) retraction actuator found 

in service; the corrosion was found at the 

interface of the rod end and the piston, and 

at the bracket and related pins. We are 

issuing this AD to prevent disconnection of 

the MLG retraction actuator, which could 

result in extension of the MLG without 

damping, and consequent structural damage 

and collapse of the MLG during landing. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Retained Inspection of the MLG 

Retraction Actuator and Corrective Actions 

With No Changes 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (g) of AD 2013–16–08, 

Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, August 

20, 2013), with no changes. For any airplane 

with an MLG retraction actuator assembly 

having any part number and serial number 

identified in paragraph 1.A., Effectivity, of 

Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–32–031, 

Revision C, dated April 17, 2012, except 

airplanes on which modification status ‘‘32– 

64’’ is marked on the identification plate: At 

the applicable time specified in paragraph 

(g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD, perform a detailed 

inspection of the retraction actuator assembly 

for evidence of corrosion and security of the 

jam nut, as applicable, in accordance with 

Part A of the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–32–031, 

Revision C, dated April 17, 2012; and 

Goodrich Service Bulletin 49600–32–63 R1, 

dated May 17, 2011. If any corrosion or 

unsecured jam nut is found, before further 

flight, replace the retract actuator with a new 

or serviceable retract actuator; and install the 

retract actuator in accordance with Part A of 

the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–32–031, 

Revision C, dated April 17, 2012. Repeat the 

inspection thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 1,200 flight hours or 12 months, 

whichever occurs first. 

(1) For MLG retraction actuator assemblies 

on which, as of September 24, 2013 (the 

effective date of AD 2013–16–08, 

Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, August 

20, 2013)), 8,000 or more total flight hours 

have accumulated since new or since 

overhaul, or that have been in service for 

more than 4 years since new or since 

overhaul: Inspect within 1,200 flight hours or 

12 months after September 24, 2013, 

whichever occurs first. 

(2) For MLG retraction actuator assemblies 

on which, as of September 24, 2013 (the 

effective date of AD 2013–16–08, 

Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, August 

20, 2013)), less than 8,000 total flight hours 

have accumulated since new or since 

overhaul, and that have been in service for 

4 years or less since new or since overhaul: 

Inspect before the accumulation of 9,200 total 

flight hours on the MLG retraction actuator 

assembly since new or since overhaul or 

within 5 years in service since new or since 

overhaul, whichever occurs first. 

(h) Retained Inspection of MLG Retraction 

Actuator Bracket and Related Pins, and 

Corrective Actions With No Changes 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (h) of AD 2013–16–08, 

Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, August 

20, 2013), with no changes. For any airplane 

with an MLG dressed shock strut having any 

part number and serial number identified in 

paragraph 1.A., Effectivity, of Bombardier 

Service Bulletin 670BA–32–033, Revision B, 

dated June 26, 2012: Within 4,400 flight 

hours or 24 months after September 24, 2013 

(the effective date of AD 2013–16–08), 

whichever occurs first, perform a detailed 

inspection of the retract actuator bracket 

assembly, associated pins, and the mating 

lugs on the outer cylinder for evidence of 

corrosion, in accordance with Bombardier 

Service Bulletin 670BA–32–033, Revision B, 

dated June 26, 2012; and Goodrich Service 

Bulletin 49000–32–46 R2, dated November 

11, 2011. Do all applicable corrective actions 

before further flight (i.e., replace retract 

actuator bracket assembly and pins, or outer 

cylinder lugs, as applicable). 

(i) Retained Installation of New Jam Nut 

With No Changes 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (i) of AD 2013–16–08, Amendment 

39–17546 (78 FR 51055, August 20, 2013), 

with no changes. For any airplane with an 

MLG retraction actuator assembly having any 

part number and serial number identified in 

paragraph 1.A., Effectivity, of Bombardier 

Service Bulletin 670BA–32–031, Revision C, 

dated April 17, 2012, except airplanes on 

which modification status ‘‘32–64’’ is marked 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules 43325 

on the identification plate: Within 20,000 

flight hours or 10 years after September 24, 

2013 (the effective date of AD 2013–16–08), 

whichever occurs first, install a new jam nut 

having part number 49606–5, in accordance 

with Part B of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 

670BA–32–031, Revision C, dated April 17, 

2012; and Goodrich Service Bulletin 49600– 

32–64 R3, dated December 15, 2011. 

(j) Retained Credit for Previous Actions With 

Change to Paragraph (j)(1)(iii) of This AD 

(1) This paragraph restates the credit 

provided by paragraph (j)(1) of AD 2013–16– 

08, Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, 

August 20, 2013), with a change to the 

service information citation in paragraph 

(j)(1)(iii) of this AD. This paragraph provides 

credit for the actions required by paragraphs 

(g) and (i) of this AD, if those actions were 

performed before September 24, 2013 (the 

effective date of AD 2013–16–08), using the 

service information specified in paragraph 

(j)(1)(i), (j)(1)(ii), or (j)(1)(iii) of this AD, 

which is not incorporated by reference in this 

AD. 

