[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 27 (Friday, February 8, 2002)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5958-5960]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-3065]


 ========================================================================
 Proposed Rules
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
 the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
 notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
 the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 27 / Friday, February 8, 2002 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 5958]]



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000-NM-398-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model CL-215-1A10 and CL-
215-6B11 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 
CL-215-1A10 and CL-215-6B11 series airplanes, that currently requires 
repetitive inspections to detect cracking on certain wing-to-fuselage 
frame angles; and repair, if necessary. This action would decrease the 
compliance time for the initial inspection to detect cracking on 
certain wing-to-fuselage frame angles and would decrease the interval 
between repetitive inspections. This proposal is prompted by issuance 
of mandatory continuing airworthiness information by a foreign civil 
airworthiness authority. The actions specified by the proposed AD are 
intended to detect and correct cracking in the wing-to-fuselage frame 
angles, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the 
airframe.

DATES: Comments must be received by March 11, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, 
Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000-NM-398-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 
Renton, Washington 98055-4056. Comments may be inspected at this 
location between 9 a.m. and 3 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. 2000-NM-398-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., Canadair, Aerospace Group, P.O. Box 
6087, Station Centre-ville, Montreal, Quebec H3C 3G9, Canada. This 
information may be examined at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, Engine and 
Propeller Directorate, New York Aircraft Certification Office, 10 Fifth 
Street, Third Floor, Valley Stream, New York 11581.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Serge Napoleon, Aerospace Engineer, 
Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE-171, FAA, Engine and Propeller 
Directorate, New York Aircraft Certification Office, 10 Fifth Street, 
Third Floor, Valley Stream, New York 11581; telephone (516) 256-7512; 
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 2000-NM-398-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. 2000-NM-398-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 
98055-4056.

Discussion

    On July 23, 1999, the FAA issued AD 99-16-04, amendment 39-11239 
(64 FR 41775, August 2, 1999), applicable to certain Bombardier Model 
CL-215-1A10 and CL-215-6B11 series airplanes, to require repetitive 
inspections to detect cracking on certain wing-to-fuselage frame 
angles, and repair, if necessary. The requirements of that AD are 
intended to detect and correct cracking in the wing-to-fuselage frame 
angles, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the 
airframe.

Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rule

    Since the issuance of that AD, Transport Canada Civil Aviation 
(TCCA), the Canadian civil airworthiness authority, has informed the 
FAA that cracks on the wing-to-fuselage frame angles have been found in 
three in-service CL-215T series airplanes. The cracking, which is due 
to structural fatigue, has occurred much sooner than had been 
anticipated. The wing-to-fuselage frame angles were found to be 
affected by the number of times the pilot scoops down to get water to 
drop onto a fire, referred to in this AD as the number of ``total water 
drops.'' Cracking of the wing-to-fuselage frame

[[Page 5959]]

angles, if not corrected, could result in reduced structural integrity 
of the airframe.

Explanation of Relevant Service Information

    Bombardier has issued Alert Service Bulletin 215-A476, Revision 4, 
dated August 18, 2000, which describes procedures for an eddy current 
inspection of fasteners on the front and rear spar frame angles and for 
reporting results of the inspection, negative or positive, to 
Bombardier. Accomplishment of the actions specified in the service 
bulletin is intended to adequately address the identified unsafe 
condition. The TCCA classified this service bulletin as mandatory and 
issued Canadian airworthiness directive CF-1997-07R2, dated August 17, 
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, the TCCA has kept the FAA informed 
of the situation described above. The FAA has examined the findings of 
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 99-16-04 to 
require an additional trigger for the initial (and the repetitive) 
inspections for cracks of the wing-to-fuselage frame angles. That 
trigger--the total number of water drops--has been added, because water 
drops have been found to be associated with cracking of the wing-to-
fuselage frame angles. Adding this trigger is likely to decrease the 
time before an initial inspection is required and to shorten the 
interval between repetitive inspections. The actions would be required 
to be accomplished in accordance with the service bulletin described 
previously.

