Document ID: FAA-2006-26598-0015
Agency: faa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S. A. (EMBRAER) Models EMB-110P1 and EMB-110P2 Airplanes
Posted Date: 2008-07-08T04:00Z

[Federal Register: July 8, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 131)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 38937-38940]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr08jy08-25]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2006-26598; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-087-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

 
Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S. A. 
(EMBRAER) Models EMB-110P1 and EMB-110P2 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of 
the comment period.

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

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier supplemental NPRM for the products 
listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing 
airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of 
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an 
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    It has been found cases of corrosion at the regions of Wings-to-
Fuselage attachments, Vertical Stabilizer to Fuselage attachments, 
Rib 1 Half-wing and Passenger Seat Tracks. Such corrosion may lead 
to subsequent cracking of the affected parts, compromising the 
aircraft structural integrity, which may in turn lead to structural 
failure and/or loss of some control surface.

    The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address 
the unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 8, 
2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax: (202) 493-2251.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the

[[Page 38938]]

Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed 
AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other 
information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone (800) 
647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in 
the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karl Schletzbaum, Aerospace Engineer, 
FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, 
Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329-4146; fax: (816) 329-4090.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or 
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address 
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2006-
26598; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-087-AD'' at the beginning of your 
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We 
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend 
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We 
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we 
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 with an earlier supplemental 
NPRM for the specified products, which was published in the Federal 
Register on March 7, 2007 (72 FR 10093). That earlier supplemental NPRM 
proposed to require actions intended to address the unsafe condition 
for the products listed above.
    Since that supplemental NPRM was issued, Empresa Brasileira de 
Aeronautica S. A. (EMBRAER) issued Service Bulletin S.B. No.: 110-00-
0007, REVISION No.: 01, dated January 12, 2007. This revision added a 
concurrent requirement to do EMBRAER Service Bulletin S.B. No.: 110-57-
0026, REVISION No.: 03, dated April 02, 2007.
    The Agencia Nacional de Aviacao Civil (ANAC), which is the aviation 
authority for Brazil, has issued AD No.: 2006-10-01R1, dated August 30, 
2007 (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe 
condition for the specified products. The MCAI states:

    It has been found cases of corrosion at the regions of Wings-to-
Fuselage attachments, Vertical Stabilizer to Fuselage attachments, 
Rib 1 Half-wing and Passenger Seat Tracks. Such corrosion may lead 
to subsequent cracking of the affected parts, compromising the 
aircraft structural integrity, which may in turn lead to structural 
failure and/or loss of some control surface.
    Since this condition may occur in other aircraft of the same 
type design and affects flight safety, a corrective action is 
required. Thus, sufficient reason exists to request compliance with 
this AD in the indicated time limit.
    Inspection for corrosion at regions of Wings-to Fuselage 
attachments, Vertical Stabilizer to Fuselage attachments, Rib 1 
Half-wing and Passenger Seat Tracks; and if applicable, removal of 
the detected corrosion.

You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD 
docket.

Relevant Service Information

    EMBRAER has issued Service Bulletin S.B. No.: 110-00-0007, REVISION 
No.: 01, dated January 12, 2007; and Service Bulletin S.B. No.: 110-57-
0026, REVISION No.: 03, dated April 02, 2007. The actions described in 
this service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition 
identified in the MCAI.

Comments

    We have considered the following comments received on the earlier 
NPRM.

Comment Issue No. 1: Extend the Implementation Period

    Business Air, Inc. and Royal Air Freight comment that the proposed 
AD, as written, would unnecessarily interrupt their service and 
bankrupt the companies due to their reliance on this airplane type. 
They request the implementation period of the proposed AD be extended 
to prevent grounding of the aircraft. Business Air, Inc. requests the 
time extension to develop an alternative method of compliance (AMOC).
    The compliance times specified in the proposed AD could be adjusted 
to accommodate a reasonable time period for maintenance planning. 
According to 14 CFR 39.19, the FAA approves AMOCs or changes in 
compliance times, if we determine the proposal provides an acceptable 
level of safety. In this case, the FAA understands that some of the 
affected airplanes are being maintained under operators' approved 
aircraft inspection and maintenance programs. It is possible that many 
of the proposed AD actions can be integrated into these existing 
inspection and maintenance programs. Since the programs vary from 
operator to operator, we cannot write a compliance time to adhere to 
every maintenance schedule. We will consider changes in the compliance 
time or alternative actions presented to the FAA using the procedures 
in 14 CFR 39.19 and this AD.
    We are not changing the proposed AD as a result of this comment.