(i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–32– 

031, dated March 14, 2011. 

(ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA– 

32–031, Revision A, dated June 9, 2011. 

(iii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA– 

32–031, Revision B, dated July 29, 2011. 

(2) This paragraph restates the credit 

provided by paragraph (j)(2) of AD 2013–16– 

08, Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, 

August 20, 2013), with no changes. This 

paragraph provides credit for the actions 

required by paragraph (h) of this AD, if those 

actions were performed before September 24, 

2013 (the effective date of AD 2013–16–08), 

using the service information specified in 

paragraph (j)(2)(i) or (j)(2)(ii) of this AD, 

which is not incorporated by reference in this 

AD. 

(i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–32– 

033, dated March 14, 2011. 

(ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA– 

32–033, Revision A, dated July 29, 2011. 

(k) Retained Parts Installation Limitations 

With Change to Paragraph (k)(2) of This AD 

(1) This paragraph restates the parts 

installation limitation specified in paragraph 

(k)(1) of AD 2013–16–08, Amendment 39– 

17546 (78 FR 51055, August 20, 2013), with 

no changes. As of September 24, 2013 (the 

effective date of AD 2013–16–08), no person 

may install on any airplane an MLG 

retraction actuator assembly having any part 

number and serial number identified in 

paragraph 1.A., Effectivity, of Bombardier 

Service Bulletin 670BA–32–031, Revision C, 

dated April 17, 2012, unless that retraction 

actuator assembly has been inspected as 

specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, and all 

applicable corrective actions (i.e., 

replacement of the retract actuator) specified 

in paragraph (g) of this AD have been done. 

Repeat the inspection specified in paragraph 

(g) of this AD thereafter at the intervals 

specified in paragraph (g) of this AD. 

(2) This paragraph restates the parts 

installation limitation specified in paragraph 

(k)(2) of AD 2013–16–08, Amendment 39– 

17546 (78 FR 51055, August 20, 2013), with 

a revised part name. As of the effective date 

of this AD, no person may install on any 

airplane an MLG dressed shock strut having 

any part number and serial number identified 

in paragraph 1.A., Effectivity, of Bombardier 

Service Bulletin 670BA–32–033, Revision B, 

dated June 26, 2012, unless that retraction 

actuator assembly has been inspected and all 

applicable corrective actions have been done, 

in accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 

670BA–32–033, Revision B, dated June 26, 

2012. 

(l) Other FAA AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, New York Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), ANE–170, 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 ACO, send it to ATTN: 

Program Manager, Continuing Operational 

Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart 

Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; 

telephone 516–228–7300; fax 516–794–5531. 

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, New York ACO, ANE–170, 

Engine and Propeller Directorate, FAA; or 

Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or 

Bombardier’s TCCA Design Approval 

Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO, 

the approval must include the DAOauthorized signature. 

(m) Related Information 

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian 

Airworthiness Directive CF–2011–36R1, 

dated October 3, 2012, for related 

information. This MCAI may be found in the 

AD docket on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for and 

locating Docket No. FAA–2014–0483. 

(2) For Bombardier service information 

identified in this 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. 

(3) For Goodrich service information 

identified in this AD, contact Goodrich 

Corporation, Landing Gear, 1400 South 

Service Road, West Oakville L6L 5Y7, 

Ontario, Canada; telephone 905–825–1568; 

email jean.breed@goodrich.com; Internet 

http://www.goodrich.com/TechPubs. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 13, 

2014. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–17550 Filed 7–24–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

21 CFR Part 573 

[Docket No. FDA–2014–F–0988] 

BASF Corp.; Filing of Food Additive 

Petition (Animal Use) 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Notice of petition. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) is announcing 

that BASF Corp. has filed a petition 

proposing that the food additive 

regulations be amended to provide for 

the safe use of sodium formate as an 

acidifier in swine feed. 

DATES: Submit either electronic or 

written comments on the petitioner’s 

request for categorical exclusion from 

preparing an environmental assessment 

or environmental impact statement by 

August 25, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit electronic 

comments to: http://

www.regulations.gov. Submit written 

comments to the Division of Dockets 

Management (HFA–305), Food and Drug 

Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 

1061, Rockville, MD 20852. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Isabel W. Pocurull, Center for Veterinary 

Medicine (HFV–226), Food and Drug 

Administration, 7519 Standish Pl. 

Rockville, MD 20855, 240–453–6853. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the 

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

(section 409(b)(5) (21 U.S.C. 348(b)(5)), 

notice is given that a food additive 

petition (FAP 2286) has been filed by 

BASF Corp., 100 Park Ave. Florham 

Park, NJ 07932. The petition proposes to 

amend Title 21 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) in part 573 Food 

Additives Permitted in Feed and 

Drinking Water of Animals (21 CFR part 

573) to provide for the safe use of 

sodium formate as an acidifier in swine 

feed. 

The petitioner has requested a 

categorical exclusion from preparing an 

environmental assessment or 

environmental impact statement under 

21 CFR 25.32(r). Interested persons may 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS