[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 61 (Thursday, March 29, 2001)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17097-17099]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-7705]



[[Page 17097]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2001-NM-25-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model DHC-8-200 and -300 
Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This document proposes the supersedure of an existing 
airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to certain Bombardier Model 
DHC-8-200 and -300 series airplanes, that currently requires repetitive 
inspections to detect chafing or arcing damage to the cable/wire and 
fuel tube assemblies on the right-hand side of each engine, and 
replacement with new components, if necessary. That AD also provides 
for an optional terminating action for the repetitive inspections 
required by that AD. This proposal would require accomplishment of the 
previously optional terminating action. This action is necessary to 
prevent chafing of the cable/wire bundles against the fuel line, which 
could result in arcing and a consequent fire or explosion. This action 
is intended to address the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by April 30, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, 
Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001-NM-25-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 
Renton, Washington 98055-4056. Comments may be inspected at this 
location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 
Federal holidays. Comments may be submitted via fax to (425) 227-1232. 
Comments may also be sent via the Internet using the following address: 
[email protected]. Comments sent via fax or the Internet must 
contain ``Docket No. 2001-NM-25-AD'' in the subject line and need not 
be submitted in triplicate. Comments sent via the Internet as attached 
electronic files must be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for Windows or 
ASCII text.
    The service information referenced in the proposed rule may be 
obtained from Bombardier, Inc., Bombardier Regional Aircraft Division, 
123 Garratt Boulevard, Downsview, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada. This 
information may be examined at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, New York 
Aircraft Certificaiton Office, 10 Fifth Street, Third Floor, Valley 
Stream, New York.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Delisio, Aerospace Engineer, 
Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft 
Certification Office, 10 Fifth Street, Third Floor, Valley Stream, New 
York 11581; telephone (516) 256-7521; fax (516) 568-2716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the 
proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as 
they may desire. Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number 
and be submitted in triplicate to the address specified above. All 
communications received on or before the closing date for comments, 
specified above, will be considered before taking action on the 
proposed rule. The proposals contained in this action may be changed in 
light of the comments received.
    Submit comments using the following format:
     Organize comments issue-by-issue. For example, discuss a 
request to change the compliance time and a request to change the 
service bulletin reference as two separate issues.
     For each issue, state what specific change to the proposed 
AD is being requested.
     Include justification (e.g., reasons or data) for each 
request.
    Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All 
comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing 
date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested 
persons. A report summarizing each FAA-public contact concerned with 
the substance of this proposal will be filed in the Rules Docket.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments 
submitted in response to this action must submit a self-addressed, 
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments 
to Docket Number 2001-NM-25-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and 
returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request 
to the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, Attention: Rules 
Docket No. 2001-NM-25-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 
98055-4056.

Discussion

    On January 12, 2001, the FAA issued AD 2001-02-02, amendment 39-
12086 (66 FR 6454, January 22, 2001), applicable to certain Bombardier 
Model DHC-8-200 and -300 series airplanes, to require repetitive 
inspections to detect chafing or arcing damage to the cable/wire and 
fuel tube assemblies on the right-hand side of each engine, and 
replacement with new components, if necessary. That AD also provides 
for an optional terminating action for the repetitive inspections 
required by that AD. That action is necessary to prevent chafing of the 
cable/wire bundles against the fuel line, which could result in arcing 
and a consequent fire or explosion.

Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rule

    In the preamble to AD 2001-02-02, the FAA indicated that certain 
actions required by that AD were considered ``interim action'' and that 
further rulemaking action was being considered to require modification 
of the cable assembly, which would constitute terminating action for 
the repetitive inspections required by that AD. However, the planned 
compliance time for the installation of the modification was 
sufficiently long so that notice and opportunity for prior public 
comment was practicable. The FAA now has determined that further 
rulemaking action is indeed necessary, this proposed AD follows from 
that determination.

Explanation of Relevant Service Information

    Bombardier has issued Revision A, dated December 12, 2000, and 
Revision B, dated January 30, 2001, of Alert Service Bulletin A8-73-23. 
These revisions describe procedures for repetitive general visual 
inspections to detect chafing or arcing damage to the cable and the 
fuel tube assemblies on the right hand side of each engine, and 
replacement with new components, if necessary. These revisions also 
describe procedures for an optional modification that entails, among 
other things, rerouting the existing wire harness to the opposite side 
of the oil cooler, and shortening and securing the wire harness, if 
necessary. That modification eliminates the need for the repetitive 
inspections. Revisions A and B of the alert service bulletin (ASB) 
specify certain corrections to the original ASB regarding part numbers 
and certain

[[Page 17098]]

other accomplishment instructions. (The original version of ASB A8-73-
23, dated November 3, 2000, was previously specified as the appropriate 
service information in AD 2001-02-02.) Accomplishment of the actions 
specified in either Revision A or Revision B of the ASB is intended to 
adequately address the identified unsafe condition. Transport Canada 
Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the airworthiness authority of Canada, 
has classified Revisions A and B of ASB A8-73-23 as mandatory and 
issued Canadian airworthiness directive CF-2000-33, dated November 14, 
2000, in order to assure the continued airworthiness of these airplanes 
in Canada.

FAA's Conclusions

    These airplane models are manufactured in Canada and are type 
certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of 
section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and 
the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to this 
bilateral airworthiness agreement, TCCA has kept the FAA informed of 
the situation described above. The FAA has examined the findings of the 
TCCA, reviewed all available information, and determined that AD action 
is necessary for products of this type design that are certificated for 
operation in the United States.

Explanation of Requirements of Proposed Rule

    Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to 
exist or develop on other airplanes of the same type design registered 
in the United States, the proposed AD would supersede AD 2001-02-02 to 
continue to require repetitive inspections to detect chafing or arcing 
damage to the cable/wire and fuel tube assemblies on the right-hand 
side of each engine, and replacement with new components, if necessary. 
The proposed AD also would require certain modification procedures that 
specify, among other actions, rerouting the existing wire harness to 
the opposite side of the oil cooler. Accomplishment of the modification 
would constitute terminating action for the repetitive inspections. The 
actions would be required to be accomplished in accordance with the 
ASB's described above.

Cost Impact

    There are approximately 150 airplanes of U.S. registry that would 
be affected by this proposed AD.
    The repetitive inspections that are currently required by AD 2001-
02-02, and retained in this proposed AD, take approximately 2 work 
hours per airplane to accomplish, at an average labor rate of $60 per 
work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the currently 
required actions on U.S. operators is estimated to be $18,000, or $120 
per airplane, per inspection cycle.
    The new action, incorporation of the modification, that is proposed 
in this AD action, would take approximately 4 work hours per airplane 
to accomplish, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required 
parts would cost approximately $350 per airplane. Based on these 
figures, the cost impact of the proposed requirements of this AD on 
U.S. operators is estimated to be $88,500, or $590 per airplane.
    The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions 
that no operator has yet accomplished any of the current or proposed 
requirements of this AD action, and that no operator would accomplish 
those actions in the future if this AD were not adopted.

Regulatory Impact

    The regulations proposed herein 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. Therefore, it 
is determined that this proposal would not have federalism implications 
under Executive Order 13132.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that 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) if promulgated, 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. A copy of the draft 
regulatory evaluation prepared for this action is contained in the 
Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by contacting the Rules 
Docket at the location provided under the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 
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.


Sec. 39.13  [Amended]

    2. Section 39.13 is amended by removing amendment 39-12086 (66 FR 
6454, January 22, 2001), and by adding a new airworthiness directive 
(AD), to read as follows:

Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly de Havilland, Inc.):  Docket 2001-NM-25-
AD. Supersedes AD 2001-02-02, Amendment 39-12086.

    Applicability: Model DHC-8-201, -202, -301, -311, and -315 
series airplanes, having serial numbers 100 through 552 inclusive, 
certificated in any category.

    Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the 
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been 
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the 
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified, 
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of 
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an 
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (d) of 
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of 
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition 
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been 
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to 
address it.

    Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished 
previously.
    To prevent possible arcing between the electrical wiring and the 
fuel tube, which could result in a fire or explosion, accomplish the 
following:

Inspection Requirements of AD 2000-02-02

    (a) Within 50 flight hours or 10 days after February 6, 2001 
(the effective date of AD 2001-02-02), whichever occurs first: Do a 
general visual inspection to detect chafing or arcing damage to the 
cable and the fuel tube assemblies on the right hand side of each 
engine, per Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A8-73-23, Revision A, 
dated December 12, 2000, or Revision B, dated January 30, 2001. 
Repeat the inspection every 500 flight hours or 3 months, whichever 
occurs first.

    Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a general visual inspection 
is defined as: ``A visual examination of an interior or exterior 
area, installation, or assembly to detect obvious damage, failure, 
or irregularity. This level of inspection is made under normally 
available lighting conditions such as daylight, hangar lighting, 
flashlight, or drop-light, and may require removal or opening of 
access panels or doors. Stands, ladders, or platforms may be 
required to gain proximity to the area being checked.''


[[Page 17099]]



Repair

    (b) If any damage to the fuel tube or cable assembly is 
detected, before further flight, replace the damaged component per 
Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A8-73-23, Revision A, dated 
December 12, 2000, or Revision B, dated January 30, 2001. 
Thereafter, repeat the inspection required by paragraph (a) of this 
AD every 500 flight hours or 3 months, whichever occurs first.

    Note 3: Accomplishment of the replacement actions specified in 
paragraph (b) of this AD or terminating action required by paragraph 
(c) of this AD, per Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A8-73-23 
(original version), dated November 30, 2000, before the effective 
date of this AD, is acceptable for compliance with paragraphs (b) or 
(c) of this AD, as applicable.

Terminating Action

    (c) Within 1,000 flight hours or 6 months after the effective 
date of this AD, whichever occurs first: Accomplish the modification 
instructions described in Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A8-73-
23, Revision A, dated December 12, 2000, or Revision B, dated 
January 30, 2001, that specify, among other actions, rerouting the 
existing wire harness to the opposite side of the oil cooler. 
Accomplishment of the modification constitutes terminating action 
for the repetitive inspection requirements of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (d) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the 
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be 
used if approved by the Manager, New York Aircraft Certification 
Office (ACO), FAA. Operators shall submit their requests through an 
appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add 
comments and then send it to the Manager, New York ACO.

    Note 4: Information concerning the existence of approved 
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be 
obtained from the New York ACO.

Special Flight Permits

    (e) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with 
Secs. 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 
21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where the 
requirements of this AD can be accomplished.

    Note 5: The subject of this AD is addressed in Canadian 
airworthiness directive CF-2000-33, dated November 14, 2000.


    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 22, 2001.
Donald L. Riggin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 01-7705 Filed 3-28-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U