Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 11, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 10457 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that this AD: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 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 summary of the costs 

to comply with this AD (and other 

information as included in the 

Regulatory Evaluation) and placed it in 

the AD Docket. You may get a copy of 

this summary by sending a request to us 

at the address listed under ADDRESSES. 

Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2008–1319; 

Directorate Identifier 2008–CE–071– 

AD’’ in your request. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

■ Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the Federal Aviation Administration 

amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (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. FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the 

following new AD: 

2009–05–12 Cessna Aircraft Company: 

Amendment 39–15836; Docket No. 

FAA–2008–1319; Directorate Identifier 

2008–CE–071–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This AD becomes effective on April 15, 

2009. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to the following 

airplane models and serial numbers that are 

certificated in any category: 

Model Serial Nos. 

208 ............... 20800001 through 20800415 and 20800417 through 20800419. 

208B ............. 208B0001 through 208B1081, 208B1083 through 208B1215, 208B1217 through 208B1257, 208B1259 through 208B1305, 

208B1307, and 208B1309 through 208B1310. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from reports of a 

‘‘catch’’ in the aileron control system when 

the control yoke is turned. We are issuing 

this AD to prevent the cable attach fitting on 

the aileron upper quadrant assembly from 

rotating and possibly contacting or 

interfering with the aileron lower quadrant 

assembly, which could result in limited roll 

control and reduced handling capabilities. 

Compliance 

(e) To address this problem, you must do 

the following, unless already done: 

Actions Compliance Procedures 

Modify the aileron carry-through cable attachment to the aileron upper quadrant with parts 

of improved design.

Within the next 100 hours time-in-service after 

April 15, 2009 (the effective date of this AD) 

or within the next 6 months after April 15, 

2009 (the effective date of this AD), whichever occurs first.

Follow the Accomplishment Instructions in 

Cessna Caravan Service Bulletin CAB08–6, 

dated October 27, 2008. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(f) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), 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: Ann 

Johnson, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Wichita 

Aircraft Certification Office, 1801 Airport 

Road, Room 100, Wichita, Kansas 67209; 

telephone: 316–946–4105; fax: 316–946– 

4107; e-mail address: ann.johnson@faa.gov. 

Before using any approved AMOC on any 

airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify 

your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in 

the FAA Flight Standards District Office 

(FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(g) You must use Cessna Caravan Service 

Bulletin CAB08–6, dated October 27, 2008, 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 Cessna Aircraft Company, 

P.O. Box 7704, Wichita, Kansas 67277; 

telephone: (800) 423–7762 or (316) 517–6056; 

Internet: http://www.cessna.com. 

(3) You may review copies of the service 

information incorporated by reference for 

this AD at the FAA, Central Region, Office of 

the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Kansas 

City, Missouri 64106. For information on the 

availability of this material at the Central 

Region, call (816) 329–3768. 

(4) You may also review copies of the 

service information incorporated by reference 

for this AD 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 Kansas City, Missouri, on 

February 27, 2009. 

John Colomy, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–4828 Filed 3–10–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–1318; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–NM–155–AD; Amendment 

39–15848; AD 2009–06–12] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier 

Model CL–600–2B19 (Regional Jet 

Series 100 & 440) Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are superseding an 

existing 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 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
10458 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 11, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

an unsafe condition on an aviation 

product. The MCAI describes the unsafe 

condition as: 

* * * * * 

The Bombardier CL–600–2B19 airplanes 

have had a history of flap failures at various 

positions for several years. Flap failure may 

result in a significant increase in required 

landing distances and higher fuel 

consumption than planned during a 

diversion. * * * 

* * * * * 

We are issuing this AD to require 

actions to correct the unsafe condition 

on these products. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective April 

15, 2009. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in this AD 

as of April 15, 2009. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain other publications listed in 

this AD as of September 5, 2007 (72 FR 

46555, August 21, 2007). 

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: Dan 

Parrillo, Aerospace Engineer, Systems 

and Flight Test Branch, ANE–171, FAA, 

New York Aircraft Certification Office, 

1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, 

Westbury, New York 11590; telephone 

(516) 228–7305; fax (516) 794–5531. 

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 December 18, 2008 (73 FR 

76974) and proposed to supersede AD 

2008–01–04, Amendment 39–15329 (73 

FR 1964, January 11, 2008). That NPRM 

proposed to correct an unsafe condition 

for the specified products. 

That NPRM proposed to retain the 

requirements of AD 2008–01–04, i.e., 

revising the airplane flight manual 

(AFM) to incorporate a temporary 

revision (TR) into the AFM, adding 

operational procedures into the AFM, 

training flight crewmembers and 

operational control/dispatch personnel 

on the operational procedures, and 

doing corrective maintenance actions. 

The corrective maintenance actions 

include a pressure test of the flexible 

drive-shaft and corrective actions, and a 

low temperature torque test of the flap 

actuators and corrective actions. 

That NPRM also proposed to add 

repetitive low temperature torque tests 

of the flap actuators and corrective 

actions. In addition, that NPRM 

proposed to require revising the AFM to 

incorporate a new TR (adding maximum 

flaps operating speed data and clarifying 

maximum flaps extended speeds), and 

to modify the Operational Limitations. 

That NPRM also proposed to require 

revising the annual simulator training 

for ‘‘Flap Zero Landing’’ events and 

revising the previously required training 

for flight crewmembers and operational 

control/dispatch personnel on the 

operational procedures. 

Further, the NPRM proposed to 

require certain maintenance actions 

following a flap fail event and 

installation of a cockpit placard that 

specifies new flap operating limitations. 

That NPRM also proposed to allow 

installing modified flap actuators, 

which would terminate certain sections 

of the operational procedures. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

considered the comments received. 

Request To Revise Wording in 

Paragraph (h)(6) of the NPRM 

Mesa Group requests that we revise 

the wording in paragraph (h)(6) of the 

NPRM. The commenter points out that 

paragraph (h)(6) of the NPRM specifies 

to do maintenance actions ‘‘except if 

maintenance actions cannot be done 

and normal flap system operation can be 

restored after an on-ground circuit 

breaker reset operation, then continued 

revenue operation is permitted without 

further maintenance action for up to 10 

flight cycles * * *.’’ The commenter 

states the descriptions of the actions in 

paragraphs (h)(6)(i) and (h)(6)(ii) of the 

NPRM—i.e., to ‘‘do the maintenance 

actions specified in paragraph (h)(6) of 

the AD’’—create a ‘‘loop’’ and 

jeopardize safety of flight because 

operators can continue flight 

indefinitely as long as the airplane lands 

where maintenance actions cannot be 

done. 

We disagree with the commenter’s 

assertion that the actions proposed in 

paragraphs (h)(6)(i) and (h)(6)(ii) of the 

NPRM create a loop. Paragraph (h)(6) of 

this AD provides an exception to doing 

the maintenance actions before further 

flight on airplanes on which a flap fail 

message occurs. The exception allows 

flight without further maintenance 

action for up to 10 flight cycles subject 

to certain operating limitations and after 

an on-ground circuit breaker reset 

operation, except as provided by the 

actions described in paragraphs (h)(6)(i) 

and (h)(6)(ii) of this AD. 

Paragraph (h)(6)(i) of this AD limits 

the allowable flight cycles by specifying 

that the maintenance actions specified 

in paragraph (h)(6) of this AD must be 

done within 10 flight cycles following 

the initial on-ground circuit breaker 

reset operation. Paragraph (h)(6)(ii) of 

this AD also limits the allowable flight 

cycles by specifying that if another flap 

fail event occurs any time after the 

initial circuit breaker reset operation, 

then the maintenance actions specified 

in paragraph (h)(6) of this AD must be 

done before further flight. 

Once operators have done the onground circuit breaker reset operation, 

the maintenance actions must be done 

within the compliance time specified in 

paragraph (h)(6)(i) or (h)(6)(ii) of this 

AD, depending on whether another flap 

fail event occurs. Paragraphs (h)(6)(i) 

and (h)(6)(ii) of this AD do not allow 

any exceptions to the specified 

compliance times. However, for clarity, 

we have revised paragraphs (h)(6)(i) and 

(h)(6)(ii) to refer to the service 

information instead of paragraph (h)(6) 

of this AD. 

Request To Revise or Supersede AD 

2006–12–21 

Comair requests that we revise or 

supersede AD 2006–12–21, amendment 

39–14647 (71 FR 34793, June 16, 2006), 

to add a statement indicating that the 

installation of the actuators called out in 

paragraph (h)(5) of the NPRM is 

acceptable for compliance with 

paragraph (h) of AD 2006–12–21. The 

commenter notes that in paragraph (i) of 

the NPRM we include such a statement, 

but there will still be no cross reference 

within AD 2006–12–21 itself. 

We do not agree that it is necessary 

to revise or supersede AD 2006–12–21. 

The intent of paragraph (i) of this AD is 

simply to specify that installing certain 

flap actuators provides a method of 

compliance with paragraph (h) of AD 

2006–12–21. In addition, a global 

alternative method of compliance 

(AMOC) to AD 2006–12–21 was granted 

to Bombardier on November 18, 2008, 

which allowed installation of actuator 

part numbers (P/Ns) 601R93103–23/24 

(Vendor P/N 853D100–23/24) in lieu of 

P/Ns 601R93103–19/20 (Vendor P/Ns 

853D100–19/20) as a way to comply 

with paragraph (h) of AD 2006–12–21. 

The AMOC also allows installation of 

actuator P/Ns 601R93104–23/24 

(Vendor P/N 854D100–23/24) in lieu of 

P/Ns 601R93104–19/20 (Vendor P/N 

854D100–19/20) as a way to comply 

with paragraph (h) of AD 2006–12–21. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 11, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 10459 

We have not changed this AD in this 

regard. 

Request To Revise AFM Reference 

Comair and Air Wisconsin request 

that we revise an AFM reference in the 

quoted material of paragraph (h)(2) of 

the NPRM from ‘‘AFM TR/165’’ to 

‘‘AFM TR RJ/165–1.’’ Both commenters 

request that we revise the AFM 

reference in Note 1 following 

‘‘paragraph 1.’’ of the quoted material. 

Comair also requests that we revise the 

AFM reference in the Note following 

‘‘paragraph 2.’’ of the quoted material. 

We agree to revise the AFM reference 

because AFM TR RJ/165–1 is the latest 

AFM TR. We have revised the notes 

within the quoted material in paragraph 

(h)(2) of this AD accordingly. 

Request To Remove Training 

Requirement 

Two commenters, Comair and Air 

Wisconsin, request that we remove 

training requirements from the NPRM. 

Comair states that paragraphs (f)(3), 

(g)(1), and (h)(3) of the NPRM contain 

training requirements and that an AD is 

not the proper mechanism to mandate 

training. Comair states that 14 CFR 39.3 

defines airworthiness directives as 

‘‘* * * legally enforceable rules that 

apply to the following products: aircraft, 

aircraft engines, propellers, and 

appliances.’’ Comair further states that 

these paragraphs requiring training are 

issued against people and not against a 

product. Air Wisconsin also states that 

paragraphs (g)(1), (h)(3)(i), and (h)(3)(ii) 

of the NPRM do not belong in the AD 

because those paragraphs apply to flight 

crewmembers and operational control/ 

dispatch personnel. 

We disagree with the request to 

remove training requirements. Section 

39.11 of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (14 CFR 39.11) describes 

the types of actions that ADs can 

require, including ‘‘conditions and 

limitations you must comply with.’’ 

While we agree that section 39.3 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 

39.3) applies to the products listed in 14 

CFR 39.11, we retain broad authority to 

require any corrective action that is 

determined to be most effective in 

addressing an identified unsafe 

condition on any of the products listed 

in 14 CFR 39.3. 

In this AD, we have found that one of 

the factors contributing to the identified 

unsafe condition is lack of flightcrew 

training in operating an airplane when 

a flap failure occurs in flight (such as in 

freezing conditions). Due to the unsafe 

condition, we determined that these 

training requirements, in conjunction 

with the other requirements of this AD, 

are necessary for safe operation of the 

airplane. We have not revised this AD 

in this regard. 

Request To Clarify Requirements in 

Paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and (g)(3)(ii) of the 

NPRM 

Comair requests that we clarify the 

requirements specified in paragraphs 

(g)(3)(i) and (g)(3)(ii) of the NPRM. 

Comair states that in recent years it 

seems to have become common practice 

when an AD is superseded by another 

AD that the old requirements are 

restated as they appeared in the 

superseded AD. Paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and 

(g)(3)(ii) of AD 2008–01–04 refer to 

‘‘2,000 flight hours.’’ Paragraphs (g)(3)(i) 

and (g)(3)(ii) of this NPRM now list 

‘‘5,000 flight cycles.’’ Comair states that 

if there is a new requirement, for 

consistency, it should fall under 

paragraph (h) of the NPRM. 

Comair is correct in observing that we 

generally restate the requirements of the 

existing AD in the new AD. We restate 

the requirements as a necessity when 

the requirements of the existing AD 

continue in the new AD or when certain 

requirements of the new AD are tied to 

accomplishment of an action or actions 

in the existing AD, and as a courtesy to 

operators for their reference. When there 

are compliance changes to the actions in 

the existing AD, we may keep the 

actions in the restatement section; thus, 

we restated paragraph (g)(3) of this AD 

with a change to the accumulated time 

on the actuators. 

In this case, we have extended the 

accumulated time on the actuators that 

are affected by paragraph (g)(3) of this 

AD. We explained this in the Discussion 

section of the NPRM as follows: 

This proposed AD also re-identifies the 

airplanes affected by paragraph (g)(3) of the 

existing AD. The accumulated time on the 

actuators specified in paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and 

(g)(3)(ii) of this AD has been extended from 

‘‘2,000 flight hours’’ to ‘‘5,000 flight cycles.’’ 

The re-identification does not affect 

airplanes that have already complied 

with the actions specified in paragraph 

(g)(3) of this AD and is relieving for 

airplanes that have not yet complied 

with the actions specified in paragraph 

(g)(3) of this AD. No change has been 

made to paragraph (g)(3) of this AD. 

Request To Clarify Requirements of 

Paragraphs (g)(3) and (h)(4) of the 

NPRM 

Air Wisconsin requests that we clarify 

the requirements of paragraphs (g)(3) 

and (h)(4) of the NPRM. Air Wisconsin 

states that paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and 

(g)(3)(ii) of the NPRM and paragraphs 

(h)(4)(i) and (h)(4)(ii) of the NPRM are 

confusing because they seem to 

duplicate each other. Air Wisconsin 

suggests that paragraphs (h)(4)(i) and 

(h)(4)(ii) be removed and that we refer 

to paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and (g)(3)(ii) 

instead in paragraph (h)(4) of the NPRM. 

Air Wisconsin further requests that 

we clarify whether paragraphs (g)(3) and 

(h)(4) of the NPRM apply to actuators 

that had the pinion shaft seals replaced 

since February 15, 2008, and have fewer 

than 5,000 flight cycles since 

replacement. In addition, Air Wisconsin 

also requests that we clarify whether 

paragraphs (g)(3) and (h)(4) of the NPRM 

do not apply to actuators that are 

overhauled or that had the pinion shaft 

seals replaced. 

We agree that the requirements of 

paragraphs (g)(3) and (h)(4) should be 

clarified. Paragraph (g)(3) of this AD 

applies to airplanes that have actuators 

(identified in paragraph (g)(3) of this 

AD) that meet the conditions of either 

paragraph (g)(3)(i) or (g)(3)(ii) of this 

AD. Once an actuator accumulates more 

than 5,000 flight cycles since new, or a 

repaired actuator accumulates more 

than 5,000 flight cycles on the pinion 

shaft seals, operators must do the lowtemperature torque test specified in 

paragraph (g)(3) of this AD. If an 

actuator has 5,000 or fewer flight cycles 

since new, or if an actuator that has 

been repaired has 5,000 or fewer flight 

cycles since pinion shaft seal 

replacement, then paragraph (g)(3) of 

this AD does not apply to that actuator. 

Therefore, paragraph (g)(3) of this AD 

also does not apply to overhauled 

actuators with 5,000 or fewer flight 

cycles since the pinion shaft seals have 

been replaced. 

The intent of paragraph (h)(4) of this 

AD is to require repetitive low 

temperature torque tests to be done for 

actuators having more than 5,000 flight 

cycles, and on repaired actuators having 

more than 5,000 flight cycles on the 

pinion shaft seals. 

If the actuators are replaced with new 

actuators having 5,000 flight cycles or 

fewer, or with repaired actuators having 

5,000 flight cycles or fewer on the 

pinion shaft seals, then the repetitive 

torque tests are terminated. 

However, the replaced actuators will 

be affected by the requirements of 

paragraph (g)(3) of this AD once the new 

actuator accumulates more than 5,000 

flight cycles since new, or the repaired 

actuator accumulates more than 5,000 

flight cycles on the pinion shaft seals; 

once these actuators are required to 

have the low temperature torque test 

specified in paragraph (g)(3) of this AD, 

these actuators will be affected by the 

requirements of paragraph (h)(4) of this 

AD if they pass the torque test (i.e., the 

actuators that do not need to be 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
10460 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 11, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

replaced). We have revised paragraph 

(h)(4) of this AD to clarify these 

requirements and removed paragraphs 

(h)(4)(i) and (h)(4)(ii) of this AD. 

Request To Revise Language in the 

Quoted Material in Paragraph (h)(2) of 

the NPRM 

Several commenters request that we 

revise specific language in the section 

titled ‘‘4. Dispatch Following a Flap 

Failed Event’’ of the quoted material in 

paragraph (h)(2) of the NPRM: 

• Comair requests that we clarify the 

listing for conditions a., b., c., and d. 

specified in paragraph 4. of the quoted 

material. 

We agree to clarify the listing for 

conditions a., b., c., and d. specified in 

paragraph 4. of the quoted material. We 

have determined that the current 

wording is not clear in specifying that 

conditions ‘‘a. and b., and either c. or 

d.,’’ must be met. Therefore, we have 

revised the wording in the section titled 

‘‘4. Dispatch Following a Flap Failed 

Event’’ of the quoted material in 

paragraph (h)(2) of this AD as follows: 

‘‘If normal flap system operation can be 

restored after an on-ground system reset, 

continued revenue operation of that airplane 

is permitted, provided conditions a. and b., 

and either c. or d., below are satisfied: 

* * *.’’ 

• Air Wisconsin and Pinnacle 

Airlines request that we clarify that the 

maintenance technician/personnel or 

flight crewmember can accomplish the 

operational check specified in 

paragraph 4.b. of the quoted material. 

We agree with the request to clarify 

paragraph 4.b. of the quoted material. 

The flightcrew has the responsibility for 

verifying the operability of the systems 

called out in paragraph 4.b. of the 

quoted material. We have revised 

paragraph 4.b. of the quoted material in 

paragraph (h)(2) of this AD to read: 

‘‘Prior to each flight following an onground circuit breaker reset, the thrust 

reversers, ground spoilers, and brake system 

are verified operational by the flightcrew.’’ 

• Comair requests that we clarify that 

there is no requirement to document the 

results of the flightcrew system tests, 

and suggests adding the following 

statement to paragraph 4. of the quoted 

material: ‘‘Note: No maintenance log 

entry is required for the following 

action.’’ 

We disagree with the commenter’s 

request. There must be operatorcontrolled documentation that accounts 

for the 10-flight-cycle limitation 

following the initial reset of a circuit 

breaker. The method of documentation 

is up to the discretion of the operator 

and the principal operations inspector 

(POI). We have not revised this AD in 

this regard. 

• Comair also requests that we add 

the following statement to paragraph 4. 

of the quoted material: ‘‘Until a 

maintenance action can be performed as 

specified by (h)(3)(6), for each flight 

following an on-ground circuit breaker 

reset, either condition a. or b. [landing 

distance available], below, must be 

satisfied: * * *.’’ 

We disagree with the request to add 

the statement. We find that the language 

suggested by the commenter provides 

no substantive change from the meaning 

of the paragraph as it is written in the 

NPRM, and that no clarity would be 

added with such a change. We have not 

revised this AD in this regard. 

• Air Wisconsin and PSA Airlines 

request that the action specified in 

paragraph 4.b. of the quoted material in 

paragraph (h)(2) of the NPRM be revised 

to clarify what needs to be 

accomplished and what is expected. Air 

Wisconsin states that the type of check 

should be specified. PSA Airlines 

suggests that the word ‘‘verify’’ be 

removed. Comair also requests that we 

clarify paragraph 4.b. by specifying ‘‘For 

each flight following an on-ground 

circuit breaker reset, prior to take-off, 

the following checks [thrust reversers, 

ground spoilers, and brake system] must 

be performed: * * *.’’ In addition, 

Comair requests that additional 

information on the operational checks 

be provided. 