Cost Impact

    There is one airplane of U.S. registry that would be affected by 
this proposed AD.
    The inspections that are currently required by AD 99-16-04 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 $120 per airplane, per inspection cycle.
    The inspections that are proposed in this AD action would take 
approximately 3 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 proposed requirements of this AD on U.S. operators is 
estimated to be $180 per airplane, per inspection cycle.
    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 39-11239 (64 FR 
41775, August 2, 1999), and by adding a new airworthiness directive 
(AD), to read as follows:

Bombardier Inc. (Formerly Canadair):
    Docket 2000-NM-398-AD. Supersedes AD 99-16-04, Amendment 39-
11239.

    Applicability: Model CL-215-1A10 and CL-215-6B11 series 
airplanes, serial numbers 1001 through 1125 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 (g) 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 detect and correct cracking in the wing-to-fuselage frame 
angles, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the 
airframe, accomplish the following:

Restatement of Requirements of AD 99-16-04

    (a) Perform an eddy current inspection to detect cracking of the 
fuselage frame angles at the wing front and rear spar attachment to 
the fuselage at the later of the times specified in paragraphs 
(a)(1) and (a)(2) of this AD, in accordance with Bombardier Alert 
Service Bulletin ASB 215-A476, Revision 3, dated August 21, 1998. 
Thereafter, repeat the inspection at intervals not to exceed 415 
flight hours.
    (1) Prior to the accumulation of 2,300 total flight hours.
    (2) Within 150 flight hours or 4 months after September 7, 1999 
(the effective date of AD 99-16-04), whichever occurs first.

    Note 2: Accomplishment of the eddy current inspections of the 
lower surfaces of the frame angles conducted in accordance with 
Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin ASB 215-A476, Revision 1, dated 
January 14, 1997, or ASB 215-A476, Revision 2, dated June 15, 1998, 
prior to the effective date of this AD, is considered to be 
acceptable for compliance with the requirements of paragraph (a) of 
this AD for that area only.


[[Page 5960]]


    (b) If the results of any inspection required by paragraph (a) 
of this AD are outside the limits specified in paragraph 2.C.(7) of 
Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin ASB 215-A476, Revision 3, dated 
August 21, 1998, or ASB 215-A476, Revision 4, dated August 18, 2000: 
Prior to further flight, repair in accordance with a method approved 
by the Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA.

New Actions Required by This AD

Initial Inspection

    (c) Unless paragraph (a) of this AD has been accomplished, 
perform an eddy current inspection to detect cracking of the 
fuselage frame angles at the wing front and rear spar attachment to 
the fuselage at the later of the times specified in paragraphs 
(c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, in accordance with Bombardier Alert 
Service Bulletin 215-A476, Revision 4, dated August 18, 2000.
    (1) Prior to the accumulation of 2,300 total flight hours or 
7,500 total water drops, whichever occurs first.
    (2) Within 60 days after the effective date of this AD.

Repetitive Inspection

    (d) Perform an eddy current inspection to detect cracking of the 
fuselage frame angles at the wing front and rear spar attachment to 
the fuselage, in accordance with Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin 
215-A476, Revision 4, dated August 18, 2000, at intervals not to 
exceed 415 flight hours or 1,500 water drops, whichever occurs 
first.

Corrective Action

    (e) If the results of any inspection required by paragraph (c) 
or (d) of this AD are outside the limits specified in paragraph 
2.C.(7) of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin ASB 215-A476, Revision 
4, dated August 18, 2000: Prior to further flight, repair in 
accordance with a method approved by the Manager, New York Aircraft 
Certification Office (ACO), FAA.

Reporting

    (f) Within 10 days after performing any inspection required by 
paragraph (a), (c), or (d) of this AD: Report the findings, positive 
or negative, to Bombardier Inc., Amphibious Aircraft Division, 
Customer Support, Department 645, Attention: Manager of Technical 
Support, Fax Number (514) 855-7602. Information collection 
requirements contained in this AD have been approved by the Office 
of Management and Budget (OMB) under the provisions of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and have been 
assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (g) 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 ACO. 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 3: 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

    (h) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with 
sections 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 4: The subject of this AD is addressed in Canadian 
airworthiness directive CF-1997-07R2, dated August 17, 2000.


    Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 1, 2002.
Ali Bahrami,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 02-3065 Filed 2-7-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U