[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 161 (Monday, August 21, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 48487-48490]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-13713]


 ========================================================================
 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. 71, No. 161 / Monday, August 21, 2006 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 48487]]



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2006-25645; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-201-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model CL-600-1A11 (CL-600), 
CL-600-2A12 (CL-601), and CL-600-2B16 (CL-601-3A and CL-601-3R) 
Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) 
for all Bombardier Model CL-600-1A11 (CL-600), CL-600-2A12 (CL-601), 
and CL-600-2B16 (CL-601-3A and CL-601-3R) airplanes. This proposed AD 
would require implementing a corrosion prevention and control program 
(CPCP) either by accomplishing specific tasks or by revising the 
maintenance inspection program to include a CPCP. This proposed AD 
results from the determination that, as airplanes age, they are more 
likely to exhibit indications of corrosion. We are proposing this AD to 
prevent structural failure of the airplane due to corrosion.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 20, 
2006.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on 
this proposed AD.
     DOT Docket Web site: Go to http://dms.dot.gov and follow 
the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your 
comments electronically.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, room PL-401, 
Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: (202) 493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the 
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. 
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Contact Bombardier, Inc., Canadair, Aerospace Group, P.O. Box 6087, 
Station Centreville, Montreal, Quebec H3C 3G9, Canada, for service 
information identified in this proposed AD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Beckwith, Aerospace Engineer, 
Airframe and Propulsion Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft 
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, suite 410, Westbury, New 
York 11590; telephone (516) 228-7302; fax (516) 794-5531.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or 
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address 
listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number ``FAA-2006-
25645; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-201-AD'' at the beginning of your 
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will 
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the 
proposed AD in light of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://dms.dot.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will 
also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA 
personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of 
that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our 
dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or 
signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, 
etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the 
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you 
may visit http://dms.dot.gov.

Examining the Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket Management Facility office 
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays. The Docket Management Facility office (telephone (800) 647-
5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at the DOT 
street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 
available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System 
receives them.

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the airworthiness 
authority for Canada, notified us that an unsafe condition may exist on 
all Bombardier Model CL-600-1A11 (CL-600), CL-600-2A12 (CL-601), and 
CL-600-2B16 (CL-601-3A and CL-601-3R) airplanes. TCCA advises that, as 
airplanes age, they are more likely to exhibit indications of 
corrosion. Operators must implement a corrosion prevention and control 
program (CPCP) that identifies specific areas to be inspected to 
minimize and control deterioration of the airplane from corrosion. This 
condition, if not corrected, could result in structural failure of the 
airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    Bombardier has issued Challenger 600 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks 
(CPCP) Supplement, PSP 605 (CPCP), dated July 28, 2004 (for Model CL-
600-1A11 (CL-600) airplanes); Challenger 601 Time Limits/Maintenance 
Checks (CPCP) Supplement, PSP 601-5 (CPCP), dated July 28, 2004 (for 
Model CL-600-2A12 (CL-601) airplanes); and Challenger 601 Time Limits/
Maintenance Checks (CPCP) Supplement, PSP 601A-5 (CPCP), dated July 28, 
2004 (for Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-601-3A and CL-601-3R) airplanes). In 
this proposed AD, we refer to these publications as ``the Manual.''
    Paragraph 6 ``Corrosion Levels'' of the Manual defines three levels 
of corrosion:

 Level 1 corrosion:
    1. Occurs between repetitive inspections and can be reworked within 
certain limits; or
    2. Exceeds allowable limits and is attributed to an event not 
typical of the usage of the other airplanes in

[[Page 48488]]

the operator's fleet; or
    3. Exceeds allowable limits as a result of accumulated blend-out of 
light corrosion found in previous inspections such that the structural 
item must be reinforced or replaced.
 Level 2 corrosion occurs between repetitive inspections and 
requires a single rework that exceeds allowable limits, necessitating a 
repair or partial or complete replacement of a structural significant 
element.
 Level 3 corrosion is found during initial or repetitive 
inspections and is determined to be a potentially urgent unsafe 
condition necessitating expeditious action.

    Paragraph 9 ``List of Tasks'' of the Manual contains the CPCP task 
numbers, description of the inspections for corrosion, repetitive 
intervals, and necessary re-protection actions.
    TCCA mandated the Manual and issued Canadian airworthiness 
directive CF-2005-06, dated March 10, 2005, to ensure the continued 
airworthiness of these airplanes in Canada.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    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. We have examined TCCA's findings, 
evaluated all pertinent information, and determined that we need to 
issue an AD for airplanes of this type design that are certificated for 
operation in the United States.
    Therefore, we are proposing this AD, which would require 
implementing a CPCP either by accomplishing specific tasks or by 
revising the maintenance inspection program to include a CPCP. The 
proposed AD would require you to use the Manual described previously to 
perform these actions. The proposed AD also would require you to report 
findings of Level 3 corrosion to the airplane manufacturer.