We clarify that paragraph 4.b. of the 

quoted material in paragraph (h)(2) of 

this AD is intended to apply to all 

operators. Individual operators have the 

option of using more restrictive 

language. We find no need to revise this 

AD in this regard. 

• Pinnacle Airlines requests that we 

clarify who must perform the on-ground 

circuit breaker reset. Pinnacle Airlines 

infers that the flightcrew does the reset. 

We clarify that the following wording 

in paragraph (h)(6) of this AD makes it 

apparent the flightcrew performs the 

reset: ‘‘* * * the circuit breaker reset 

operation can be performed by the 

flightcrew when authorized by the 

operator’s maintenance control 

organization.’’ We have not revised this 

AD in this regard. 

• Pinnacle Airlines states that we 

should clarify that the flightcrew or 

maintenance personnel can perform the 

operation of the flaps for 5 cycles 

specified in paragraph 4.a. of the quoted 

material in paragraph (h)(2) of this AD. 

Pinnacle states that allowing only 

flightcrews to perform this function, 

under certain circumstances (such as 

crew duty time issues), could have 

substantial negative logistic impacts, 

which could have a negative impact on 

passenger service. 

We disagree with the commenter. The 

operation of the flaps for 5 cycles, as 

specified in paragraph 4.a. of the quoted 

material in paragraph (h)(2) of this AD, 

is intended to be a flightcrew function. 

Doing this operation is predicated on 

the condition specified in (h)(6) of this 

AD when maintenance resources are not 

available. If maintenance personnel are 

available, operators should be 

performing the maintenance procedures 

in accordance with the fault isolation 

manual, as specified in paragraph (h)(6) 

of this AD. We have not revised this AD 

in this regard. 

• Pinnacle Airlines requests that we 

clearly specify when the operational 

checks in paragraph 4.b. of the quoted 

material terminate. 

We disagree with the request to add 

a statement for terminating action for 

paragraph 4.b. of the quoted material. 

We have determined that to mitigate the 

risk of multiple flap fail events, and 

until further rulemaking is considered, 

the requirements of paragraph 4.b. must 

be followed as stipulated in paragraph 

(h)(6) of this AD. We have not revised 

this AD in this regard. 

• Air Wisconsin requests that we add 

language stating that ‘‘an aircraft can be 

returned to revenue service after a flap 

system reset is accomplished after a 

Flap Fail event provided that (then list 

the conditions).’’ 

We disagree with the request to add 

language to paragraph 4. of the quoted 

material in paragraph (h)(2) of this AD 

to specify when an aircraft can be 

returned to service. The requirements of 

paragraph (h)(2) of this AD are 

limitations. However, in paragraph 

(h)(6) of this AD, we do specify the 

criteria for returning the airplane to 

service following a flap fail event. We 

have not revised this AD in this regard. 

• Regarding paragraph 4.a. of the 

quoted material in paragraph (h)(2) of 

the NPRM, Comair requests that, for the 

flightcrew system tests, we clarify that 

the cycling of the flaps through 5 cycles 

applies only to the first flight following 

the flap reset by specifying, ‘‘For the 

first flight following an on-ground 

circuit breaker reset, prior to dispatch, 

the flaps must be operated for five full 

extension/retraction cycles with no 

subsequent failures.’’ 

We clarify that the intent is to perform 

the action of paragraph 4.a. once prior 

to dispatch following a flap fail event. 

We have revised that paragraph to read: 

‘‘Prior to the initial dispatch following 

an on-ground circuit breaker reset, the 

flaps must be operated for five full 

extension/retractions cycles by the 

flightcrew with no subsequent failures.’’ 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 11, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 10461 

• Comair requests that, for flightcrew 

system tests, we clarify that the term 

‘‘take-off,’’ instead of ‘‘dispatch,’’ should 

be used for the following tests to allow 

the crew to perform them during taxiout: thrust reverse, ground spoiler, and 

brake system. Air Wisconsin requests 

that we replace the word ‘‘dispatch’’ 

with the word ‘‘flight’’ in paragraphs 

4.a. and 4.b. of the quoted material in 

paragraph (h)(2) of the NPRM. 

We disagree with revising the word 

‘‘dispatch’’ in paragraph 4.a. of the 

quoted material in paragraph (h)(2) of 

the NPRM. We intend that these 

operations are to be performed as part 

of a pre-taxi checklist. We do not want 

these operations to be performed during 

taxi where, if discrepancies are noted, 

corrective actions would impact airport 

congestion and ground control services 

if the airplane has to return to the gate. 

However, as stated previously, we have 

revised paragraph 4.b. of the quoted 

material in paragraph (h)(2) of this AD 

to specify ‘‘each flight’’ instead of 

‘‘dispatch.’’ 

Request To Clarify Paragraph (h)(4) of 

the NPRM 

Comair requests that we clarify the 

intent of paragraph (h)(4) of the NPRM. 

Comair states that many of its actuators 

are in the category covered by 

paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and (g)(3)(ii) of the 

NPRM, for which no additional action 

for paragraph (g)(3) of the NPRM is 

required. Comair questions whether the 

intent of the new maintenance action in 

paragraph (h)(4) of the NPRM is to 

require a low-temperature torque test 

even for those actuators for which no 

action was required under paragraph 

(g)(3) of the NPRM. 

We provide the following 

clarification. Paragraph (h)(4) of this AD 

does not apply to actuators on which no 

action was required by paragraph (g)(3) 

of this AD. The wording in paragraph 

(h)(4) of this AD, ‘‘New Maintenance 

Action,’’ is explicit in that it applies to 

‘‘* * * airplanes for which the low 

temperature torque test of flap actuators 

is required by paragraph (g)(3) of this 

AD * * *’’ Paragraph (g)(3) of this AD 

applies only to actuators identified in 

paragraph (g)(3) and that meet the 

specifications in paragraph (g)(3)(i) or 

(g)(3)(ii) of this AD. Therefore, there is 

no requirement to perform a repetitive 

low-temperature torque test for 

actuators for which no action was 

required under paragraph (g)(3) of this 

AD. We have not revised this AD in this 

regard. 

Request To Add Phase-in Period to 

Paragraph (h)(4) of the NPRM 

Comair and Air Wisconsin request 

that we add a phase-in period to 

paragraph (h)(4) of the NPRM. Comair 

notes that a number of actuators are 

compliant with Bombardier Service 

Bulletin 601R–27–150, dated July 12, 

2007, from as early as February 15, 

2008. Comair states that it is unlikely 

this NPRM will supersede AD 2008–01– 

04 before February 15, 2009, and 

therefore some actuators will already 

have exceeded 12 months since last 

compliance. Comair concludes that 

since under AD 2008–01–04, paragraph 

(g)(3) was only a one-time compliance, 

and paragraph (h)(4) of the NPRM will 

now make that repetitive, a phase-in is 

necessary for actuators having early 

compliance. 

We agree with the commenter’s 

request to add a grace period to the 

compliance time of ‘‘within 12 months 

after doing the low temperature torque 

test’’ specified in paragraph (h)(4) of this 

AD. To avoid undue burden on the 

operators, adding a grace period is both 

desirable and prudent. We have 

determined that adding a 60-day grace 

period will not adversely affect safety. 

We have revised paragraph (h)(4) of this 

AD accordingly. 

Request To Revise Reference 

Comair, PSA Airlines, and Pinnacle 

Airlines request that we revise the 

reference to the fault isolation manual 

specified in paragraph (h)(6) of the 

NPRM. The commenters state that 

because the NPRM specifies Revision 

38, dated January 10, 2008, of Section 

27–50–00 of Chapter 27 of the 

Bombardier Canadair Regional Jet CRJ 

100/200/440 Fault Isolation Manual CSP 

A–009, Volume 1 (the ‘‘FIM’’), operators 

will not be in compliance when using 

later revisions of the FIM. Comair states 

that operators have no control over 

Bombardier revisions. PSA and Pinnacle 

state that an alternative method of 

compliance would be needed to use 

later Bombardier revisions. PSA 

recommends we remove the reference to 

Revision 38 of the FIM. Pinnacle 

recommends that we add ‘‘or later 

revisions’’ to the FIM reference. 

We cannot agree to revise the 

reference to the FIM specified in 

paragraph (h)(6) of this AD. We must 

specify a revision and a date to meet 

Office of Federal Register (OFR) 

regulations for publications 

incorporated by reference. We also 

cannot refer to ‘‘later revisions’’ of 

applicable service information 

according to OFR regulations. We have 

not revised this AD in this regard. 

Request To Revise Certain ‘‘Part’’ 

References 

Comair, Pinnacle Airlines, and Mesa 

Airlines request that we revise certain 

‘‘Part’’ references in the NPRM. (The 

‘‘Part’’ references correspond to 

language in the mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information.) Comair 

states that both paragraphs (h)(6) and 

(h)(7) of the NPRM are listed as ‘‘Part 

V.’’ Mesa states that paragraphs (h)(4) 

and (h)(5) are labeled as ‘‘Part IV.’’ 

Pinnacle notes that paragraphs (h)(5), 

(h)(6), and (h)(7) of the NPRM should 

refer to Parts V, VI, and VII, 

respectively. 

Based on the commenters’ remarks, 

we have reconsidered including ‘‘Part’’ 

references in this AD. In the NPRM, we 

intentionally included these references 

to correspond to the Canadian 

airworthiness directive. However, we 

find that referring to a ‘‘Part’’ of a 

Canadian airworthiness directive in the 

U.S. AD does not add clarity, is 

unnecessary, and may result in 

confusion for the reader. Therefore, we 

have removed these references from this 

AD. 

Request To Limit Reporting 

Requirement 

Comair and Air Wisconsin request 

that we limit the reporting requirement 

specified in paragraph (h)(7) of the 

NPRM. Comair states that a 2-year limit 

should provide enough data. Air 

Wisconsin also states that reporting 

should be limited to 2 years or dropped 

from the requirements. Pinnacle also 

notes that the reporting requirement is 

onerous and will require substantial 

logistics on the operator’s part. 

We agree to revise the reporting 

requirement in paragraph (h)(7) of this 

AD. The reporting requirement is 

necessary and must be mandated to 

monitor the effectiveness of the AD 

actions and to assist the manufacturer 

and the regulatory authorities in 

determining if additional rulemaking 

action is necessary. However, we agree 

the reporting can be limited. We have 

revised paragraph (h)(7) of this AD to 

specify that reporting is required for 

only 24 months. 

Request for Clarification on Inoperable 

Items 

PSA Airlines requests that we clarify 

whether it is OK to operate with items 

that are inoperable per the minimum 

equipment list (MEL). 

The AD takes precedence over other 

service information. Operating an 

airplane that does not comply with the 

AD violates part 39 of the Federal 

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 39). 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
10462 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 11, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

According to sections 121.628(b)(2) and 

91.213(b)(2) of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (14 CFR 121.628(b)(2) and 

91.213(b)(2)), instruments and 

equipment required by an AD to be in 

operable condition may not be included 

in the MEL unless the AD provides 

otherwise. 

Request To Clarify Compliance With 

the FIM 

PSA Airlines requests that we clarify 

how to comply with the FIM 

requirements in paragraph (h)(6) of the 

NPRM. The commenter states that since 

the FIM is a multiple-part document 

covering flight operations, dispatch, and 

maintenance, it is difficult to provide 

documentation for compliance with 

each part. The commenter also states 

that if part of this AD will require signoffs for each event, compliance 

documentation could be very confusing 

after a number of sign-offs. The 

commenter recommends inserting 

language that would eliminate the need 

for repetitive sign-offs, such as stating 

that the FIM maintenance requirements 

of paragraph (h)(6) must be tracked and 

completed in a manner acceptable to the 

principal maintenance inspector (PMI). 

We agree that adding the statement 

PSA Airlines requests would be 

effective. Therefore, we have revised 

paragraph (h)(6) of this AD to add the 

following statement: ‘‘These 

maintenance requirements must be 

tracked in a manner acceptable to the 

principal maintenance inspector (PMI).’’ 

Request To Clarify Paragraph (h)(6)(ii) 

of the NPRM 

Several commenters request that we 

clarify paragraph (h)(6)(ii) of the NPRM. 

Air Wisconsin requests that we clarify 

whether paragraph (h)(6)(ii) of the 

NPRM, which states ‘‘If another flap fail 

event occurs any time after the initial 

circuit breaker reset operation * * *’’ is 

meant to be within the process of 

exercising the components/systems 

specified in paragraph 4. ‘‘Dispatch 

Following a Flap Failed Event’’ of the 

quoted material in paragraph (h)(2) of 

this AD. 

PSA Airlines requests that we clarify 

paragraph (h)(6)(ii) of the NPRM by 

adding, ‘‘another event within the 10 

cycle limit’’ or ‘‘another event prior to 

completion of the FIM procedure from 

the previous event.’’ PSA states that the 

current wording could be interpreted to 

mean either another event within the 

10-cycle limit, or anytime after an initial 

flap rest, regardless of whether the FIM 

procedure has been complied with. 

Pinnacle Airlines requests that we 

add language to paragraph (h)(6)(ii) of 

the NPRM that specifies when the 

requirement to perform the maintenance 

actions of paragraph (h)(6) of the NPRM 

is no longer relevant. The commenter 

indicates that the statement requires 

that the action be continued in 

perpetuity. 

We agree to clarify paragraph (h)(6)(ii) 

of this AD. Paragraph (h)(6)(ii) of this 

AD is intended to apply to any flap fail 

event, whether in flight or during any of 

the checks required in paragraph 4.a. of 

the quoted material in paragraph (h)(2) 

of this AD. However, we do not intend 

that paragraph (h)(6)(ii) of this AD apply 

to any event regardless of whether the 

FIM procedure has been complied with. 

The paragraph (h)(6)(ii) requirement to 

perform the maintenance actions is 

required only if another flap fail event 

occurs during the 10-flight-cycle period 

following the initial circuit breaker rest 

authorized in paragraph (h)(6) of this 

AD. We have revised paragraph (h)(6)(ii) 

of this AD to clarify that if another flap 

fail event occurs anytime ‘‘within the 

10-flight-cycle limit’’ after the initial 

circuit breaker reset operation, the 

maintenance actions are required to be 

done before further flight. 

Request To Clarify Special Flight 

Permits 

PSA Airlines requests that a statement 

be added to indicate that aircraft having 

a second flap event or an aircraft on 

which the flaps cannot be reset may be 

ferried to a location where the FIM 

procedure specified in paragraph (h)(6) 

of this AD can be accomplished. 

We do not agree that it is necessary 

to add a statement to this AD. This AD 

does not prohibit ferry flights. Special 

flight permits, as described in Section 

21.197 and Section 21.199 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 

21.197 and 21.199), may be requested to 

operate the airplane to a location where 

the requirements of this AD can be 

accomplished. We have not revised this 

AD in this regard. 

Request To Substantiate Repetitive Low 

Temperature Torque Test 

Mesa Airlines requests data for 

substantiating the repeat of the low 

temperature torque test every 12 months 

following the initial test. 

The necessity for repeat tests and the 

compliance time interval were 

determined by the State of Design 

authority (Transport Canada Civil 

Aviation (TCCA)) based on risk analysis 

and consultation with the airplane 

manufacturer. We have considered 

TCCA’s determination, as well as the 

safety implications and the time 

necessary to do the inspections, and 

have determined that requiring the 

repetitive low temperature torque tests 

at 12-month intervals is appropriate. 

However, under the provisions of 

paragraph (j) of the AD, we will 

consider requests for adjustments to the 

compliance time if data are submitted to 

substantiate that such an adjustment 

would provide an acceptable level of 

safety. We have not revised this AD in 

this regard. 

Request To Consider an Option to the 

Existing Actuator System 

Cox and Company requests that its 

‘‘Flap Actuator Heating System’’ be 

considered as an ‘‘add on’’ option to the 

existing actuator system. The 

commenter states that its test data 

indicate that its ‘‘Flap Actuator Heating 

System’’ will eliminate nearly all soft 

jams that occur on Bombardier Model 

CL–600–2B19 airplanes during cold 

weather. 

We do not concur. We cannot include 

such an option in an AD when that 

option is not yet certificated. When the 

design has received an FAA 

Supplemental Type Certificate (STC), it 

is the operator’s discretion to consider 

installation. However, under the 

provisions of paragraph (j) of this AD, 

we will consider requests from 

operators for approval of an AMOC if 

sufficient data are submitted to 

substantiate that the installation would 

provide an acceptable level of safety. 

We have not revised this AD in this 

regard. 

Request To Add Calendar Limitation 

Pinnacle Airlines requests that we 

add a calendar limitation to paragraph 

4. of the quoted material in paragraph 

(h)(2) of the NPRM that is similar to the 

limitation specified in paragraph 3. of 

the same quote. Pinnacle is concerned 

that not having a calendar limitation 

would result in significant operational 

impacts throughout the calendar year. 

We disagree with the request to add 

a calendar limitation to paragraph 4. of 

the quoted material in paragraph (h)(2) 

of this AD. Paragraph 3. of the quoted 

material in paragraph (h)(2) of this AD 

is specifically focused on mitigating a 

cold weather flap fail event. However, 

while paragraph 4. applies to cold 

weather events, it is not limited to that 

scenario. Therefore, regardless of 

weather conditions, paragraph 4. of the 

quoted material in paragraph (h)(2) of 

this AD is necessary to address the 

identified unsafe condition. We have 

not revised this AD in this regard. 

Request To Clarify Compliance 

Pinnacle Airlines asks whether noncompliance with the AD would happen 

if the flightcrew does the operational 

check specified in paragraph 4.a. of the 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 11, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 10463 

quoted material in paragraph (h)(2) of 

the NPRM and neglects to record 

compliance with the check. Pinnacle 

Airlines also asks whether for paragraph 

4.b. in the quoted material in the same 

paragraph non-compliance with the AD 

would happen if the flightcrew neglects 

to record compliance with the 

requirement for the operational check of 

the thrust reversers, ground spoilers, 

and brake system. 

Compliance with paragraphs 4.a. and 

4.b. of the quoted material in paragraph 

(h)(2) of this AD is predicated on 

paragraph (h)(6) of this AD, which 

invokes the limitation specified in 

paragraph (h)(2) of this AD if the 

maintenance actions cannot be 

performed. The exception to doing the 

maintenance actions was intended for 

relief only when an airplane was at a 

location where maintenance personnel 

and/or equipment were not available. 

Maintenance control authorization is 

required for the flightcrew to perform 

this operation. The method of 

documentation is at the discretion of the 

operator and the principal operations 

inspector (POI). We have not revised 

this AD in this regard. 

Request To Clarify the Phrase 

‘‘Maintenance Actions Cannot Be 

Done’’ 

Pinnacle Airlines and Air Wisconsin 

request that we clarify the phrase 

‘‘maintenance actions cannot be done’’ 

in paragraph (h)(6) of the NPRM. 

Pinnacle Airlines requests that we 

provide specific language and 

conditions concerning this statement 

and questions if maintaining flight 

schedule integrity is an adequate reason 

to establish that ‘‘maintenance actions 

cannot be done.’’ 

We agree that the statement can be 

clarified. The intent of this AD is to 

prevent an unsafe condition. The only 

reason for deferring maintenance is a 

lack of available maintenance resources. 

We have revised paragraph (h)(6) of this 

AD by replacing ‘‘if maintenance actions 

cannot be done’’ with ‘‘if maintenance 

resources are not available.’’ 

Request To Add Requirement to 

Paragraph (h)(2) of the NPRM 

Pinnacle Airlines requests that we 

include in paragraph 4. of the quoted 

material in paragraph (h)(2) of the 

NPRM the following statement: ‘‘Circuit 

breaker reset operation can be 

performed by the flight crew when 

authorized by the operator’s 

maintenance control organization.’’ 

Pinnacle Airlines notes that this 

statement is also in paragraph (h)(6) of 

the NPRM. 

We disagree with the request to add 

the statement suggested by the 

commenter. The reset function 

stipulated in paragraph 4. of the quoted 

material in paragraph (h)(2) of this AD 

is intended to be done by the flightcrew. 