Comment Issue No. 2: The Manufacturer Is Attempting To Ground the 
Aircraft

    AirNow (also identified as Business Air, Inc.) states the proposed 
AD is an attempt by the manufacturer to ground the aircraft and relieve 
itself of support responsibilities. They state that these aircraft are 
operated in different climatic conditions and are subjected to widely 
varying degrees of corrosion conditions. In addition, the aircraft are 
operated with differing levels of oversight and surveillance by the 
FAA. AirNow suggests the proposed AD does not take into account these 
differences in operational environment. We infer that the commenter 
wants a differentiation of compliance times based on operational 
environment or wants the NPRM withdrawn.
    The FAA does not agree that the NPRM should be withdrawn. We agree 
that airplanes are operated under varied levels of oversight and 
climatic conditions internationally; however, the instructions issued 
from the airworthiness authority of the state of design apply to all 
airplanes of this type design, regardless of use.
    Under the aviation relationship between Brazil and the United 
States, Brazil monitors the continued airworthiness of aircraft it is 
the State of Design for and issues mandatory continuing airworthiness 
information (MCAI) when they determine it is necessary. FAA Order 
8040.5, Airworthiness Directive Process for Mandatory Continuing 
Airworthiness Information (MCAI), directs the FAA in responding to 
foreign issued MCAI. Under this order, the FAA accepts and analyzes the 
MCAI as developed by the State of Design, in this case Brazil, which is 
responsible for the continued airworthiness of the EMB-110 design. 
After reviewing the MCAI and FAA service difficulty reports that 
revealed some corrosion related reports, we determined that an unsafe 
condition exists and the condition is likely to exist or develop in 
other products of the same type design registered in the United States.
    We are not changing the proposed AD as a result of this comment.

[[Page 38939]]

Comment Issue No. 3: The Costs Are Underestimated

    Royal Air Freight and AirNow comment that the proposed AD 
underestimates the actual cost and does not recognize the damage that 
will be done to surrounding structure or components when the proposed 
maintenance is done.
    We accept the MCAI as developed by the State of Design, in this 
case Brazil, which is responsible for the continued airworthiness of 
the EMB-110 design. Therefore, we rely on ANAC to advise us on the time 
and materials necessary to accomplish the actions in the service 
information. The FAA cannot determine the impact of the proposed AD 
actions to surrounding structure beyond what was provided to us by 
ANAC. We based the cost estimates on the information supplied by ANAC, 
and we realize some operators may incur higher or lower costs.
    On January 12, 2007, Embraer revised the service information. The 
revision is discussed below in Comment Issue No. 4. We have reviewed 
the revised information and have revised the costs accordingly.

Comment Issue No. 4: Revised Service Information

    Embraer notes the service bulletin identified in the proposed AD 
has been revised. The revised service information is Service Bulletin 
S.B. No.: 110-00-0007, REVISION No.: 01, dated January 12, 2007. This 
service bulletin adds more requirements to address the unsafe 
condition, including compliance with Service Bulletin, S.B. No.: 110-
57-0026, REVISION No.: 03, dated April 02, 2007. Embraer also comments 
that the revised service information incorporates an AMOC that ANAC 
issued to allow the use of repetitive inspections from Part III of the 
revised service bulletin in lieu of Part IV compliance. The commenter 
proposes new language for the NPRM that includes the new information 
mentioned in their comment.
    We have reviewed the revised service information and agree that we 
should include it in the proposed AD. We have revised the proposed AD 
to include EMBRAER Service Bulletin S.B. No.: 110-00-0007, REVISION 
No.: 01, dated January 12, 2007; and EMBRAER Service Bulletin S.B. No.: 
110-57-0026, REVISION No.: 03, dated April 2, 2007.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another 
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant 
to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they 
have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and 
service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because 
we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe condition exists 
and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type 
design.
    We also determined from our review that some of the actions 
required in the service information may go beyond addressing the unsafe 
condition listed in the MCAI. We are changing this proposed AD to 
require, at this time, only the actions we determined necessary to 
address the unsafe condition. We will continue to evaluate the other 
MCAI actions and monitor the corrosion issue. We may take future AD 
action if we determine an additional unsafe condition exists or is 
likely to develop.
    Certain changes described above change the scope of the earlier 
NPRM. As a result, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen 
the comment period to provide additional opportunity for the public to 
comment on the proposed AD.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service 
Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in 
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it 
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the 
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these 
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information 
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those 
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are 
highlighted in a NOTE within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD 
will affect 38 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it 
would take about 95 work-hours per product to comply with the basic 
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per 
work-hour.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on 
U.S. operators to be $288,800, or $7,600 per product.
    We have no way of determining the number of products that may need 
any necessary follow-on actions or the cost associated with those 
actions.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to 
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the 
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation 
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's 
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in 
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General 
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with 
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing 
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator 
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within 
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition 
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this 
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not 
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship 
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed 
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies 
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or 
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria 
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to 
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

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

[[Page 38940]]

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S. A. (EMBRAER): Docket No. FAA-
2006-26598; Directorate Identifier 2006-CE-087-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by September 8, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Models EMB-110P1 and EMB-P2 airplanes, 
all serial numbers, certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 57: Wings.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) 
states:
    It has been found cases of corrosion at the regions of Wings-to-
Fuselage attachments, Vertical Stabilizer to Fuselage attachments, 
Rib 1 Half-wing and Passenger Seat Tracks. Such corrosion may lead 
to subsequent cracking of the affected parts, compromising the 
aircraft structural integrity, which may in turn lead to structural 
failure and/or loss of some control surface.
    Since this condition may occur in other aircraft of the same 
type design and affects flight safety, a corrective action is 
required. Thus, sufficient reason exists to request compliance with 
this AD in the indicated time limit.
    Inspection for corrosion at regions of Wings-to Fuselage 
attachments, Vertical Stabilizer to Fuselage attachments, Rib 1 
Half-wing and Passenger Seat Tracks; and if applicable, removal of 
the detected corrosion.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions:
    (1) Within the next 30 days after the effective date of this AD 
or within the next 100 hours time-in-service after the effective 
date of this AD, whichever occurs first, carry out a general visual 
inspection for corrosion at the regions of the wings-to-fuselage 
attachments, vertical stabilizer to fuselage attachments, rib 1 
half-wing, and passenger seat tracks, following Parts I, II, and III 
of the Embraer--Empresa Brasileira de Aeron[aacute]utica S.A. 
(EMBRAER) Service Bulletin S.B. No.: 110-00-0007, REVISION No.: 01, 
dated January 12, 2007.
    (i) Before further flight, all structures found corroded or 
cracked as a result of the inspections done above must be addressed 
following the detailed instructions and procedures described in 
EMBRAER Service Bulletin S.B. No.: 110-00-0007, REVISION No.: 01, 
dated January 12, 2007.
    (ii) Previous accomplishment of EMBRAER Alert Service Bulletin 
S.B. No.: 110-00-A007, dated March 6, 2006, or the implementation of 
the tasks required by section VI of the Maintenance Planning Guides 
TP 110P2/145, PM 110/652, or PM 110/165, released by EMBRAER, are 
considered acceptable methods of compliance with the requirements of 
(f)(1) and (f)(1)(i) of this AD.
    (2) Within the next 36 months after the effective date of this 
AD, do a visual, and as applicable, dye-penetrant inspection in rib 
1 external and internal regions, in the auxiliary fittings of the 
main box half-wings, and in the spar webs of half-wings. Do the 
inspections following the paragraph 3. ACCOMPLISHMENT INSTRUCTIONS 
of EMBRAER Service Bulletin S.B. No.: 110-57-0026, REVISION No.: 03, 
dated April 2, 2007. Before further flight, all structures found 
corroded or cracked as a result of the inspections done above must 
be corrected following the detailed instructions and procedures 
described in EMBRAER Service Bulletin S.B. No.: 110-57-0026, 
REVISION No.: 03, dated April 2, 2007.

    Note 1: The FAA is aware that most of the affected airplanes are 
maintained under operators' approved aircraft inspection and 
maintenance programs. The AD actions may be integrated into these 
existing inspection and maintenance programs. We will consider 
changes in the compliance time or alternative actions following the 
provisions of paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information 
as follows: We determined the requirement to do Part IV and Part V 
of EMBRAER Service Bulletin S.B. No.: 110-00-0007, REVISION No.: 01, 
dated January 12, 2007, may go beyond addressing the unsafe 
condition listed in the MCAI. We have removed those actions from 
this AD. We will continue to evaluate the additional MCAI actions 
and monitor the corrosion issue. We may take future AD action if we 
determine an additional unsafe condition exists or is likely to 
develop.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, 
Standards Office, 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: Karl Schletzbaum, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, 
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, 
Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329-4146; fax: (816) 329-4090. 
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.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain 
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these 
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered 
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority 
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product 
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in 
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has 
approved the information collection requirements and has assigned 
OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI Ag[ecirc]ncia Nacional de 
Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil (ANAC) AD No.: 2006-10-01R1, dated 
August 30, 2007; EMBRAER Service Bulletin S.B. No.: 110-00-0007, 
REVISION No.: 01, dated January 12, 2007; EMBRAER Alert Service 
Bulletin S.B. No.: 110-00-A007, dated March 6, 2006; EMBRAER Service 
Bulletin S.B. No.: 110-57-0026, REVISION No.: 03, dated April 2, 
2007; and Maintenance Planning Guides TP 110P2/145, PM 110/652, and 
PM 110/165, released by EMBRAER; for related information.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on June 30, 2008.
Kim Smith,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E8-15510 Filed 7-7-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P