[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 143 (Tuesday, July 27, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44589-44591]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-16679]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2001-NM-270-AD; Amendment 39-13740; AD 2004-15-06]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; BAE Systems (Operations) Limited 
(Jetstream) Model 4101 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), 
applicable to all BAE Systems (Operations) Limited (Jetstream) Model 
4101 airplanes, that requires various inspections of the fuselage nose 
structure between stations 4 and 11, and corrective actions if 
necessary. This action is necessary to detect and correct fatigue 
cracking in the primary structure of the nose of the airplane at the 
forward avionics bay (fuselage stations 4 to 11), which could result in 
reduced structural integrity of the airplane. This action is intended 
to address the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Effective August 31, 2004.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications, as listed 
in the regulations, is approved by the Director of the Federal Register 
as of August 31, 2004.

ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be 
obtained from British Aerospace Regional Aircraft American Support. 
This information may be examined at the Federal Aviation Administration 
(FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, 
SW., Renton, Washington; or 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, 
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 
227-1175; fax (425) 227-1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal 
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness 
directive (AD) that is applicable to all BAE Systems (Operations) 
Limited (Jetstream) Model 4101 airplanes was published in the Federal 
Register on October 1, 2003 (68 FR 56596). That action proposed to 
require various inspections of the fuselage nose structure between 
stations 4 and 11, and corrective actions if necessary.

Comments

    Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate 
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to 
the comments received from a single commenter.

Request To Withdraw Proposed AD

    The commenter, an operator, states that the proposed AD is an 
unnecessary burden to operators. The commenter suggests that instead of 
the FAA issuing an AD, the maintenance review board (MRB) report should 
be revised to include the actions required by the proposed AD. The 
commenter states that it currently performs numerous inspections for 
cracking on its fleet of Jetstream Model 4101 airplanes using 
procedures specified in the commenter's maintenance programs. The 
commenter notes that BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Service Bulletin 
J41-53-047, Revision 1, dated July 19, 2002, specifies that when the 
inspections and procedures in the service bulletin are published in the 
MRB report and the maintenance planning document (MPD), the inspections 
and procedures will be deleted from the service bulletin and the MRB 
report will become the published source document. The commenter also 
notes that another operator, with a fleet of 27 Jetstream Model 4101 
airplanes, did the inspections specified in the service bulletin and 
did not find any cracking. Compliance with the proposed AD would 
require the commenter to bring 25 airplanes ``off-line'' to access and 
inspect the areas specified in the proposed AD. The commenter states 
that if the inspection procedures were added to the MRB report through 
a revision, an operator could merge these inspections into its 
established maintenance program so the inspections coincide with the 
operator's heavy maintenance program, which would reduce the 
operational impact.
    The FAA infers that the commenter is requesting that the AD be 
withdrawn. We do not agree. The procedures specified in operators' MRB 
reports are not mandatory. Therefore, we must issue an AD to ensure 
that the identified unsafe condition is properly addressed. We 
acknowledge that some operators may currently have maintenance programs 
that address the unsafe condition. If a program is adequate, an 
operator would be in a position to request approval for an alternative 
method of compliance with the AD (i.e., to follow the operator's 
current program rather than revise it to comply with the AD). Our 
obligation to issue the AD and address an unsafe condition remains; the 
rule must apply to everyone to ensure that all affected airplanes are 
covered, regardless of who operates them. Furthermore, the 
airworthiness authority for the state of design issued an airworthiness 
directive mandating the same actions required by this AD. This AD has 
not been changed regarding this issue.

Request To Revise Cost Impact Section

    The commenter notes that the figure in the Cost Impact section of 
the proposed AD does not include incidental costs, such as the time 
required to gain access and close up an airplane. The commenter states 
that these costs are not incidental, and that the majority of time 
required to perform the various inspections is spent accessing the 
areas to be inspected.
    We infer that the commenter is requesting that the Cost Impact 
section of the proposed AD be revised. We do not agree. As stated in 
the proposed AD, ``the figures discussed in AD rulemaking actions 
represent only the time necessary to perform the specific actions 
actually required by the AD.'' The specific actions required by the AD 
are various inspections of the fuselage nose structure between stations 
4 and 11. We expect that most operators will be able to do the actions 
required by this AD during scheduled maintenance. We attempt to set 
compliance times that generally coincide with operators' maintenance 
schedules. However, because operators' schedules vary substantially, we 
cannot accommodate every operator's optimal scheduling in each AD. The 
time necessary for gaining access to and closing the inspection area is 
incidental. This AD has not been changed regarding this issue.
    The commenter also objects to the FAA's assumption that ``no 
operator would accomplish those actions in the future if this AD were 
not adopted.'' The

[[Page 44590]]

commenter states that it performs numerous inspections for cracking in 
accordance with its maintenance program.
    The commenter appears to have misunderstood the context of the 
quoted statement: ``The cost impact figure discussed above is based on 
assumptions that no operator has yet accomplished any of the proposed 
requirements of this AD action, and that no operator would accomplish 
those actions in the future if this AD were not adopted.'' The purpose 
of the Cost Impact section of the NPRM is to estimate the costs of 
compliance with the proposed AD. As stated, for this purpose, the FAA 
assumes that all operators taking the required actions are doing so 
only because the AD requires it. We recognize that in most cases this 
assumption is incorrect, and that the resulting costs attributed to the 
AD are exaggerated. But we do not have access to data that would enable 
us to accurately determine on what percentage of affected airplanes the 
actions would be done in the absence of the AD. This AD has not been 
changed regarding this issue.

Explanation of Changes to This AD

    We have included the headers ``Inspections'' and ``Corrective 
Actions'' in the body of this AD. These headers were inadvertently 
omitted from the proposed AD. We also changed the citations for the 
appropriate source of service information from Jetstream Service 
Bulletin J41-53-047, Revision 1, dated July 19, 2002, to BAE Systems 
(Operations) Limited Service Bulletin J41-53-047, Revision 1, dated 
July 19, 2002, to comply with the Office of the Federal Register's 
guidelines for material incorporated by reference. We have determined 
that these changes will neither increase the economic burden on any 
operator nor increase the scope of the AD.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the available data, including the comments 
noted above, we have determined that air safety and the public interest 
require the adoption of the rule with the changes previously described.

Cost Impact

    The FAA estimates that 57 airplanes of U.S. registry will be 
affected by this AD, that it will take approximately 50 work hours per 
airplane to accomplish the required actions, and that the average labor 
rate is $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of 
the AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $185,250, or $3,250 per 
airplane, per inspection cycle.
    The cost impact figure discussed above is based on assumptions that 
no operator has yet accomplished any of the requirements of this AD 
action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in the 
future if this AD were not adopted. The cost impact figures discussed 
in AD rulemaking actions represent only the time necessary to perform 
the specific actions actually required by the AD. These figures 
typically do not include incidental costs, such as the time required to 
gain access and close up, planning time, or time necessitated by other 
administrative actions.

Regulatory Impact

    The regulations adopted herein 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. Therefore, it 
is determined that this final rule does not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (1) is 
not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; 
(2) is not a ``significant rule'' under 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. A final evaluation has been prepared for this action 
and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained 
from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption 
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by 
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, pursuant to 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

0
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]

0
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new airworthiness 
directive:

2004-15-06 BAE Systems (Operations) Limited (Formerly British 
Aerospace Regional Aircraft): Amendment 39-13740. Docket 2001-NM-
270-AD.

    Applicability: All Model Jetstream 4101 airplanes, certificated 
in any category.
    Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished 
previously.
    To detect and correct fatigue cracking in the primary structure 
of the nose of the airplane at the forward avionics bay (fuselage 
stations 4 to 11), which could result in reduced structural 
integrity of the airplane, accomplish the following:

Inspections

    (a) Perform detailed, radiographic, and eddy current inspections 
of the fuselage nose structure between stations 4 and 11 for 
discrepancies (including cracking, corrosion, and exposed wiring), 
per the Accomplishment Instructions of BAE Systems (Operations) 
Limited Service Bulletin J41-53-047, Revision 1, dated July 19, 
2002, except that reporting results of inspection findings is not 
required by this AD. Do the inspections at the later of the times 
specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this AD. Repeat the 
inspections thereafter at intervals not to exceed 6,000 landings.
    (1) Prior to the accumulation of 10,000 total landings, but not 
before the accumulation of 7,000 total landings.
    (2) Within 3,000 landings after the effective date of this AD, 
or at the next 8-year environmental (corrosion) inspection, 
whichever occurs first.

    Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is 
defined as: ``An intensive visual examination of a specific 
structural area, system, installation, or assembly to detect damage, 
failure, or irregularity. Available lighting is normally 
supplemented with a direct source of good lighting at intensity 
deemed appropriate by the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror, 
magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface cleaning and elaborate 
access procedures may be required.''

    (b) For the inspections of the surround structure for the 
avionics bay doors, operators may either remove the high intensity 
radiated field (HIRF) seal and do a detailed inspection, or do 
radiographic and eddy current inspections with the HIRF seal in 
place.

Corrective Actions

    (c) If any discrepancy is found during any inspection required 
by this AD, before further flight, repair per BAE Systems 
(Operations) Limited Service Bulletin J41-53-047, Revision 1, dated 
July 19, 2002. Where the service bulletin specifies contacting the 
manufacturer for disposition of repairs, before further flight, 
repair per a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, 
ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate; or the Civil Aviation 
Authority (or its delegated agent).

[[Page 44591]]

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (d) In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, the Manager, International 
Branch, ANM-116, FAA, is authorized to approve alternative methods 
of compliance for this AD.

Incorporation by Reference

    (e) Unless otherwise specified in this AD, the actions shall be 
done in accordance with BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Service 
Bulletin J41-53-047, Revision 1, dated July 19, 2002. This 
incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the 
Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 
51. Copies may be obtained from British Aerospace Regional Aircraft 
American Support, 13850 Mclearen Road, Herndon, Virginia 20171. 
Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or 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.

    Note 2: The subject of this AD is addressed in British 
airworthiness directive 001-06-2001.

Effective Date

    (f) This amendment becomes effective on August 31, 2004.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 9, 2004.
Kevin M. Mullin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 04-16679 Filed 7-26-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P