Compliance with this paragraph is 

predicated on paragraph (h)(6) of this 

AD, which invokes the limitation 

specified in paragraph (h)(2) of this AD 

only if maintenance actions in 

accordance with the FIM cannot be 

performed. We have not revised this AD 

in this regard. 

Request To Clarify Compliance With 

Paragraph (h)(7) of the NPRM 

Pinnacle Airlines requests that we 

clarify compliance with paragraph (h)(7) 

of the NPRM. Pinnacle questions 

whether it would constitute noncompliance with the AD if the operator 

does not obtain all of the flaps 

electronic control unit (FECU) codes 

and report them to Bombardier within 

30 days. Pinnacle also would like to 

know how the operator brings an 

airplane back into regulatory 

compliance if the FAA considers the 

aforementioned scenario to be noncompliance with the AD. 

Non-compliance with the reporting 

requirement in paragraph (h)(7) of this 

AD is non-compliance with the AD. The 

operator brings the aircraft back into 

compliance by meeting the reporting 

requirements. Under the provisions of 

paragraph (j) of this AD, we will 

consider requests from affected persons 

for approval of an AMOC. We have not 

revised this AD in this regard. 

Request To Clarify the Phrase ‘‘or 30 

Days After the Effective Date of This 

AD’’ 

Air Wisconsin requests that we clarify 

what is meant in paragraph (h)(7) of the 

NPRM by the phrase, ‘‘or 30 days after 

the effective date * * *.’’ 

The intent of the phrase ‘‘30 days after 

the effective date’’ in paragraph (h)(7) of 

the NPRM is to allow additional time for 

operators to report if fault data were 

found before the effective date of this 

AD. However, we have revised 

paragraph (h)(7) of this AD to limit the 

need to report to ‘‘as of the effective date 

of this AD’’ and, therefore, we have 

removed the phrase ‘‘30 days after the 

effective date’’ from paragraph (h)(7) of 

this AD. 

Request To Revise Reference 

Pinnacle Airlines requests that 

paragraph (h)(7) of the NPRM be 

amended to indicate ‘‘Task 05–51–50– 

980–801 as introduced in the Canadair 

Regional Jet TR 05–035, dated July 13, 

2007, to the Canadair Regional Jet 

Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM), or 

latest revision.’’ Pinnacle Airlines states 

that when Bombardier incorporates TR 

05–035 into the AMM, operators will 

have to obtain an AMOC to comply with 

the AD. 

We cannot agree with the 

commenter’s request to add a reference 

to the latest revision of the service 

bulletin. We cannot refer to later 

revisions of applicable service 

information according to OFR 

regulations for publications 

incorporated by reference. We agree that 

affected persons will have to obtain an 

AMOC to comply with the AD if they 

plan to use later revisions. We have not 

revised this AD in this regard. 

Request To Clarify Intent of Paragraph 

3.a.(i) in the Quoted Material of 

Paragraph (h)(2) of the NPRM 

Air Wisconsin requests that we verify 

that the intent of paragraph 3.a.(i) of the 

quoted material in paragraph (h)(2) of 

the NPRM was to include a reference to 

overhaul. 

The text in paragraph 3.a.(i) of the 

quoted material in paragraph (h)(2) of 

this AD is correct. We intended to 

include a reference to overhaul. We 

have not revised this AD in this regard. 

Request To Clarify Compliance With 

Paragraph (g)(3) of the NPRM 

Air Wisconsin asks whether 

paragraph (h)(4) of the NPRM 

supersedes paragraph (g)(3) of the 

NPRM. 

Paragraph (h)(4) of this AD does not 

‘‘supersede’’ paragraph (g)(3) of this AD. 

Paragraph (h)(4) of this AD refers to 

paragraph (g)(3) of this AD as a means 

of identification of those actuators to 

which the requirements of paragraph 

(h)(4) apply. In other words, for those 

actuators that have had the initial test 

required by paragraph (g)(3) of this AD, 

operators must repeat the test in 

accordance with the requirements of 

paragraph (h)(4) of this AD every 12 

months. We have not revised this AD in 

this regard. 

Request To Revise FIM Reference To 

Refer to Part Numbers 

Air Wisconsin requests that we revise 

paragraph (h)(6) of the NPRM to say 

‘‘* * * IAW section 27–50–00 of the 

FIM, CSP A–009 as introduced in 

revision 38 dated January 10, 2008 as it 

applies to the affected part numbers 

identified in par (g)(3)(i) and (ii).’’ 

We do not agree to revise paragraph 

(h)(6) of this AD. The conditions of 

paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and (g)(3)(ii) of this 

AD apply to the low temperature torque 

testing requirements of paragraph (g)(3) 

of this AD. Those conditions have no 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
10464 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 11, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

correlation to the FIM procedures that 

are to be followed after a flap fail event. 

We have not revised this AD in this 

regard. 

Request To Clarify Actions 

Air Wisconsin requests that we clarify 

what to do if the maintenance actions 

specified in paragraph (h)(6)(i) of the 

NPRM cannot be done. 

If an operator cannot comply with an 

AD, the operator must contact the FAA 

for repair instructions. For this AD, 

operators may request an AMOC, as 

specified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD. 

We have not revised this AD in this 

regard. 

Request for an Alternative Method to 

Paragraph (h)(8) of the NPRM 

Air Wisconsin requests that we allow 

the installation of a placard that is an 

alternative to the placard specified in 

paragraph (h)(8) of the NPRM. The 

commenter suggests that, as an 

alternative to using the placard 

identified in Bombardier Service 

Bulletin 601R–11–090, dated August 15, 

2008, operators can use a placard that 

says ‘‘Do Not Extend Flaps to 8 or 20 

above 200 KIAS.’’ 

We do not agree to revise paragraph 

(h)(8) of this AD. The intention of this 

paragraph is to apply to all operators. 

Individual operators have the option of 

using an alternative placard by 

requesting an AMOC in accordance with 

the procedures specified in paragraph (j) 

of this AD. We have not revised this AD 

in this regard. 

Request To Revise Wording in 

Paragraphs 1.a. and 1.b. of the Quoted 

Material in Paragraph (f)(2) of the 

NPRM 

The Air Line Pilots Association 

(ALPA) requests that we revise the 

wording in paragraphs 1.a. and 1.b. of 

the quoted material in paragraph (f)(2) 

of the NPRM so that the phrase ‘‘and 

can be reasonably expected to remain at 

or above this visibility until after 

landing’’ is replaced with ‘‘and shall be 

forecast in the Terminal Area Forecast 

(TAF) to remain at or above this 

visibility until after landing.’’ 

We acknowledge the commenter’s 

request. However, paragraph (f)(2) of 

this AD is a restatement of the existing 

requirements of AD 2008–01–04. We 

cannot change the wording, as those 

who have already complied with the 

AFM revision specified in that AD 

would then be out of compliance. 

However, we infer the commenter 

intended to request that we revise the 

new AFM revision specified in 

paragraph (h)(2) of this AD. We have 

changed the wording in paragraph 1.a. 

of the quoted material in paragraph 

(h)(2) of this AD as follows: 

’’When conducting a precision approach, 

the reported visibility (or RVR) is confirmed 

to be at or above the visibility associated with 

the landing minima for the approach in use, 

and shall be forecast in the Terminal Area 

Forecast (TAF) to remain at or above this 

visibility until after landing; or’’ 

We have changed the wording in 

paragraph 1.b. of the quoted material in 

paragraph (h)(2) of this AD as follows: 

’’When conducting a non-precision 

approach, the reported ceiling and visibility 

(or RVR) are confirmed to be at or above the 

ceiling and visibility associated with the 

landing minima for the approach in use, and 

shall be forecast in the Terminal Area 

Forecast (TAF) to remain at or above this 

visibility until after landing; or’’ 

Request To Add Language Calling for a 

Permanent Solution 

ALPA requests that we add language 

to the NPRM to be similar to Canadian 

AD CF–2007–10R1, which calls out the 

need for a permanent solution. The 

commenter states that it appears that a 

flap actuator redesign proposal has been 

accepted by the Canadian 

Transportation Safety Board and is 

being developed by the manufacturer 

that will ultimately remove some of the 

operational and maintenance actions 

called out in this AD. The commenter 

also states that a provision for a 

permanent solution that will ultimately 

remove some of the operational and 

maintenance actions called out in this 

AD must be included in this AD. 

We do not agree to add language 

specifying that there is a need for a 

permanent solution. Such a statement 

adds no additional risk mitigation or 

clarification. The new actuators referred 

to in paragraph (h)(5) of this AD are an 

optional maintenance action that would 

terminate the requirements of paragraph 

3. of the quoted material in paragraph 

(h)(2) of this AD. In addition, the 

reporting requirement of paragraph 

(h)(7) of this AD is being used to 

monitor the effectiveness of the AD 

actions and will enable the 

manufacturer to obtain better insight 

into the nature, cause, and extent of the 

issue, and eventually to develop final 

action to address the unsafe condition. 

Once final action has been identified, 

we might consider further rulemaking. 

We have not revised this AD in this 

regard. 

Request To Add Language To Address 

‘‘Known Icing Enroute’’ 

ALPA requests that we add language 

to the NPRM to address ‘‘known icing 

enroute.’’ ALPA states that diversion 

operations in icing conditions could 

pose a serious icing risk for aircraft 

operating with the flaps at some 

intermediate setting. ALPA concludes 

that the unintended consequences of an 

aircraft’s flaps being exposed to icing 

conditions for extended periods of time 

must be addressed in the operational 

portion of the NPRM. 

We appreciate ALPA’s comment for 

identifying a generic issue in the AFM. 

While this comment is not specific to 

this AD, it has highlighted a deficiency 

in the Abnormal Procedures section of 

the AFM. Flap failure in an extended 

position while in icing conditions is a 

generic issue. A TR to the AFM may be 

issued to address this deficiency. Once 

this TR has been issued and approved, 

we might consider further rulemaking. 

We have not revised this AD in this 

regard. 

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 

policies. Any such differences are 

highlighted in a NOTE within the AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD will affect 

684 products of U.S. registry. We also 

estimate that it will take about 18 workhours per product to comply with the 

basic requirements of this AD. The 

average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. 

Required parts will cost a negligible 

amount 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 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 11, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 10465 

this AD to the U.S. operators to be 

$984,960, or $1,440 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 

■ Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as 

follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing Amendment 39–15329 (73 FR 

1964, January 11, 2008) and adding the 

following new AD: 

2009–06–12 Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly 

Canadair): Amendment 39–15848. 

