[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 206 (Thursday, October 25, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 60593-60595]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-21008]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-27785; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-267-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. 
(EMBRAER) Model ERJ 170 Airplanes and Model ERJ 190 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

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

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

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier NPRM for the products listed above. 
This action revises the earlier NPRM by expanding the scope. 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 that some ``caution'' messages issued by the 
Flight Guidance Control System (FGCS) are not displayed on aircraft 
equipped with [certain] EPIC software load[s] * * *. Therefore, 
following a possible failure on one FGCS channel during a given 
flight, such a failure condition will remain undetected * * *. If 
another failure occurs on the second FGCS channel, the result may be 
a command hardover by the autopilot.

    A command hardover is a sudden roll, pitch, or yaw movement, which 
could result in reduced controllability of the airplane. 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 November 19, 
2007.

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 W12-40, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, 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 Docket Operations office 
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 Operations 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: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, 
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425) 
227-1175; fax (425) 227-1149.

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-2007-
27785; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-267-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 based on 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 we 
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 with an earlier NPRM for the 
specified products, which was published in the Federal Register on 
April 6, 2007 (72 FR 17042). That earlier NPRM proposed to require 
actions intended to address the unsafe condition for the products 
listed above.
    Since that NPRM was issued, EMBRAER Model ERJ 190-200 STD, -200 LR, 
and -200 IGW airplanes have been added to the U.S. type certificate 
data sheet. We have determined that these airplane models are subject 
to the unsafe condition and are included in the MCAI for Model 190 
airplanes.

[[Page 60594]]

Comments

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

Request to Add Optional Terminating Action

    Two commenters, EMBRAER and the Air Transport Association (ATA) on 
behalf of its member US Airways, have requested that an optional method 
of compliance be added to the AD.
    EMBRAER states that PRIMUS EPIC Field-Loadable Software Version 
19.3 is available and that instructions for uploading this new software 
are described in Service Bulletins 170-31-0019 and 190-31-0009, both 
issued on May 4, 2007. EMBRAER continues that, as soon as this upload 
is accomplished, the repetitive inspections described by service 
bulletins 170-22-0003 and 190-22-0002 (cited in the original NPRM as 
appropriate sources of service information) are no longer needed. 
Consequently EMBRAER suggests that we revise the NPRM to include an 
optional installation of software version 19.3 in lieu of the 
repetitive inspections.
    US Airways states that Embraer Service Bulletin 190-22-0002, dated 
November 9, 2006, mandates testing of the FGCS channel engagement until 
MAU PRIMUS EPIC software LOAD version 19.1 has been installed. US 
Airways therefore requests that upload of PRIMUS EPIC Software Version 
19.1 or higher be added to the final rule as an option to the 
compliance requirements already stated in the NPRM.
    We partially agree with this request. We have determined that 
software LOAD version 19.1 will not address the unsafe condition 
described in the supplemental NPRM. However, we have confirmed with 
Embraer that software LOAD version 19.3 or higher is acceptable as an 
optional terminating action for the repetitive functional checks. We 
have therefore revised paragraph (f) into paragraph (f)(1) and 
paragraph (f)(2) in the supplemental NPRM to provide for the optional 
terminating action.

Request to Clarify Procedures

    One commenter, Ranamdeep Singh, asks that we clarify or remove the 
following statement from paragraph (f) of the NPRM: ``Before further 
flight, do all applicable replacements of the actuator input-output 
processor in accordance with the applicable service bulletin.'' The 
commenter states that the MCAI specifies a functional check within 300 
hours after the effective date of the MCAI, with repetitions every 600 
hours thereafter, in accordance with EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-22-
0002, dated November 9, 2006, but does not require replacing the 
actuator input-output processor before further flight. The commenter 
continues that Service Bulletin 190-22-0002 provides an alternative 
procedure to perform the functional check with the airplane in flight 
rather than on the ground. The commenter states an intent to use this 
alternative method due to a lack of ground equipment, but asserts that 
the words ``before further flight'' in paragraph (f) of the NPRM mean 
that the alternative method can not be used, which, therefore, causes 
an excessive burden by forcing operators to perform the functional 
check on the ground. The commenter therefore requests that we clarify 
or remove the specified statement.
    We partially agree with this request. It appears there is some 
confusion regarding the procedures described in Service Bulletin 190-
22-0002. The original NPRM requires replacing the actuator input-output 
processor before further flight after it has been determined that 
replacement is applicable. The functional checks described in the 
service bulletin, in paragraph 3.A.2 of the ground check and paragraphs 
3.B.6(a) and (b) of the alternative check, all specify replacing the 
actuator input-output processor if certain messages are displayed 
during the functional check. The operator may use the alternative 
method and perform the functional check in flight, but after the check 
has been done, any defective actuator input-output processor must be 
replaced before further flight after the airplane has landed. It is not 
necessary to change the supplemental NPRM in this regard.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This 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 the State of Design Authority, we have 
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service 
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we 
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition 
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same 
type design.
    Certain changes described above expand 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 this proposed AD.

Differences Between This 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 
would affect about 98 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that 
it would take about 2 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 $15,680, or $160 per product.

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

[[Page 60595]]

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.


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-
2007-27785; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-267-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by November 19, 2007.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all EMBRAER Model ERJ 170-100 LR, -100 
STD, -100 SE, -100 SU, -200 LR, -200 STD, and -200 SU airplanes, and 
Model ERJ 190-100 STD, -100 LR, -100 IGW, -200 STD, -200 LR, and -
200 IGW airplanes; certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 22: Auto 
Flight.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) 
for Model ERJ 170 airplanes states:
    It has been found that some ``caution'' messages issued by the 
Flight Guidance Control System (FGCS) are not displayed on aircraft 
equipped with EPIC software load 17.3 or 17.5. Therefore, following 
a possible failure on one FGCS channel during a given flight, such a 
failure condition will remain undetected or latent in subsequent 
flights. If another failure occurs on the second FGCS channel, the 
result may be a command hardover by the autopilot.
    The MCAI for Model ERJ 190 airplanes states:
    It has been found that some ``caution'' messages issued by the 
Flight Guidance Control System (FGCS) are not displayed on aircraft 
equipped with EPIC software load 4.3, 4.4 or 4.5. Therefore, 
following a possible failure on one FGCS channel during a given 
flight, such a failure condition will remain undetected or latent in 
subsequent flights. If another failure occurs on the second FGCS 
channel, the result may be a command hardover by the autopilot.
    A command hardover is a sudden roll, pitch, or yaw movement, 
which could result in reduced controllability of the airplane. The 
MCAI mandates a functional test of the flight guidance control 
system channels engagement. The corrective action is replacement of 
the actuator input-output processor if necessary.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) Within 300 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, 
do a functional check of the flight guidance control system (FGCS) 
channels engagement, in accordance with EMBRAER Service Bulletin 
170-22-0003 or EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-22-0002, both dated 
November 9, 2006, as applicable. Repeat the functional check 
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 600 flight hours, until the 
optional terminating action described by paragraph (f)(2) of this AD 
had been done. If any malfunction of the FGCS is discovered during 
any functional check required by this paragraph, before further 
flight, do all applicable replacements of the actuator input-output 
processor in accordance with the applicable service bulletin.

    Note 1: For the purpose of this AD, a functional check is: ``A 
quantitative check to determine if one or more functions of an item 
perform within specified limits.''

    (2) Installing PRIMUS EPIC Field-Loadable Software Version 19.3, 
in accordance with EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-31-0019, Revision 
01, dated June 25, 2007; or Service Bulletin 190-31-0009, Revision 
02, dated June 29, 2007, as applicable, ends the repetitive 
functional checks required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD. If any 
software versions higher than 19.3 are available, the latest of any 
such versions is acceptable for the installation described in this 
paragraph.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information 
as follows: We have provided optional terminating action in 
paragraph (f)(2) of this AD; this difference has been coordinated 
with the Ag[ecirc]ncia Nacional de Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil 
(ANAC).

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, 
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 
Attn: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-
116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 
Renton, Washington 98057-3356, has the authority to approve AMOCs 
for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 
39.19. 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, 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 Brazilian Airworthiness Directives 2006-11-02 
and 2006-11-03, both effective November 16, 2006; EMBRAER Service 
Bulletins 170-22-0003 and 190-22-0002, both dated November 9, 2006; 
EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-31-0019, Revision 01, dated June 25, 
2007; and EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-31-0009, Revision 02, dated 
June 29, 2007; for related information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 13, 2007.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Assistant Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 
Certification Service.
 [FR Doc. E7-21008 Filed 10-24-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P