Differences Among the Proposed AD, the Manual, and the Canadian 
Airworthiness Directive

    Although the Manual and Canadian airworthiness directive CF-2005-06 
specify that all corrosion findings be reported to the airplane 
manufacturer, this proposed AD would only require reporting of Level 3 
corrosion.
    The Canadian airworthiness directive CF-2005-06 specifies to 
incorporate the CPCP within one year and then to accomplish CPCP tasks 
at the next corresponding maintenance review board (MRB) task or the 
next CPCP task interval. However, this proposed AD specifies 
accomplishing CPCP tasks at the next CPCP task interval specified in 
the applicable Manual or within 12 months, whichever occurs later. In 
developing an appropriate compliance time for this proposed, we 
considered the urgency associated with the subject unsafe condition, 
the availability of required parts, and the practical aspect of 
accomplishing the required actions within a period of time that 
corresponds to the normal scheduled maintenance for most affected 
operators.

Clarification of Compliance Times in the Manual

    The compliance times in the Manual are not clearly identified. In 
this proposed AD, we clarify that the times in the ``Interval'' column 
of the Manual are in flight hours unless there is an ``M'' adjacent to 
the number. If there is an ``M'' adjacent to the number, the time is in 
months. If there are two different numbers for a task, the number with 
a ``T'' adjacent to it is the threshold and the number with an ``R'' 
adjacent to it is the repetitive interval.

Costs of Compliance

    This proposed AD would affect about 204 airplanes of U.S. registry. 
There are between 72 and 74 specific inspections, depending on the 
applicable Manual. The inspections would take about 74 work hours per 
airplane, per inspection cycle, at an average labor rate of $80 per 
work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the proposed 
AD for U.S. operators is $1,207,680, or $5,920 per airplane, per 
inspection cycle.

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 have 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 that the 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. See the 
ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

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.


Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by 
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly Canadair): Docket No. FAA-2006-25645; 
Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-201-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by September 
20, 2006.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all Bombardier Model CL-600-1A11 (CL-
600), CL-600-2A12 (CL-601), and CL-600-2B16 (CL-601-3A and CL-601-
3R) airplanes, certificated in any category.

[[Page 48489]]

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from the determination that, as airplanes 
age, they are more likely to exhibit indications of corrosion. We 
are issuing this AD to prevent structural failure of the airplane 
due to corrosion.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this 
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the 
actions have already been done.

Manual References

    (f) The term ``the Manual,'' as used in this AD, means the 
documents specified in paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2), and (f)(3) of this 
AD, as applicable. Although the Manual specifies to submit certain 
information to the manufacturer, this AD requires reporting only 
Level 3 corrosion.
    (1) For Model CL-600-1A11 (CL-600) airplanes: Challenger 600 
Time Limits/Maintenance Checks (CPCP) Supplement, PSP 605 (CPCP), 
dated July 28, 2004;
    (2) For Model CL-600-2A12 (CL-601) airplanes: Challenger 601 
Time Limits/Maintenance Checks (CPCP) Supplement, PSP 601-5 (CPCP), 
dated July 28, 2004; and
    (3) For Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-601-3A and CL-601-3R) airplanes: 
Challenger 601 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks (CPCP) Supplement, PSP 
601A-5 (CPCP), dated July 28, 2004.

Initial Inspections

    (g) At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and 
(g)(2) of this AD: Perform each of the CPCP tasks, including re-
protection actions, as applicable, specified in Paragraph 9 ``List 
of Tasks'' of the applicable Manual in accordance with the 
procedures specified in the applicable Manual.
    (1) Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) At the next CPCP task interval specified in the ``Interval'' 
column in the applicable table in Paragraph 9 ``List of Tasks'' of 
the applicable Manual. The times in the ``Interval'' column are in 
flight hours unless there is an ``M'' adjacent to the number. If 
there is an ``M'' adjacent to the number, the time is in months. If 
there are two different numbers for a task, the number with a ``T'' 
adjacent to it is the threshold and the number with an ``R'' 
adjacent to it is the repetitive interval.

Repetitive Inspections

    (h) After accomplishment of each initial CPCP task required by 
paragraph (g) of this AD, except as provided by paragraph (i) of 
this AD: Repeat each of the CPCP tasks, and re-protection actions, 
as applicable, specified in Paragraph 9 ``List of Tasks'' of the 
applicable Manual at intervals not to exceed the compliance time 
specified in the ``Interval'' column in the applicable table in 
Paragraph 9 ``List of Tasks'' of the applicable Manual. The times in 
the ``Interval'' column are in flight hours unless there is an ``M'' 
adjacent to the number. If there is an ``M'' adjacent to the number, 
the time is in months. If there are two different numbers for a 
task, the number with a ``T'' adjacent to it is the threshold and 
the number with an ``R'' adjacent to it is the repetitive interval.
    (i) After accomplishment of each initial CPCP task required by 
paragraph (g) of this AD, the FAA may approve the incorporation into 
the operator's approved maintenance/inspection program of either the 
CPCP specified in the applicable Manual and this AD, or an 
equivalent program that is approved by the FAA. In all cases, the 
initial CPCP task for each airplane area must be completed at the 
compliance time specified in paragraph (g) of this AD. For the 
purposes of this paragraph, the FAA is defined as the cognizant 
Flight Standards District Office.
    (1) Any operator complying with paragraph (i) of this AD may use 
an alternative recordkeeping method to that otherwise required by 
section 91.417 (``Maintenance records'') or section 121.380 
(``Maintenance recording requirements'') of the Federal Aviation 
Regulations (14 CFR 91.417 or 14 CFR 121.380, respectively) for the 
actions required by this AD, provided that the recordkeeping method 
is approved by the FAA and is included in a revision to the FAA-
approved maintenance/inspection program. For the purposes of this 
paragraph, the FAA is defined as the cognizant Flight Standards 
District Office.
    (2) After the initial accomplishment of the tasks required by 
paragraph (g) of this AD, any extension of the repetitive intervals 
specified in the applicable Manual must be approved by the FAA. For 
the purposes of this paragraph, the FAA is defined as the Manager, 
New York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA.

Corrective Actions

    (j) If any corrosion is found during accomplishment of any 
action required by paragraph (g) or (h) of this AD: Before further 
flight, rework, repair, or replace, as applicable, all subject 
parts, in accordance with Paragraph 7 ``Application of the CPCP 
Check'' of the applicable Manual.

Reporting Requirements and Repetitive Actions for Remainder of Affected 
Fleet

    (k) If any Level 3 corrosion, as defined in the Introduction of 
the applicable Manual, is found during accomplishment of any action 
required by this AD: Do paragraphs (k)(1), (k)(2), and (k)(3) of 
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 contained in this 
AD, and assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056.
    (1) Within 3 days after the finding of Level 3 corrosion, report 
findings to Bombardier in accordance with paragraph 7.J. of the 
applicable Manual.
    (2) Within 10 days after the finding of Level 3 corrosion, 
either submit a plan to the FAA to identify a schedule for 
accomplishing the applicable CPCP task on the remainder of the 
airplanes in the operator's fleet that are subject to this AD, or 
provide data substantiating that the Level 3 corrosion that was 
found is an isolated case. The FAA may impose a schedule other than 
proposed in the plan upon finding that a change to the schedule is 
needed to ensure that any other Level 3 corrosion is detected in a 
timely manner. For the purposes of this paragraph, the FAA is 
defined as the cognizant Principal Maintenance Inspector (PMI) for 
operators that are assigned a PMI (e.g., part 121, 125, and 135 
operators), and the cognizant Flight Standards District Office for 
other operators (e.g., part 91 operators).
    (3) Within the time schedule approved in accordance with 
paragraph (k)(2) of this AD, accomplish the applicable task on the 
remainder of the airplanes in the operator's fleet that are subject 
to this AD.

Limiting Future Corrosion Findings

    (l) If corrosion findings that exceed Level 1 are found in any 
area during any repeat of any CPCP task after the initial 
accomplishment required by paragraph (g) of this AD: Within 60 days 
after such finding, implement a means approved by the FAA to reduce 
future findings of corrosion in that area to Level 1 or better. For 
the purposes of this paragraph, the FAA is defined as the cognizant 
PMI for operators that are assigned a PMI (e.g., part 121, 125, and 
135 operators), and the cognizant Flight Standards District Office 
for other operators (e.g., part 91 operators).

Scheduling Corrosion Tasks for Transferred Airplanes

    (m) Before any airplane subject to this AD is transferred and 
placed into service by an operator: Establish a schedule for 
accomplishing the CPCP tasks required by this AD in accordance with 
paragraph (m)(1) or (m)(2) of this AD, as applicable.
    (1) For airplanes on which the CPCP tasks required by this AD 
have been accomplished previously at the schedule established by 
this AD: Perform the first CPCP task in each area in accordance with 
the previous operator's schedule, or in accordance with the new 
operator's schedule, whichever results in an earlier accomplishment 
of that CPCP task. After the initial accomplishment of each CPCP 
task in each area as required by this paragraph, repeat each CPCP 
task in accordance with the new operator's schedule.
    (2) For airplanes on which the CPCP tasks required by this AD 
have not been accomplished previously, or have not been accomplished 
at the schedule established by this AD: The new operator must 
perform each initial CPCP task in each area before further flight or 
in accordance with a schedule approved by the FAA. For the purposes 
of this paragraph, the FAA is defined as the cognizant PMI for 
operators that are assigned a PMI (e.g., part 121, 125, and 135 
operators), and the cognizant Flight Standards District Office for 
other operators (e.g., part 91 operators).

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (n)(1) The Manager, New York ACO, has the authority to approve 
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 
39.19.
    (2) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with 14 CFR 
39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the 
appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards 
Certificate Holding District Office.

[[Page 48490]]

Related Information

    (o) Canadian airworthiness directive CF-2005-06, dated March 10, 
2005, also addresses the subject of this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 11, 2006.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.

[FR Doc. E6-13713 Filed 8-18-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P