Docket No. FAA–2008–1318; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–NM–155–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This airworthiness directive (AD) 

becomes effective April 15, 2009. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This AD supersedes AD 2008–01–04, 

Amendment 39–15329. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Bombardier Model 

CL–600–2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) 

airplanes, certificated in any category, serial 

numbers 7003 through 7990 and 8000 and 

subsequent. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 27: Flight controls. 

Reason 

(e) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states: 

* * * * * 

The Bombardier CL–600–2B19 airplanes 

have had a history of flap failures at various 

positions for several years. Flap failure may 

result in a significant increase in required 

landing distances and higher fuel 

consumption than planned during a 

diversion. * * * 

* * * * * 

Requirements of AD 2007–17–07, 

Amendment 39–15165: Actions and 

Compliance 

(f) Unless already done, do the following 

actions. 

(1) Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) Change: 

Within 30 days after September 5, 2007 (the 

effective date of AD 2007–17–07), revise the 

Canadair Regional Jet Airplane Flight Manual 

CSP A–012, by incorporating the information 

in Canadair Regional Jet Temporary Revision 

(TR) RJ/165, dated July 6, 2007, into the 

AFM. Accomplishing the requirements of 

paragraph (h)(1) of this AD terminates the 

requirements of this paragraph and the AFM 

revision required by this paragraph may be 

removed from the AFM. 

Note 1: The actions required by paragraph 

(f)(1) of this AD may be done by inserting a 

copy of Canadair Regional Jet TR RJ/165, 

dated July 6, 2007, into the Canadair 

Regional Jet Airplane Flight Manual CSP 

A–012. When this TR has been included in 

general revisions of the AFM, the general 

revisions may be inserted in the AFM. 

(2) Operational Procedures: Within 30 days 

after September 5, 2007, revise the 

Limitations Section of the Canadair Regional 

Jet Airplane Flight Manual CSP A–012, to 

include the following statement. This may be 

done by inserting a copy of paragraph (f)(2) 

of this AD in the AFM. Accomplishing the 

requirements of paragraph (h)(2) of this AD 

terminates the requirements of this paragraph 

and the AFM revision required by this 

paragraph may be removed from the AFM. 

‘‘1. Flap Extended Diversion 

Upon arrival at the destination airport, an 

approach shall not be commenced, nor shall 

the flaps be extended beyond the 0 degree 

position, unless one of the following 

conditions exists: 

a. When conducting a precision approach, 

the reported visibility (or RVR) is confirmed 

to be at or above the visibility associated with 

the landing minima for the approach in use, 

and can be reasonably expected to remain at 

or above this visibility until after landing; or 

b. When conducting a non-precision 

approach, the reported ceiling and visibility 

(or RVR) are confirmed to be at or above the 

ceiling and visibility associated with the 

landing minima for the approach in use, and 

can be reasonably expected to remain at or 

above this ceiling and visibility until after 

landing; or 

c. An emergency or abnormal situation 

occurs that requires landing at the nearest 

suitable airport; or 

d. The fuel remaining is sufficient to 

conduct the approach, execute a missed 

approach, divert to a suitable airport with the 

flaps extended to the landing position, 

conduct an approach at the airport and land 

with 1000 lb (454 kg) of fuel remaining. 

Note 1: The fuel burn factor (as per AFM 

TR/165) shall be applied to the normal fuel 

consumption for calculation of the flaps 

extended missed approach, climb, diversion 

and approach fuel consumption. 

Note 2: Terrain and weather must allow a 

minimum flight altitude not exceeding 

15,000 feet along the diversion route. 

Note 3: For the purpose of this AD, a 

‘‘suitable airport’’ is an airport that has at 

least one usable runway, served by an 

instrument approach if operating under 

Instrument Flight Rules (IFR), and the airport 

is equipped as per the applicable regulations 

and standards for marking and lighting. The 

existing and forecast weather for this airport 

shall be at or above landing minima for the 

approach in use. 

2. Flap Failure After Takeoff 

When a takeoff alternate is filed, terrain 

and weather must allow a minimum flight 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
10466 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 11, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

altitude not exceeding 15,000 feet along the 

diversion route to that alternate, or other 

suitable airport. The fuel at departure shall 

be sufficient to divert to the takeoff alternate 

or other suitable airport with the flaps 

extended to the takeoff position, conduct and 

approach and land with 1000 lb (454 kg) of 

fuel remaining. 

Note: The fuel burn factor (as per AFM TR/ 

165) shall be applied to the normal fuel 

consumption for calculation of the flaps 

extended, climb, diversion and approach fuel 

consumption. 

3. Flap Zero Landing 

Operations where all useable runways at 

the destination and alternate airports are 

forecast to be wet or contaminated (as 

defined in the AFM) are prohibited during 

the cold weather season (December to March 

inclusive in the northern hemisphere) unless 

one of the following conditions exists: 

a. The flap actuators have been verified 

serviceable in accordance with Part C (Low 

Temperature Torque Test of the Flap 

Actuators) of SB 601R–27–150, July 12, 2007, 

or 

b. The flight is conducted at a cruise 

altitude where the SAT is ¥60 deg C or 

warmer. If the SAT in flight is colder than 

¥60 deg C, descent to warmer air shall be 

initiated within 10 minutes, or 

c. The Landing Distance Available on a 

useable runway at the destination airport is 

at least equal to the actual landing distance 

required for flaps zero. This distance shall be 

based on Bombardier performance data, and 

shall take into account forecast weather and 

anticipated runway conditions, or 

d. The Landing Distance Available on a 

useable runway at the filed alternate airport, 

or other suitable airport is at least equal to 

the actual landing distance for flaps zero. 

This distance shall be based on Bombardier 

performance data, and shall take into account 

forecast weather and anticipated runway 

conditions. 

Note 1: If the forecast destination weather 

is less than 200 feet above DH or MDA, or 

less than 1 mile (1500 meters) above the 

authorized landing visibility (or equivalent 

RVR), as applied to the usable runway at the 

destination airport, condition 3.a., 3.b., or 

3.d. above must be satisfied. 

Note 2: When conducting No Alternate IFR 

(NAIFR) operations, condition 3.a., 3.b., or 

3.c. above must be satisfied.’’ 

(3) Training: As of 30 days after September 

5, 2007, no affected airplane may be operated 

unless the flight crewmembers of that 

airplane and the operational control/dispatch 

personnel for that airplane have received 

training that is acceptable to the principal 

operations inspector (POI) on the operational 

procedures required by paragraph (f)(2) of 

this AD. Accomplishing the requirements of 

paragraph (h)(3)(i) of this AD terminates the 

requirements of this paragraph. 

(4) Maintenance Actions: Within 120 days 

after September 5, 2007, do the cleaning and 

lubrication of the flexible shafts, installation 

of metallic seals in the flexible drive-shafts, 

and all applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions by doing all the applicable 

actions specified in ‘‘PART A’’ of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier 

Service Bulletin 601R–27–150, dated July 12, 

2007; except if torque test results are not 

satisfactory, before further flight, install a 

serviceable actuator in accordance with the 

service bulletin or, if no serviceable actuators 

are available, contact the Manager, New York 

Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, for 

corrective action. Do all applicable related 

investigative and corrective actions before 

further flight. 

Requirements of AD 2008–01–04: Actions 

and Compliance With Revised Affected 

Airplanes for Paragraph (g)(3) 

(g) Unless already done, do the following 

actions. 

(1) As of November 30, 2008, no affected 

airplane may be operated unless the flight 

crewmembers of that airplane have received 

simulator training on reduced or zero flap 

landing that is acceptable to the POI. 

Thereafter, this training must be done during 

the normal simulator training cycle, at 

intervals not to exceed 12 months. 

Accomplishing the requirements of 

paragraph (h)(3)(ii) of this AD terminates the 

requirements of this paragraph. 

(2) Within 24 months or 4,000 flight hours 

after February 15, 2008 (the effective date of 

AD 2008–01–04), whichever occurs first: Do 

a pressure test of the flexible drive-shaft, and 

do all applicable corrective actions, by doing 

all the applicable actions specified in ‘‘PART 

B’’ of the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R–27–150, 

dated July 12, 2007. Do all applicable 

corrective actions before further flight. 

(3) For airplanes having flap actuators, part 

numbers (P/Ns), 852D100–19/–21, 853D100– 

19/–20, and 854D100–19/–20 (Bombardier 

P/Ns 601R93101–19/–21, 601R93103–19/–20, 

and 601R93104–19/–20), specified in 

paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and (g)(3)(ii) of this AD: 

Within 24 months after February 15, 2008, do 

a low temperature torque test of the flap 

actuators, and do all applicable corrective 

actions, by doing all the applicable actions 

specified in ‘‘PART C’’ of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier 

Service Bulletin 601R–27–150, dated July 12, 

2007. Do all applicable corrective actions 

before further flight. 

(i) Airplanes having actuators that have not 

been repaired and that have accumulated 

more than 5,000 flight cycles since new. 

(ii) Airplanes having actuators that have 

been repaired and that have accumulated 

more than 5,000 flight cycles on the inboard 

pinion shaft seals, P/Ns 853SC177–1/–2. 

New Requirements of This AD: Actions and 

Compliance 

(h) Unless already done, do the following 

actions. 

(1) New AFM Change: Within 30 days after 

the effective date of this AD, revise the 

Canadair Regional Jet Airplane Flight Manual 

(AFM) CSP A–012, by incorporating the 

information in Canadair Regional Jet 

Temporary Revision (TR) RJ/165–1, dated 

August 7, 2008, into the AFM. 

Accomplishing this action terminates the 

requirements of paragraph (f)(1) of this AD 

and after this action has been done, the AFM 

revision required by paragraph (f)(1) of this 

AD may be removed from the AFM. 

Note 2: The actions required by paragraph 

(h)(1) of this AD may be done by inserting 

a copy of Canadair Regional Jet TR RJ/165– 

1, dated August 7, 2008, into the Canadair 

Regional Jet AFM CSP A–012. When this TR 

has been included in general revisions of the 

AFM, the general revisions may be inserted 

in the AFM. 

(2) New Operational Procedures: Within 30 

days after the effective date of this AD, revise 

the Limitations Section of the Canadair 

Regional Jet AFM CSP A–012, to include the 

following statement. This may be done by 

inserting a copy of paragraph (h)(2) of this 

AD into the AFM. Accomplishing this action 

terminates the requirements of paragraph 

(f)(2) of this AD and after this action has been 

done, the AFM revision required by 

paragraph (f)(2) of this AD may be removed 

from the AFM. 

‘‘1. Flap Extended Diversion 

Upon arrival at the destination airport, an 

approach shall not be commenced, nor shall 

the flaps be extended beyond the 0 degree 

position, unless one of the following 

conditions exists: 

a. When conducting a precision approach, 

the reported visibility (or RVR) is confirmed 

to be at or above the visibility associated with 

the landing minima for the approach in use, 

and shall be forecast in the Terminal Area 

Forecast (TAF) to remain at or above this 

visibility until after landing; or 

b. When conducting a non-precision 

approach, the reported ceiling and visibility 

(or RVR) are confirmed to be at or above the 

ceiling and visibility associated with the 

landing minima for the approach in use, and 

shall be forecast in the Terminal Area 

Forecast (TAF) to remain at or above this 

visibility until after landing; or 

c. An emergency or abnormal situation 

occurs that requires landing at the nearest 

suitable airport; or 

d. The fuel remaining is sufficient to 

conduct the approach, execute a missed 

approach, divert to a suitable airport with the 

flaps extended to the landing position, 

conduct an approach at the airport and land 

with 1000 lb (454 kg) of fuel remaining. 

Note 1: The fuel burn factor (as per AFM 

TR RJ/165–1) shall be applied to the normal 

fuel consumption for calculation of the flaps 

extended missed approach, climb, diversion 

and approach fuel consumption. 

Note 2: Terrain and weather must allow a 

minimum flight altitude not exceeding 

15,000 feet along the diversion route. 

Note 3: For the purpose of this AD, a 

‘‘suitable airport’’ is an airport that has at 

least one usable runway, served by an 

instrument approach if operating under 

Instrument Flight Rules (IFR), and the airport 

is equipped as per the applicable regulations 

and standards for marking and lighting. The 

existing and forecast weather for this airport 

shall be at or above landing minima for the 

approach in use. 

2. Flap Failure After Takeoff 

When a takeoff alternate is filed, terrain 

and weather must allow a minimum flight 

altitude not exceeding 15,000 feet along the 

diversion route to that alternate, or other 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 11, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 10467 

suitable airport. The fuel at departure shall 

be sufficient to divert to the takeoff alternate 

or other suitable airport with the flaps 

extended to the takeoff position, conduct an 

approach and land with 1000 lb (454 kg) of 

fuel remaining. 

Note: The fuel burn factor (as per AFM TR 

RJ/165–1) shall be applied to the normal fuel 

consumption for calculation of the flaps 

extended, climb, diversion and approach fuel 

consumption. 

3. Flap Zero Landing 

Operations where all useable runways at 

the destination and alternate airports are 

forecast to be wet or contaminated (as 

defined in the AFM) are prohibited during 

the cold weather season (December to March 

inclusive in the northern hemisphere) unless 

one of the following four conditions (a. 

through d.) exists: 

a. Each installed flap actuator meets one of 

the following three conditions: 

(i) Actuators have less than 5000 flight 

cycles (FC) since new or overhaul and/or the 

actuators have been verified serviceable in 

accordance with Part C (Low Temperature 

Torque Test of the Flap Actuators) of 

Bombardier Service Bulletin (SB) 601R–27– 

150, issued July 12, 2007, or 

(ii) Actuators have P/N 601R93101–19/–21 

(Vendor P/N 852D100–19/–21), P/N 

601R93103–19/–20 (Vendor P/N 853D100– 

19/–20), or P/N 601R93104–19/–20 (Vendor 

P/N 854D100–19/–20), and have less than 

5000 FC since repair (where it can be shown 

that the actuator inboard pinion seals, Eaton 

P/Ns 853SC177–1 and –2, were replaced), or 

(iii) Actuators have P/N 601R93101–23/–25 

(Vendor P/N 852D100–23/–25) installed at all 

inboard flap positions, P/N 601R93103–23/– 

24 (Vendor P/N 853D100–23/–24) installed at 

outboard flap No. 3 position, and P/N 

601R93104–23/–24 (Vendor P/N 854D100– 

23/-24) installed at outboard flap No. 4 

position. 

b. Pre-dispatch forecast ground 

temperature at the time of arrival at 

destination airport is above ¥25 deg C, 

utilizing a reliable weather forecast service 

acceptable to the principal operations 

inspector (POI). 

c.The Landing Distance Available on a 

useable runway at the destination airport is 

at least equal to the actual landing distance 

required for flaps zero. This distance shall be 

based on Bombardier performance data, and 

shall take into account forecast weather and 

anticipated runway conditions. 

d.The Landing Distance Available on a 

useable runway at the filed alternate airport, 

or other suitable airport is at least equal to 

the actual landing distance for flaps zero. 

This distance shall be based on Bombardier 

performance data, and shall take into account 

forecast weather and anticipated runway 

conditions. 

Note 1: If the forecast destination weather 

is less than 200 feet above DH or MDA, or 

less than 1 mile (1500 meters) above the 

authorized landing visibility (or equivalent 

RVR), as applied to the usable runway at the 

destination airport, condition 3.a., 3.b., or 

3.d. above must be satisfied. 

Note 2: When conducting No Alternate IFR 

(NAIFR) operations, condition 3.a., 3.b., or 

3.c. above must be satisfied. 

4. Dispatch Following a Flap Failed Event 

If normal flap system operation can be 

restored after an on-ground system reset, 

continued revenue operation of that airplane 

is permitted, provided conditions a. and b., 

and either c. or d., below are satisfied: 

a. Prior to the initial dispatch following an 

on-ground circuit breaker reset, the flaps 

must be operated for five full extension/ 

retractions cycles by the flightcrew with no 

subsequent failures. 

b. Prior to each flight following an onground circuit breaker reset, the thrust 

reversers, ground spoilers, and brake system 

are verified operational by the flightcrew. 

c. The Landing Distance Available on a 

useable runway at the destination airport is 

at least equal to the actual landing distance 

required for flaps zero. This distance shall be 

based on Bombardier performance data, and 

shall take into account forecast weather and 

anticipated runway conditions. 

d. The Landing Distance Available on a 

useable runway at the filed alternate airport, 

or other suitable airport is at least equal to 

the actual landing distance for flaps zero. 

This distance shall be based on Bombardier 

performance data, and shall take into account 

forecast weather and anticipated runway 

conditions. 

Note 1: If the forecast destination weather 

is less than 200 feet above DH or MDA, or 

less than 1 mile (1500 meters) above the 

authorized landing visibility (or equivalent 

RVR), as applied to the usable runway at the 

destination airport, condition 4.d. above 

must be satisfied. 

Note 2: When conducting No Alternate IFR 

(NAIFR) operations, condition 4.c. above 

must be satisfied.’’ 

(3) New Training: Do the requirements 

specified in paragraphs (h)(3)(i) and (h)(3)(ii) 

of this AD. 

(i) As of 30 days after the effective date of 

this AD, no affected airplane may be operated 

unless the flight crewmembers of that 

airplane and the operational control/dispatch 

personnel for that airplane have received 

training that is acceptable to the POI on the 

operational procedures required by 

paragraph (h)(2) of this AD. Accomplishing 

this action terminates the requirements 

specified in paragraph (f)(3) of this AD. 

(ii) As of September 30, 2009, no affected 

airplane may be operated unless the flight 

crewmembers of that airplane have received 

simulator training on reduced or zero flap 

landing that is acceptable to the POI. 

Thereafter, this training must be done during 

the normal simulator training cycle, at 

intervals not to exceed 12 months. 

Accomplishing this action terminates the 

requirements specified in paragraph (g)(1) of 

this AD. 

(4) New Maintenance Action: For airplanes 

on which the low temperature torque test of 

the flap actuators is required by paragraph 

(g)(3) of this AD and on which the actuators 

have not been replaced: Within 12 months 

after doing the low temperature torque test 

specified in paragraph (g)(3) of this AD, or 

within 60 days after the effective date of this 

AD, whichever occurs later, and thereafter at 

intervals not to exceed 12 months, do a low 

temperature torque test of the flap actuators, 

and do all applicable corrective actions 

specified in Part C of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 

601R–27–150, dated July 12, 2007. Do all 

applicable corrective actions before further 

flight. Replacing the actuators terminates the 

repetitive torque tests required by this 

paragraph for those actuators; however, the 

replacement actuators are still affected by the 

requirements of paragraph (g)(3) of this AD, 

and after passing the initial low temperature 

torque test required by paragraph (g)(3) of 

this AD, the repetitive torque tests of 

paragraph (h)(4) of this AD apply again. 

(5) New Optional Maintenance Action: 

Installation of actuators having P/N 

601R93101–23/–25 (Vendor P/N 852D100– 

23/–25), P/N 601R93103–23/–24 (Vendor P/ 

N 853D100–23/–24), and P/N 601R93104–23/ 

–24 (Vendor P/N 854D100–23/–24) in 

accordance with Bombardier Service Bulletin 

601R–27–151, Revision B, dated June 12, 

2008, terminates the requirements of 

paragraph ‘‘3. Flap Zero Landing,’’ of the 

statement required by paragraph (h)(2) of this 

AD. After doing the installation specified in 

this paragraph, paragraph ‘‘3. Flap Zero 

Landing,’’ specified in paragraph (h)(2) of 

this AD, may be removed from the 

limitations section of the AFM. 

(6) Dispatch Following a Flap Fail Event: 

For airplanes on which a flap fail message 

occurs, prior to further flight, do all 

applicable maintenance actions in 

accordance with Section 27–50–00 of 

Chapter 27 of the Bombardier Canadair 

Regional Jet CRJ100/200/440 Fault Isolation 

Manual CSP A–009, Volume 1, Revision 38, 

dated January 10, 2008; except if 

maintenance resources are not available and 

normal flap system operation can be restored 

after an on-ground circuit breaker reset 

operation, then continued revenue operation 

is permitted without further maintenance 

action for up to 10 flight cycles, subject to the 

operating limitations specified by the 

procedure titled ‘‘4. Dispatch Following a 

Flap Failed Event,’’ specified in paragraph 

(h)(2) of this AD; except as provided by 

paragraphs (h)(6)(i) and (h)(6)(ii) of this AD. 

The circuit breaker reset operation can be 

performed by the flightcrew when authorized 

by the operator’s maintenance control 

organization. These maintenance 

requirements must be tracked in a manner 

acceptable to the principal maintenance 

inspector (PMI). 

(i) Within 10 flight cycles following the 

initial on-ground circuit breaker reset 

operation, do all applicable maintenance 

actions in accordance with Section 27–50–00 

of Chapter 27 of the Bombardier Canadair 

Regional Jet CRJ100/200/440 Fault Isolation 

Manual CSP A–009, Volume 1, Revision 38, 

dated January 10, 2008. 

(ii) If another flap fail event occurs anytime 

within the 10-flight-cycle limit after the 

initial circuit breaker reset operation, before 

further flight, do all applicable maintenance 

actions in accordance with Section 27–50–00 

of Chapter 27 of the Bombardier Canadair 

Regional Jet CRJ100/200/440 Fault Isolation 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
10468 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 11, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

Manual CSP A–009, Volume 1, Revision 38, 

dated January 10, 2008. 

(7) As of the effective date of this AD, 

operators are required to report all fault data, 

including flaps electronic control unit 

(FECU) codes, to Bombardier within 30 days 

after each failure occurrence, in accordance 

with Task 05–51–50–980–801 as introduced 

in the Canadair Regional Jet TR 05–035, 

dated July 13, 2007, to the Canadair Regional 

Jet Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM). As 

of 24 months after the effective date of this 

AD, the actions specified in this paragraph 

are no longer required. 

(8) Cockpit Placard: Within 120 days after 

the effective date of this AD, install a flight 

compartment placard in accordance with 

Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R–11–090, 

dated August 15, 2008. 

Method of Compliance With AD 2006–12–21 

(i) Installing flap actuators in accordance 

with paragraph (h)(5) of this AD is acceptable 

for compliance with the installation of 

Number 3 and Number 4 flap actuators 

required by paragraph (h) of AD 2006–12–21, 

Amendment 39–14647. All other 

requirements of paragraph (h) of AD 2006– 

12–21 are still applicable and must be 

complied with. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 3: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: 

(1) The maintenance tasks specified in the 

first row of the table in ‘‘Part IV. Maintenance 

Actions’’ of the MCAI do not specify a 

corrective action if an actuator is not 

serviceable (i.e., torque test results are not 

satisfactory). However, this AD requires 

contacting the FAA or installing a serviceable 

actuator before further flight if torque test 

results are not satisfactory. (Reference 

paragraph (f)(4) of this AD.) 

(2) Although paragraph 2. of ‘‘Part III. 

Training’’ of the MCAI recommends 

accomplishing the new training within 1 

year, this AD requires accomplishing the 

training before September 30, 2009, in order 

to ensure that the actions are completed prior 

to the onset of cold weather operations. 

(3) For the Flaps Zero Landing 

requirements in paragraph 3.a (i) of ‘‘Part II. 

Operational Procedures,’’ the MCAI refers to 

actuators with less than 5,000 flight cycles. 

We have clarified sub-paragraph 3.a.(i) of 

paragraph ‘‘3. Flap Zero Landing,’’ of the 

statement specified in paragraph (h)(2) of this 

AD that the 5,000 flight cycles is since new 

or overhauled. 

(4) For the Flaps Zero Landing 

requirements in paragraph 3.c. of ‘‘Part II. 

Operational Procedures,’’ the MCAI requires 

a pre-dispatch forecast ground temperature at 

the time of arrival at the destination airport 

to be above ¥25 deg C. This AD clarifies subparagraph 3.b. of paragraph ‘‘3. Flap Zero 

Landing,’’ of the statement specified in 

paragraph (h)(2) of this AD that the source of 

the forecast is to be a reliable weather 

forecast service acceptable to the POI. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(j) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1)(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, New York Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), 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: Dan 

Parrillo, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and 

Flight Test Branch, ANE–171, FAA, New 

York ACO, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, 

Westbury, New York 11590; telephone (516) 

228–7305; fax (516) 794–5531. 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. 

(ii) AMOCs approved previously in 

accordance with AD 2008–01–04 are 

approved as AMOCs for the corresponding 

provisions of 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. 

(3) Reporting Requirements: For any 

reporting requirement in this AD, under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 

the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

has approved the information collection 

requirements and has assigned OMB Control 

Number 2120–0056. 

Related Information 

(k) Refer to MCAI Canadian Airworthiness 

Directive CF–2007–10R1, dated August 18, 

2008, and the service information identified 

in Table 1 of this AD for related information. 

TABLE 1—RELATED SERVICE INFORMATION

Service information Revision level Date 

Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R–27–150 ........................................................................... Original ........................... July 12, 2007. 

Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R–27–151 ........................................................................... B ..................................... June 12, 2008. 

Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R–11–090 ........................................................................... Original ........................... August 15, 2008. 

Canadair Regional Jet TR RJ/165 to the Canadair Regional Jet AFM CSP A–012 ............. Original ........................... July 6, 2007. 

Canadair Regional Jet TR RJ/165–1 to the Canadair Regional Jet AFM CSP A–012 ......... Original ........................... August 7, 2008. 

Canadair Regional Jet TR 05–035 to the Canadair Regional Jet AMM ................................ Original ........................... July 13, 2007. 

Section 27–50–00 of Chapter 27 of the Bombardier Canadair Regional Jet CRJ100/200/ 

440 Fault Isolation Manual CSP A–009, Volume 1.

38 ................................... January 10, 2008. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(l) You must use the service information 

contained in Table 2 of this AD to do the 

actions required by this AD, as applicable, 

unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

TABLE 2—ALL MATERIAL INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Service information Revision level Date 

Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R–27–150, including Appendix A ....................................... Original ........................... July 12, 2007. 

Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R–27–151 ........................................................................... B ..................................... June 12, 2008. 

Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R–11–090 ........................................................................... Original ........................... August 15, 2008. 

Canadair Regional Jet Temporary Revision RJ/165 to the Canadair Regional Jet Airplane 

Flight Manual CSP A–012.

Original ........................... July 6, 2007. 

Canadair Regional Jet TR RJ/165–1, including pages 05–11–5 through 05–11–14, to the 

Canadair Regional Jet AFM CSP A–012.

Original ........................... August 7, 2008. 

Canadair Regional Jet TR 05–035 to the Canadair Regional Jet AMM ................................ Original ........................... July 13, 2007. 

Section 27–50–00 of Chapter 27 of the Bombardier Canadair Regional Jet CRJ100/200/ 

440 Fault Isolation Manual CSP A–009, Volume 1.

38 ................................... January 10, 2008. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 11, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 10469 

Bombardier Canadair Regional Jet CRJ100/ 

200/440 Fault Isolation Manual CSP A–009, 

Volume 1, Revision 38, dated January 10, 

2008, contains the following effective pages: 

List of Effective Pages 

Page title/description Page number(s) Revision 

number Date shown on page(s) 

FIM Title Page ................................................... None shown ............................. 38 January 10, 2008. 

Transmittal Letter ............................................... 1 ............................................... 38 January 10, 2008. 

Record of Revisions ........................................... 1 ............................................... .................... January 10, 2008. 

FIM Volume 1 Title Page ................................... None shown ............................. 38 January 10, 2008. 

Chapter 27 Effective Pages 

1–3 ........................................... 38 January 10, 2008. 

4 ............................................... 37 January 10, 2007. 

Section 27–50–00 

101 ........................................... 28 August 26, 2003. 

102–153 ................................... 38 January 10, 2008. 

154, 156 ................................... 30 March 17, 2004. 

155 ........................................... 34 April 10, 2005. 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference of 

the service information contained in Table 3 

of this AD under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. 

TABLE 3—NEW MATERIAL INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Service information Revision level Date 

Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R–27–151 ........................................................................... B ..................................... June 12, 2008. 

Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R–11–090 ........................................................................... Original ........................... August 15, 2008. 

Canadair Regional Jet TR RJ/165–1, including pages 05–11–5 through 05–11–14, to the 

Canadair Regional Jet AFM CSP A–012.

Original ........................... August 7, 2008. 

Canadair Regional Jet TR 05–035 to the Canadair Regional Jet AMM ................................ Original ........................... July 13, 2007. 

Section 27–50–00 of Chapter 27 of the Bombardier Canadair Regional Jet CRJ100/200/ 

440 Fault Isolation Manual CSP A–009, Volume 1.

38 ................................... January 10, 2008. 

(2) The Director of the Federal Register 

previously approved the incorporation by 

reference of Bombardier Service Bulletin 

601R–27–150, including Appendix A, dated 

July 12, 2007; and Canadair Regional Jet 

Temporary Revision RJ/165, dated July 6, 

2007, to the Canadair Regional Jet Airplane 

Flight Manual CSP A–012; on September 5, 

2007 (72 FR 46555, August 21, 2007). 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 CoˆteVertu Road West, Dorval, Que ́bec H4S 1Y9, 

Canada; telephone 514–855–5000; fax 514– 

855–7401; e-mail 

thd.crj@aero.bombardier.com; Internet http:// 

www.bombardier.com. 

(4) 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 or 425–227–1152. 

(5) 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 February 

26, 2009. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–5290 Filed 3–10–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–0671; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–NM–017–AD; Amendment 

39–15796; AD 2009–02–06] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 737–300, –400, and –500 Series 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

Boeing Model 737–300, –400, and –500 

series airplanes. This AD requires 

repetitive high frequency eddy current 

inspections for cracking of the 1.04-inch 

nominal diameter wire penetration hole 

in the frame and frame reinforcement, 

between stringers S–20 and S–21, on 

both the left and right sides of the 

airplane, and related investigative and 

corrective actions if necessary. This AD 

results from reports of cracking in the 

frame, or in the frame and frame 

reinforcement, common to the 1.04-inch 

nominal diameter wire penetration hole 

intended for wire routing. We are 

issuing this AD to detect and correct 

cracking in the fuselage frames and 

frame reinforcements, which could 

reduce the structural capability of the 

frames to sustain limit loads, and result 

in cracking in the fuselage skin and 

subsequent rapid depressurization of 

the airplane. 

DATES: This AD is effective April 15, 

2009. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in this AD 

as of April 15, 2009. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES