[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 229 (Tuesday, November 29, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 73496-73501]
[FR Doc No: 2011-29803]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0717; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-108-AD;
Amendment 39-16869; AD 2011-24-05]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding an existing airworthiness directive (AD)
that applies to certain Airbus Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, -243,
-301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342, and -343 airplanes; and
Model A340-200 and -300 series airplanes. This 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:

    During A330 and A340 aeroplanes fatigue tests, cracks appeared
on the right (RH) and left (LH) sides between the crossing area of
the keel beam fitting and the front spar of the Centre Wing Box
(CWB). This condition, if not corrected, could lead to keel beam
rupture which would affect the area structural integrity.
* * * * *
    We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective January 3, 2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of January 3,
2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain other publications listed in this AD as of
September 13, 2007 (72 FR 44731, August 9, 2007).

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1138; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on July 19, 2011 (76 FR
42602), and proposed to supersede AD 2007-16-02, Amendment 39-15141 (72
FR 44731, August 9, 2007). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe
condition for the specified products. The MCAI states:

    During A330 and A340 aeroplanes fatigue tests, cracks appeared
on the right (RH) and left (LH) sides between the crossing area of
the keel beam fitting and the front spar of the Centre Wing Box
(CWB). This condition, if not corrected, could lead to keel beam
rupture which would affect the area structural integrity.
    In order to maintain the structural integrity of the aeroplane,
EASA AD 2006-0315R1 required repetitive special detailed inspections
on the horizontal flange of the keel beam in the area of first
fastener hole aft of FR40.
    This [EASA] AD, which supersedes EASA AD 2006-0315R1:

--Retains the inspection requirements of EASA AD 2006-0315R1,
--Extends the AD applicability to aeroplanes which have embodied
Airbus modification 49202, and
--Modifies the inspection thresholds and intervals.

You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the single comment received.

Request To Update Service Information

    Airbus requested that we incorporate the latest revisions of the
primary service bulletins, Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletins A330-57-
3081 and A340-57-4089, both including Appendix 01, both Revision 04,
both dated May 31, 2011, and give credit for actions performed
according to the revisions of these service bulletins specified in the
NPRM (76 FR 42602, July 19, 2011).
    We agree to specify Revision 04, dated May 31, 2011, of Airbus
Mandatory Service Bulletins A330-57-3081 and A340-57-4089, and have
changed paragraphs (h), (j)(1), (j)(3), (n), (n)(1)(i), (n)(1)(ii)(B),
(n)(2)(ii), (p)(1), and (p)(2); tables 1 and 3; and Notes 3 and 4; of
this AD accordingly. Revision 04 of those service bulletins states that
no additional work is required for airplanes modified by any previous
issue of those service bulletins. We have also added Revision 03, dated
July 31, 2009, of those service bulletins to table 2 of this AD,
``Credit Service Information for Certain Actions.''

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the
AD with the changes described previously. We determined that these
changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or
increase the scope of the 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 required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow our FAA policies. Any such differences
are highlighted in a Note within the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this AD will
affect about 35 products of U.S. registry.
    For the 9 airplanes affected by the existing AD, the actions that
are required by AD 2007-16-02, Amendment 39-15141 (72 FR 44731, August
9, 2007), and retained in this AD take about 41 work-hours per product,
at an average labor rate of $85 per work hour. Required parts cost
about $191 per product. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of
the currently required actions is $3,676 per product.
    For the 26 additional airplanes added in this AD, we estimate the
actions in this AD will take about 41 work-hours per product, at an
average labor rate of $85 per work hour. Required parts will cost about
$191 per product. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the
proposed AD is $3,676 per product.
    In addition, because this AD advises to contact the manufacturer
for repair instructions, we cannot estimate the parts or labor costs
for any necessary follow-on actions. We have no way of determining the
number of products that may need these actions.

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 AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
    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 AD and placed it in the AD docket.

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 the NPRM (76 FR 42602, July 19, 2011),
the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for the Docket Operations office
(telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 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. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Amendment 39-15141 (72 FR

44731, August 9, 2007) and adding the following new AD:

2011-24-05 Airbus: Amendment 39-16869. Docket No. FAA-2011-0717;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-108-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective January
3, 2012.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2007-16-02, Amendment 39-15141 (72 FR
44731, August 9, 2007).

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to the airplanes identified in paragraphs
(c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD; certificated in any category; except
as provided by paragraph (c)(3) of this AD.
    (1) Airbus Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, -243, -301, -302, -
303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342, and -343 airplanes, all serial
numbers, except those on which Airbus modification 55306 or 55792
has been embodied in production.
    (2) Airbus Model A340-211, -212, -213, -311, -312, and -313
airplanes, all serial numbers, except those on which Airbus
modification 55306 or 55792 has been embodied in production.
    (3) This AD is not applicable to Airbus Model A340-211, -212, -
213, -311, -312, and -313 airplanes on which the repair specified in
Airbus Repair Drawing R57115053, R57115051, or R57115047
(installation of titanium doubler on both sides) has been
accomplished. AD 2007-12-08, Amendment 39-15086 (72 FR 31171, June
6, 2007), applies to these airplanes.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57: Wings.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:

    During A330 and A340 aeroplanes fatigue tests, cracks appeared
on the right (RH) and left (LH) sides between the crossing area of
the keel beam fitting and the front spar of the Centre Wing Box
(CWB). This condition, if not corrected, could lead to keel beam
rupture which would affect the area structural integrity.
* * * * *

Compliance

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

Restatement of Requirements of AD 2007-16-02, Amendment 39-15141 (72 FR
44731, August 9, 2007) With Revised Service Information

    (g) For Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, -243, -301, -321, -
322, -323, -341, -342, and -343 airplanes, except those on which
Airbus modification 49202 has been embodied in production, or Airbus
Service Bulletin A330-57-3090 has been embodied in service, and
Model A340-200 and -300 series airplanes, except those on which
Airbus modification 49202 has been embodied in production or Airbus
Service Bulletin A340-57-4098 has been embodied in service, and
except Model A340-211, -212, -213, -311, -312, and -313 airplanes on
which the repair specified in Airbus Repair Drawing R57115053,
R57115051, or R57115047 has been accomplished: Do the actions
required by paragraphs (h), (l), and (m) of this AD.
    (h) For airplanes identified in paragraph (g) of this AD, within
the mandatory threshold (flight cycles or flight hours) mentioned in
the paragraph 1.E.(2) of Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4089,
including Appendix 01, Revision 02; or A330-57-3081, including
Appendix 01, Revision 02; both dated January 24, 2006; depending on
the configuration of the aircraft model; or within 3 months after
September 13, 2007 (the effective date of AD 2007-16-02 (72 FR
44731, August 9, 2007)); whichever occurs later: Carry out the NDT
(non-destructive test) inspection of the hole(s) of the horizontal
flange of the keel beam located on FR 40 datum on RH (right-hand)
and/or LH (left-hand) side of the fuselage, in accordance with the
instructions of the applicable service bulletin listed in table 1 of
this AD. After the effective date of this AD, use only Airbus
Mandatory Service Bulletin A330-57-3081, including Appendix 01,
Revision 04, dated May 31, 2011; or Airbus Mandatory Service
Bulletin A340-57-4089, including Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May
31, 2011; as applicable. Inspection in accordance with Airbus A330/
A340 200-300 Technical Disposition F57D03012810, Issue B, dated
August 18, 2003; or Airbus A330/A340 Technical Disposition 582.0651/
2002, Issue A, dated October 17, 2002; satisfies the inspection
requirements for the first rotating probe inspection which is
specified at the inspection threshold of this AD. Doing the
inspection required by paragraph (n) of this AD terminates the
requirements of this paragraph of this AD.

    Note 1: In order to prevent large repairs or heavy maintenance,
Airbus recommends to perform the above inspection according to
recommended thresholds mentioned in paragraph 1.E.(2) of Airbus
Service Bulletin A340-57-4089, including Appendix 01, Revision 02;
or Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3081, including Appendix 01,
Revision 02; both dated January 24, 2006.

   Table 1--Acceptable Service Information for Certain Requirements of
                        Paragraph (h) of This AD
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Document               Revision                Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-             02  January 24, 2006.
 57-3081, including Appendix
 01.
Airbus Mandatory Service                  04  May 31, 2011.
 Bulletin A330-57-3081,
 including Appendix 01.
Airbus Service Bulletin A340-             02  January 24, 2006.
 57-4089, including Appendix
 01.
Airbus Mandatory Service                  04  May 31, 2011.
 Bulletin A340-57-4089,
 including Appendix 01.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     (i) In case of any crack finding during the inspection required
by paragraph (h) of this AD, before further flight, contact Airbus
in order to get repair instructions before next flight, and repair
before further flight.
    (j) Should no crack be detected during the inspection required
by paragraph (h) of this AD:
    (1) Before further flight: Follow up the actions indicated in
the flow charts, Figure 7, 8, or 9, of Airbus Service Bulletin A340-
57-4089, including Appendix 01, Revision 02, dated January 24, 2006,
or Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-57-4089, including
Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May 31, 2011; or Figure 5, 6, or 7,
of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3081, including Appendix 01,
Revision 02, dated January 24, 2006, or Airbus Mandatory Service
Bulletin A330-57-3081, including Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May
31, 2011; in accordance with the instructions of Airbus Service
Bulletin A340-57-4089, including Appendix 01, Revision 02, dated
January 24, 2006, or Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-57-4089,
including Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May 31, 2011; or Airbus
Service Bulletin A330-57-3081, including Appendix 01, Revision 02,
dated January 24, 2006, or Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A330-
57-3081, including Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May 31, 2011; as
applicable.
    (2) Within 30 days after September 13, 2007, or within 30 days
after doing the inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD,
whichever occurs later: Send the report of actions carried out in
paragraph (j)(1) of this AD to Airbus.
    (3) Renew the inspection at mandatory intervals given in
paragraph 1.E.(2) of Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4089, including
Appendix 01, Revision 02, dated January 24, 2006; or Airbus Service
Bulletin A330-57-3081, including Appendix 01, Revision 02, dated
January 24, 2006; as applicable; in accordance with the instructions
of Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4089, including Appendix 01,
Revision 02, dated January 24, 2006, or Airbus Mandatory Service
Bulletin A340-57-4089, including Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May
31, 2011; or Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3081, including
Appendix 01, Revision 02, dated January 24, 2006, or Airbus
Mandatory Service Bulletin A330-57-3081, including Appendix 01,
Revision 04, dated May 31, 2011; as applicable; and send the
inspection results to Airbus. Doing the inspection required by

paragraph (n) of this AD terminates the requirements of this
paragraph of this AD.

    Note 2: In order to prevent large repairs or heavy maintenance,
Airbus recommends to perform the above repetitive inspection
according to recommended intervals mentioned in paragraph 1.E.(2) of
Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4089, including Appendix 01,
Revision 02, dated January 24, 2006; or Airbus Service Bulletin
A330-57-3081, including Appendix 01, Revision 02, dated January 24,
2006.

    (k) Upon detection of a crack during a repetitive inspection
required by paragraph (j)(3) of this AD, before further flight,
contact Airbus to get repair instructions, and repair before further
flight.
    (l) For airplanes identified in paragraph (g) of this AD: No
additional work is required for compliance with paragraph (h) of
this AD for aircraft on which the inspection specified in Airbus
Service Bulletin A330-57-3081, dated October 30, 2003, or Revision
01, dated May 18, 2004; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4089,
dated October 30, 2003, or Revision 01, dated March 2, 2004, has
been accomplished. Nevertheless, the operators must check that their
inspection program is in accordance with paragraph 1.E.(2) of Airbus
Service Bulletin A340-57-4089, including Appendix 01, Revision 02,
dated January 24, 2006; or Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3081,
including Appendix 01, Revision 02, dated January 24, 2006; as
applicable; for the repetitive inspection.
    (m) For airplanes identified in paragraph (g) of this AD on
which Airbus Modification 41652 is not embodied: When the aircraft
has been modified in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A330-
57-3090, dated March 27, 2006; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-
4098, dated March 27, 2006; as applicable; the repetitive
inspections required by this AD are cancelled. In case of any crack
finding during the modification: Where the applicable service
bulletin specifies to contact Airbus, before further flight, contact
Airbus to get repair instructions, and repair.

New Requirements of This AD

    (n) At the applicable time in paragraph (n)(1) or (n)(2) of this
AD: Do an NDT inspection of the hole(s) of the horizontal flange of
the keel beam located on FR 40 datum on RH and/or LH side of the
fuselage, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A330-57-3081, including Appendix
01, Revision 04, dated May 31, 2011; or Airbus Mandatory Service
Bulletin A340-57-4089, including Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May
31, 2011; as applicable. Inspection in accordance with Airbus A330/
A340 200-300 Technical Disposition F57D03012810, Issue B, dated
August 18, 2003; or Airbus A330/A340 Technical Disposition 582.0651/
2002, Issue A, dated October 17, 2002; is acceptable for compliance
with the inspection requirements for the first rotating probe
inspection required by this paragraph. Doing the inspection required
by this paragraph terminates the requirements of paragraphs (h) and
(j)(3) of this AD.
    (1) For airplanes on which an inspection required by paragraph
(h) of this AD has not been done as of the effective date of this
AD: At the applicable time specified in paragraph (n)(1)(i) or
(n)(1)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) For all airplanes except those identified in paragraph (g)
of this AD: Within the ``Mandatory Threshold'' (flight cycles or
flight hours) specified in table 1 of paragraph 1.E.(2) of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin
A330-57-3081, including Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May 31,
2011; or Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-57-4089, including
Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May 31, 2011; as applicable; or
within 3 months after the effective date of this AD; whichever
occurs later. The compliance times for configurations 02 through 06
specified in the ``Mandatory Threshold'' column in table 1 of
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' are total flight cycles and total
flight hours.
    (ii) For airplanes identified in paragraph (g) of this AD: At
the earlier of the times specified in paragraphs (n)(1)(ii)(A) and
(n)(1)(ii)(B) of this AD.
    (A) Within the ``Mandatory Threshold'' (flight cycles or flight
hours) specified in table 1 of paragraph 1.E.(2) of Airbus Service
Bulletin A340-57-4089, including Appendix 01, Revision 02, dated
January 24, 2006; or Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3081, including
Appendix 01, Revision 02, dated January 24, 2006; depending on the
configuration of the aircraft model; or within 3 months after
September 13, 2007; whichever occurs later. The compliance times for
Model A330 post-mod. No. 41652 and pre-mod. No. 44360, post-mod. No.
44360, and pre-mod. No. 49202 (specified in Airbus Service Bulletin
A330-57-3081, including Appendix 01, Revision 02, dated January 24,
2006); and Model A340 post-mod. No. 41652, post-mod. No. 43500 and
pre-mod. No. 44360, post-mod. No. 44360 and pre-mod. No. 49202, and
Weight Variant 027 (specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-
4089, including Appendix 01, Revision 02, dated January 24, 2006);
specified in the ``Mandatory Threshold'' column in table 1 of
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' are total flight cycles and total
flight hours.
    (B) Within the ``Mandatory Threshold'' (flight cycles or flight
hours) specified in table 1 of paragraph 1.E.(2) of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin
A330-57-3081, including Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May 31,
2011; or Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-57-4089, including
Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May 31, 2011; as applicable; or
within 3 months after the effective date of this AD; whichever
occurs later. The compliance times for configurations 02 through 06
specified in the ``Mandatory Threshold'' column in table 1 of
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' are total flight cycles and total
flight hours.
    (2) For airplanes on which an inspection required by paragraph
(h) of this AD has been done as of the effective date of this AD: At
the earlier of the times specified in paragraphs (n)(2)(i) and
(n)(2)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Within the ``Mandatory Intervals'' given in table 1 of
paragraph 1.E.(2) of Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4089, including
Appendix 01, Revision 02, dated January 24, 2006; or Airbus Service
Bulletin A330-57-3081, including Appendix 01, Revision 02, dated
January 24, 2006; as applicable.
    (ii) Within the applicable ``Mandatory Interval'' specified in
table 1 of Paragraph 1.E.(2). of Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin
A330-57-3081, including Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May 31,
2011; or Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-57-4089, including
Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May 31, 2011; as applicable; or
within 3 months after the effective date of this AD; whichever
occurs later.

    Note 3: To prevent large repairs or heavy maintenance, Airbus
recommends to perform the above inspection according to recommended
thresholds specified in paragraph 1.E.(2) of Airbus Mandatory
Service Bulletin A330-57-3081, including Appendix 01, Revision 04,
dated May 31, 2011; or Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-57-
4089, including Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May 31, 2011; as
applicable.

    (o) If any cracking is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (n) of this AD, before further flight, repair in
accordance with a method approved by the International Branch, ANM-
116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, or European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) (or its delegated agent).
    (p) If no cracking is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (n) of this AD, do the actions required by paragraphs
(p)(1) and (p)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Before further flight: Install new or oversized fastener, as
applicable; seal the fastener; and do all other applicable actions;
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus
Mandatory Service Bulletin A330-57-3081, including Appendix 01,
Revision 04, dated May 31, 2011; or Airbus Mandatory Service
Bulletin A340-57-4089, including Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May
31, 2011; as applicable.
    (2) Repeat the inspection required by paragraph (n) of this AD
thereafter at intervals not to exceed the mandatory intervals
specified in Paragraph 1.E.(2). of Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin
A330-57-3081, including Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May 31,
2011; or Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-57-4089, including
Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May 31, 2011; as applicable.

    Note 4: To prevent large repairs or heavy maintenance, Airbus
recommends to perform the above repetitive inspection according to
recommended intervals mentioned in paragraph 1.E.(2) of Airbus
Mandatory Service Bulletin A330-57-3081, including Appendix 01,
Revision 04, dated May 31, 2011; or Airbus Mandatory Service
Bulletin A340-57-4089, including Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May
31, 2011; as applicable.

Credit for Actions Accomplished in Accordance With Previous Service
Information

    (q) Inspections done before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with the service information specified in table 2 of this
AD are acceptable for compliance with

the corresponding inspection required by paragraph (n) of this AD.

         Table 2--Credit Service Information for Certain Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Document               Revision                Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-             02  January 24, 2006.
 57-3081, including Appendix
 01.
Airbus Mandatory Service                  03  July 31, 2009.
 Bulletin A330-57-3081.
Airbus Service Bulletin A340-             02  January 24, 2006.
 57-4089, including Appendix
 01.
Airbus Mandatory Service                  03  July 31, 2009.
 Bulletin A340-57-4089.
Airbus Service Bulletin A330- ..............  October 30, 2003.
 57-3081.
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-             01  May 18, 2004.
 57-3081.
Airbus Service Bulletin A340- ..............  October 30, 2003.
 57-4089.
Airbus Service Bulletin A340-             01  March 2, 2004.
 57-4089.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (r) Modifying the fasteners installation in the junction keel
beam fitting at FR 40, in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin
A330-57-3098, dated August 30, 2007; or Airbus Service Bulletin
A340-57-4106, dated August 30, 2007; as applicable; before the
effective date of this AD terminates the requirements of this AD;
except for airplanes on which a crack was detected at hole 5 before
oversizing of the keel beam (in accordance with step 3.B.(1)(b)3 of
the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-
3098, dated August 30, 2007; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-
4106, dated August 30, 2007), before further flight, repair in
accordance with a method approved by the International Branch, ANM-
116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, or EASA (or its delegated
agent).
    (s) Modifying the fasteners installation in the junction keel
beam fitting at FR 40, in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin
A330-57-3098, excluding Appendix 1, Revision 01, dated July 31,
2009; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4106, excluding Appendix 1,
Revision 01, dated July 31, 2009; as applicable; terminates the
requirements of this AD.
    (t) Modifying the fasteners installation in the junction keel
beam fitting at FR 40, in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin
A330-57-3090, dated March 27, 2006; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-
57-4098, dated March 27, 2006; as applicable; terminates the
requirements of this AD.
    (u) In case of any crack finding during any modification
specified paragraphs (r), (s), and (t) of this AD: Where the
applicable service bulletin specifies to contact Airbus, before
further flight, repair in accordance with a method approved by the
International Branch, FAA, or EASA (or its delegated agent).

FAA AD Differences

    Note 5: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (v) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for
this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In
accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal
inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate.
If sending information directly to the International Branch, send it
to ATTN: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch,
ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (425)
227-1149. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any approved AMOC, notify your
appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter must
specifically reference this AD.
    (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: A federal agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a
person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a
collection of information subject to the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information
displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number
for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for
this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 5
minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions,
completing and reviewing the collection of information. All
responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Comments
concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing
the burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave.
SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information Collection Clearance
Officer, AES-200.

Related Information

    (w) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness
Directive 2010-0024, dated February 12, 2010, and the applicable
service information specified in table 3 of this AD, for related
information.

                  Table 3--Related Service Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Document               Revision                Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-             02  January 24, 2006.
 57-3081, including Appendix
 01.
Airbus Mandatory Service                  04  May 31, 2011.
 Bulletin A330-57-3081,
 including Appendix 01.
Airbus Service Bulletin A340-             02  January 24, 2006.
 57-4089, including Appendix
 01.
Airbus Mandatory Service                  04  May 31, 2011.
 Bulletin A340-57-4089,
 including Appendix 01.
Airbus Service Bulletin A330- ..............  March 27, 2006.
 57-3090.
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-             01  July 31, 2009.
 57-3098, excluding Appendix
 1.
Airbus Service Bulletin A340-             01  July 31, 2009.
 57-4106, excluding Appendix
 1.
Airbus Service Bulletin A340- ..............  March 27, 2006.
 57-4098.
Airbus A330/A340 200-300             Issue B  August 18, 2003.
 Technical Disposition
 F57D03012810.
Airbus A330/A340 Technical           Issue A  October 17, 2002.
 Disposition 582.0651/2002.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (x) You must use the following service information specified in
paragraphs (x)(1), (x)(2), (x)(7), (x)(8), (x)(9), and (x)(10) of
this AD, as applicable, to do the actions required by this AD,
unless the AD specifies otherwise. If you accomplish the optional
actions specified by this AD, you must use the service information
specified in paragraphs (x)(3), (x)(4), (x)(5), (x)(6), (x)(9), and
(x)(10) of this AD, as applicable, to perform those actions, unless
the AD specifies otherwise. The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) under 5 U.S.C. 552(a)
and 1 CFR part 51 of the following service information on the date
specified:
    (1) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A330-57-3081, including
Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May 31, 2011, approved for IBR
January 3, 2012.
    (2) Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A340-57-4089, including
Appendix 01, Revision 04, dated May 31, 2011, approved for IBR
January 3, 2012.
    (3) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3098, excluding Appendix 1,
Revision 01, dated July 31, 2009, approved for IBR January 3, 2012.
    (4) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4106, excluding Appendix 1,
Revision 01, dated July 31, 2009, approved for IBR January 3, 2012.
    (5) Airbus A330/A340 200-300 Technical Disposition F57D03012810,
Issue B, dated August 18, 2003, approved for IBR January 3, 2012.
    (6) Airbus A330/A340 Technical Disposition 582.0651/2002, Issue
A, dated October 17, 2002, approved for IBR January 3, 2012.
    (7) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3081, including Appendix 01,
Revision 02, dated January 24, 2006, approved for IBR September 13,
2007 (72 FR 44731, August 9, 2007).
    (8) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4089, including Appendix 01,
Revision 02, dated January 24, 2006, approved for IBR September 13,
2007 (72 FR 44731, August 9, 2007).
    (9) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-57-3090, March 27, 2006,
approved for IBR September 13, 2007 (72 FR 44731, August 9, 2007).
    (10) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-57-4098, March 27, 2006,
approved for IBR September 13, 2007 (72 FR 44731, August 9, 2007).
    (11) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS--Airworthiness Office--EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (12) You may review copies of the service information at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (13) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at an NARA facility, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 7, 2011.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-29803 Filed 11-28-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 111 (Friday, June 8, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 33998-34002]
[FR Doc No: 2012-13957]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 595

[Docket No. NHTSA-2012-0078]
RIN 2127-AL19

Make Inoperative Exemptions; Retrofit On-Off Switches for Air
Bags

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: There is a NHTSA regulation that permits motor vehicle dealers
and repair businesses to install retrofit on-off switches for air bags
in vehicles owned by or used by persons whose request for a switch has
been approved by the agency. This regulation is only available for
motor vehicles manufactured before September 1, 2012. In this document,
the agency proposes to extend the availability of this regulation for
three additional years, so that it would apply to motor vehicles
manufactured before September 1, 2015.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 9, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments to the docket number identified in
the heading of this document by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Rm. W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern
Time, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Regardless of how you submit your comments, you should mention the
docket number of this document.
    You may call the Docket at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public
Participation heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
document. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided. Please see the Privacy Act discussion below.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For non-legal issues: Ms. Carla Rush, Office of Crashworthiness
Standards, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590 (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax
202-493-2739).
    For legal issues: Mr. Edward Glancy, Office of the Chief Counsel,
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., Washington, DC 20590 (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Agency Analysis and Proposal
III. Shortened Comment Period
IV. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
V. Public Participation

I. Background

    To prevent or mitigate the risk of injuries or fatalities in
frontal crashes, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 208,
``Occupant crash protection'' (49 CFR 571.208), requires that vehicles
be equipped with seat belts and frontal air bags.
    In the 1990s, while air bags proved to be highly effective in
reducing fatalities from frontal crashes, they were found to cause a
small number of fatalities, especially to unrestrained, out-of-position
children, in relatively low speed crashes. It was shown that the
majority of these fatalities occurred because the occupants were very
close to or made contact with the air bag when it started to deploy.\1\
The other cause of the air bag fatalities at the time was the
aggressive design of some air bags.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See preamble to agency final rule on advanced air bags, 65
FR 30680, 30682-83, May 12, 2000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To address this problem, NHTSA developed a plan that included an
array of immediate, interim and long-term measures. The immediate and
interim measures focused on behavioral changes and relatively modest
technological changes (e.g., consumer education on air bags and the
importance of seat belts and putting children in the rear; amending
FMVSS No. 208 to allow for a limited time a sled test option for
expediting the depowering of air bags, etc.). The long-term measures
focused on more significant technological changes, i.e., advanced air
bag technologies.
    As one of the interim measures, on November 21, 1997, NHTSA
published in the Federal Register (62 FR 62406) a final rule permitting
motor vehicle dealers and repair businesses to install retrofit on-off
switches for frontal air bags in vehicles owned by or used by persons
whose request for a switch had been approved by the agency (subpart B
of 49 CFR part 595). This rule provided a limited exemption from a
statutory provision that generally prohibits motor vehicle dealers and
repair businesses from making inoperative any part of a device or
element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle
equipment in compliance with an applicable FMVSS.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The ``make inoperative'' provision is at 49 U.S.C. 30122.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the procedures set forth in the 1997 rule, vehicle owners can
request a retrofit air bag on-off switch by completing an agency
request form (Appendix B of Part 595) and submitting the form to the
agency. Owners must certify that they have read the information
brochure, in Appendix A of Part 595, discussing air bag safety and
risks. The brochure describes the steps that the vast majority of
people can take to minimize the risk of serious injuries from air bags
while preserving the benefits of air bags, without going to the expense
of buying an on-off switch. The agency developed the brochure to enable
owners to determine whether they are, or a user of their vehicle is, in
one of the groups of people at risk of a serious air bag injury and to
make a careful, informed decision about requesting an on-off switch.\3\
Owners

also must certify that they or another user of their vehicle is a
member of one of the risk groups. Since the risk groups for drivers are
different from those for passengers, a separate certification must be
made on the request form for each frontal air bag to be equipped with a
retrofit air bag on-off switch.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ At NHTSA's request, an expert panel of physicians convened
to formulate recommendations on specific medical indications for air
bag deactivation. The panel concluded that air bags are effective
lifesavers and that a medical condition does not warrant turning off
an air bag unless the condition makes it impossible for a person to
maintain an adequate distance from the air bag. Specifically, the
panel recommended disconnecting an air bag if a safe sitting
distance or position cannot be maintained by a: driver or front
passenger because of scoliosis, osteoporosis/arthritis; driver
because of achondroplasia; or passenger because of Down syndrome and
atlantoaxial instability. The panel also warranted the disconnection
of air bags if the need for wheelchair related modifications made it
necessary or if there is a medical condition that requires an infant
or child to be placed in the front passenger seat for monitoring
purposes. (The Ronald Reagan Institute of Emergency Medicine
Department of Emergency Medicine and The National Crash Analysis
Center, ``National Conference on Medical Indications for Air Bag
Disconnection,'' July 16-18, 1997.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If NHTSA approves a request, the agency will send the owner a
letter authorizing the installation of one or more on-off switches in
the owner's vehicle. The owner may give the authorization letter to a
dealer or repair business, which may then install an on-off switch for
the driver or passenger air bag or both, as approved by the agency. The
retrofit air bag on-off switch must meet certain criteria, such as
being equipped with a telltale light to alert vehicle occupants when an
air bag has been turned off. The dealer or repair business must then
fill in information about itself and its installation in a form in the
letter and return the form to the agency.
    In the November 1997 air bag on-off switch final rule, the agency
indicated that it believed, based on safety considerations, that it
should prohibit dealers and repair businesses from retrofitting
advanced air bag vehicles with on-off switches, but that it would
address this issue in the forthcoming rulemaking on advanced air bags
(62 FR at 62432-33).
    On May 12, 2000, NHTSA published in the Federal Register (65 FR
30680) its final rule to require advanced frontal air bags. The rule
required that future air bags be designed to reduce the risk of serious
air bag-induced injuries compared to then-current air bags,
particularly for small-statured women and young children; and provide
improved frontal crash protection for all occupants, by means that
include advanced air bag technology. To achieve these goals, it added a
wide variety of new requirements, test procedures, and injury criteria,
using an assortment of new test dummies.
    In the preamble to the May 2000 advanced air bag final rule, the
agency decided to continue the exemption procedures for retrofit air
bag on-off switches for vehicles manufactured through August 31, 2012.
This provided time to allow manufacturers to perfect the suppression
and low-risk deployment systems for air bags in all of their vehicles.
It also provided a number of years to verify the reliability of
advanced air bags based on real-world experience.
    NHTSA also indicated in the advanced air bag final rule that there
would be a need for deactivation of some sort (via on-off switch or
permanently) for at-risk individuals who cannot be accommodated through
sensors or other suppression technology (such as handicapped
individuals or individuals with certain medical conditions). The agency
stated at that time that it believed such needs could be best
accommodated through the authorization system for deactivation of air
bags in current use by NHTSA (65 FR at 30722).
    Also, on February 27, 2001, NHTSA published a final rule in the
Federal Register (66 FR 12638) providing a limited exemption from the
make inoperative prohibition, covering various provisions in a number
of safety standards, to facilitate the mobility of persons with
disabilities. The exemption permits repair businesses to modify certain
types of federally required safety equipment and features, under
specified circumstances. This disability exemption, which is in subpart
C of part 595, permits the installation of air bag on-off switches or
the permanent disconnection of air bags in certain, significantly more
limited circumstances than provided for in subpart B of that part.

II. Agency Analysis and Proposal

    Since the introduction of advanced air bags, and even before that
time, air bag-related fatalities have significantly declined. There
have not been any confirmed air-bag-related child fatalities in model
year 2004 or later vehicles. There have been two confirmed air-bag-
related adult fatalities in model year 2004 or later vehicles.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``Counts of Frontal Air Bag Related Fatalities and Seriously
Injured Persons,'' Special Crash Investigations, DOT HS 811 104,
January 2009. We note that although this report identifies three
confirmed air-bag-related adult fatalities in model year 2004 or
later vehicles it has come to our attention that one of these cases
was miscoded.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    However, as NHTSA recognized in the preamble to the advanced air
bag final rule, there may still be a need for deactivation of air bags
(via a switch or permanent deactivation) beyond September 1, 2012, for
at-risk individuals who cannot be accommodated through the advanced air
bag technology. Therefore, the agency has decided that it may be
appropriate to propose extending the on-off switch provisions of Part
595 subpart B, for some risk groups despite the presence of advanced
air bag technology.
    To permit the agency time to thoroughly evaluate this issue, and
potentially conduct rulemaking for an updated version of subpart B, we
are proposing to extend the current subpart B provisions for three
years. As discussed above, the regulation currently permits motor
vehicle dealers and repair businesses, for motor vehicles manufactured
before September 1, 2012, to install retrofit on-off switches for air
bags in vehicles owned by or used by persons whose request for a switch
has been approved by the agency. We are proposing to extend that date
so the provision would apply to motor vehicles manufactured before
September 1, 2015.
    With the proposed three year extension, the agency plans to
evaluate several aspects of the air bag on-off switch rule. Mainly, the
agency will evaluate the criteria for granting the retrofit on-off
switches (at-risk groups) in light of the existence of advanced air bag
technology, and the retrofit switch brochures and forms that were
included in part 595. The agency will also consider other topics that
have arisen over the years such as our continued use of prosecutorial
discretion for circumstances not covered by part 595 (e.g., the
application of retrofit switches for emergency and law enforcement
vehicles).
    Given the imminence of the September 1, 2012 date, it would not be
possible for us to complete the necessary evaluation and possible
rulemaking before that time. We are therefore proposing the three-year
extension, to maintain the current procedures during this time period.
This will avoid a situation where retrofit on-off switches would not be
available for vehicles manufactured during this time period, while the
agency is considering further rulemaking that could permanently allow
retrofit on-off air bag switches in specified circumstances. The agency
expects to be able to fully analyze the issues surrounding such a
rulemaking within those three additional years.
    We have tentatively concluded that a three-year extension is in the
interest of motor vehicle safety. This extension would prevent a
potential gap in the regulation and avoid any complications and
confusion that could arise if the subpart B exemption for retrofit on-
off air bag switches were allowed to sunset and then, later on, the
agency decided to maintain the exemption (in some form) permanently.

III. Shortened Comment Period

    Given the short time period between now and the September 1, 2012
date, we are providing a 30-day comment period. We believe this
shortened comment period is appropriate because we are proposing a
relatively short-term extension of an existing exemption.

IV. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

A. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, E.O. 13563, and DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures

    NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, and the Department of
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures (44 FR 11034;
February 26, 1979). This action was not reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget under these executive orders. It is not
considered to be significant under the Department's regulatory policies
and procedures.
    This document proposes to delay the sunset date of an existing
exemption for retrofit on-off switches for frontal air bags. They are
currently available, under specified circumstances, for vehicles
manufactured before September 1, 2012. We are proposing to extend that
date so that they will be available for vehicles manufactured before
September 1, 2015.
    The proposed rule would not require a motor vehicle manufacturer,
dealer or repair business to take any action or bear any costs except
in instances in which a dealer or repair business agrees to install an
on-off switch for an air bag. For consumers, the purchasing and
installation of on-off switches is permissive, not prescriptive.
    When an eligible consumer obtains the agency's authorization for
the installation of a retrofit on-off switch and a dealer or repair
business agrees to install the switch, there will be costs associated
with that action. The agency estimates that the installation of an on-
off switch would typically require less than one hour of shop time, at
the average national labor rate of approximately $80 per hour. NHTSA
estimates that the cost of an air bag on-off switch for one seating
position is $51 to $84 and the cost of an on-off switch for two seating
positions is $68 to $101. The agency estimates that approximately 500
air bag on-off switch requests are received and authorized annually.
However, we are uncertain about how many people actually pay to get
them installed after we authorize it. Given the relatively low number
of vehicle owners who will ultimately get the retrofit air bag on-off
switches installed and the above estimated costs, the annual net
economic impact of the actions taken under this proposed rule will not
exceed $100 million per year.
    Moreover, given the above, the fact that this has been a
longstanding exemption available for consumers and since the agency is
merely proposing to extend the availability of this exemption for an
additional three years of vehicle production, the impacts are so
minimal that a full regulatory evaluation is not needed.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended, requires
agencies to evaluate the potential effects of their proposed and final
rules on small businesses, small organizations and small governmental
jurisdictions. I hereby certify that this proposed rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This proposal would merely extend the sunset provision in Part 595.5.
No other changes are being proposed in this document. Small
organizations and small governmental units will not be significantly
affected since the potential cost impacts associated with this action
will be insignificant.

C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    NHTSA has examined today's proposed rule pursuant to Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and concluded that no
additional consultation with States, local governments or their
representatives is mandated beyond the rulemaking process. The agency
has concluded that the rulemaking would not have sufficient federalism
implications to warrant consultation with State and local officials or
the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. The proposed
rule would not have ``substantial direct effects 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.'' Today's proposed rule would not impose any additional
requirements. Instead, it would delay the sunset date of an existing
exemption for retrofit on-off switches for frontal air bags, thereby
lessening burdens on the exempted entities.
    NHTSA rules can preempt in two ways. First, the National Traffic
and Motor Vehicle Safety Act contains an express preemption provision:
when a motor vehicle safety standard is in effect under this chapter, a
State or a political subdivision of a State may prescribe or continue
in effect a standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of a
motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment only if the standard is
identical to the standard prescribed under this chapter. 49 U.S.C.
30103(b)(1). It is this statutory command by Congress that preempts any
non-identical State legislative and administrative law addressing the
same aspect of performance. However, this provision is not relevant to
this proposed rule as this proposal does not involve the establishing,
amending or revoking of a Federal motor vehicle safety standard.
    The express preemption provision described above is subject to a
savings clause under which ``[c]ompliance with a motor vehicle safety
standard prescribed under this chapter does not exempt a person from
liability at common law.'' 49 U.S.C. 30103(e). Pursuant to this
provision, State common law tort causes of action against motor vehicle
manufacturers that might otherwise be preempted by the express
preemption provision are generally preserved. However, the Supreme
Court has recognized the possibility, in some instances, of implied
preemption of such State common law tort causes of action by virtue of
NHTSA's rules, even if not expressly preempted.
    This second way that NHTSA rules can preempt is dependent upon
there being an actual conflict between an FMVSS and the higher standard
that would effectively be imposed on motor vehicle manufacturers if
someone obtained a State common law tort judgment against the
manufacturer, notwithstanding the manufacturer's compliance with the
NHTSA standard. Because most NHTSA standards established by an FMVSS
are minimum standards, a State common law tort cause of action that
seeks to impose a higher standard on motor vehicle manufacturers will
generally not be preempted. However, if and when such a conflict does
exist--for example, when the standard at issue is both a minimum and a
maximum standard--the State common law tort cause of action is
impliedly preempted. See Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S.
861 (2000).
    Pursuant to Executive Order 13132 and 12988, NHTSA has considered
whether this proposed rule could or should preempt State common law
causes of action. The agency's ability to announce its conclusion
regarding the preemptive effect of one of its rules reduces the
likelihood that preemption will be an issue in any subsequent tort
litigation.

    To this end, the agency has examined the nature (e.g., the language
and structure of the regulatory text) and objectives of today's
proposed rule and finds that this proposed rule would increase
flexibility for certain exempted entities. As such, NHTSA does not
intend that this proposed rule would preempt state tort law that would
effectively impose a higher standard on motor vehicle manufacturers
than that would be established by today's proposed rule. Establishment
of a higher standard by means of State tort law would not conflict with
the exemption proposed here. Without any conflict, there could not be
any implied preemption of a State common law tort cause of action.
Further, we are unaware of any State law or action that would prohibit
the actions that this proposed exemption would permit.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) requires Federal
agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits and
other effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate
likely to result in the expenditure by State, local or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than
$100 million annually (adjusted annually for inflation, with base year
of 1995). UMRA also requires an agency issuing a final rule subject to
the Act to select the ``least costly, most cost-effective or least
burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule.'' If
made final, this proposed rule will not result in a Federal mandate
that will likely result in the expenditure by State, local or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than
$100 million annually (adjusted annually for inflation, with base year
of 1995).

E. National Environmental Policy Act

    NHTSA has analyzed this proposed rule for the purposes of the
National Environmental Policy Act. The agency has determined that
implementation of this action will not have any significant impact on
the quality of the human environment.

F. Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform)

    When promulgating a regulation, agencies are required under
Executive Order 12988 to make every reasonable effort to ensure that
the regulation, as appropriate: (1) Specifies in clear language the
preemptive effect; (2) specifies in clear language the effect on
existing Federal law or regulation, including all provisions repealed,
circumscribed, displaced, impaired, or modified; (3) provides a clear
legal standard for affected conduct rather than a general standard,
while promoting simplification and burden reduction; (4) specifies in
clear language the retroactive effect; (5) specifies whether
administrative proceedings are to be required before parties may file
suit in court; (6) explicitly or implicitly defines key terms; and (7)
addresses other important issues affecting clarity and general
draftsmanship of regulations.
    Pursuant to this Order, NHTSA notes as follows. The preemptive
effect of this proposed rule is discussed above. NHTSA notes further
that there is no requirement that individuals submit a petition for
reconsideration or pursue other administrative proceeding before they
may file suit in court.

G. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless
the collection displays a valid OMB control number. Several of the
conditions placed by this exemption from the make inoperative
prohibition are considered to be information collection requirements as
defined by the OMB in 5 CFR part 1320. Specifically, this exemption
from the make inoperative prohibition for motor vehicle dealers and
repair businesses is conditioned upon vehicle owners filling out and
submitting a request form to the agency, obtaining an authorization
letter from the agency and then presenting the letter to a dealer or
repair business. The exemption is also conditioned upon the dealer or
repair business filling in information about itself and the
installation of the retrofit on-off switch in the form provided for
that purpose in the authorization letter and then returning the form to
NHTSA. These information collection requirements in Part 595 have been
approved by OMB (OMB Number: 2127-0588) through June 30, 2013, pursuant
to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq). NHTSA will request an extension of this approval in a timely
manner.

H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Under the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA) (Pub. L. 104-113), all Federal agencies and departments shall
use technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus standards bodies, using such technical standards as a means
to carry out policy objectives or activities determined by the agencies
and departments. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards
(e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and
business practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus standards bodies, such as the International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) and the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE).
The NTTAA directs us to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations
when we decide not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus
standards. There are no voluntary consensus standards developed by
voluntary consensus standards bodies pertaining to this NPRM.

I. Plain Language

    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write all rules in
plain language. Application of the principles of plain language
includes consideration of the following questions:
     Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs?
     Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
     Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that
isn't clear?
     Would a different format (grouping and order of sections,
use of headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?
     Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
     Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or
diagrams?
     What else could we do to make the rule easier to
understand?
    If you have any responses to these questions, please write to us
with your views.

J. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

    The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier
number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center
publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may
use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document
to find this action in the Unified Agenda.

K. Privacy Act

    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register

published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477).

V. Public Participation

How do I prepare and submit comments?

    Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your
comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket
number of this document in your comments.
    Your comments must not be more than 15 pages long. (49 CFR 553.21).
We established this limit to encourage you to write your primary
comments in a concise fashion. However, you may attach necessary
additional documents to your comments. There is no limit on the length
of the attachments.
    Please submit two copies of your comments, including the
attachments, to the Docket at the address given above under ADDRESSES.
    Comments may also be submitted to the docket electronically by
logging into http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments.
    Please note that pursuant to the Data Quality Act, in order for
substantive data to be relied upon and used by the agency, it must meet
the information quality standards set forth in the OMB and DOT Data
Quality Act guidelines. Accordingly, we encourage you to consult the
guidelines in preparing your comments. OMB's guidelines may be accessed
at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/reproducible.html.

How can I be sure that my comments were received?

    If you wish Docket Management to notify you upon its receipt of
your comments, enclose a self-addressed, stamped postcard in the
envelope containing your comments. Upon receiving your comments, Docket
Management will return the postcard by mail.

How do I submit confidential business information?

    If you wish to submit any information under a claim of
confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete
submission, including the information you claim to be confidential
business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given
above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. In addition, you should
submit two copies, from which you have deleted the claimed confidential
business information, to Docket Management at the address given above
under ADDRESSES. When you send a comment containing information claimed
to be confidential business information, you should include a cover
letter setting forth the information specified in our confidential
business information regulation. (49 CFR part 512.)

Will the agency consider late comments?

    We will consider all comments that Docket Management receives
before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated
above under DATES. To the extent possible, we will also consider
comments that Docket Management receives after that date. If Docket
Management receives a comment too late for us to consider in developing
a final rule (assuming that one is issued), we will consider that
comment as an informal suggestion for future rulemaking action.

How can I read the comments submitted by other people?

    You may read the comments received by Docket Management at the
address given above under ADDRESSES. The hours of the Docket are
indicated above in the same location. You may also see the comments on
the Internet. To read the comments on the Internet, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
dockets.
    Please note that even after the comment closing date, we will
continue to file relevant information in the Docket as it becomes
available. Further, some people may submit late comments. Accordingly,
we recommend that you periodically check the Docket for new material.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 595

    Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles.

    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA proposes to amend 49 CFR
part 595 as follows.

PART 595--MAKE INOPERATIVE EXEMPTIONS

    1. The authority citation for part 595 continues to read as
follows:

     Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117, 30122 and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

    2. Amend Sec.  595.5 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  595.5  Requirements.

    (a) Beginning January 19, 1998, a dealer or motor vehicle repair
business may modify a motor vehicle manufactured before September 1,
2015 by installing an on-off switch that allows an occupant of the
vehicle to turn off an air bag in that vehicle, subject to the
conditions in paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of this section.
* * * * *

    Issued on: May 30, 2012.
Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2012-13957 Filed 6-7-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: February 26, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 38)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 10203-10204]
[DOCID:fr26fe08-20]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R08-OAR-2007-0646; FRL-8526-9]

Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; Montana;
Interstate Transport of Pollution, New Definitions of PM and PM2.5

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve State Implementation Plan (SIP)

revisions submitted by the State of Montana on June 28, 2000 and April
16, 2007. The revisions update Administrative Rules of Montana (ARM)
provisions for Particulate Matter, and address Interstate Transport
Pollution requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the Clean Air Act.
On June 28, 2000, the Governor of Montana submitted revisions to ARM
rules 17.8.101--Definitions; 17.8.308--Particulate Matter, Airborne;
and 17.8.320--Wood Waste Burners. The June 28, 2000 submittal included
also a declaration certifying the adequacy of the State SIP in regard
to the infrastructure-related PM2.5 elements of section 110
of the Clean Air Act (CAA). In the April 16, 2007 submission, the
Governor requested EPA's review and approval of the ``Interstate
Transport Rule Declaration'' adopted into the Montana SIP on February
12, 2007. In that same letter, the Governor rescinded the State's
earlier request for approval of Montana's SIP in regard to the
infrastructure-related PM2.5 elements of section 110 of the
CAA. In light of this rescission, EPA is not taking action on this
declaration. This action is being proposed under section 110 of the
Clean Air Act.
    In the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of this Federal Register,
EPA is approving the State's SIP revision as a direct final rule
without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a non-
controversial SIP revision and anticipates no adverse comments. A
detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the preamble to the
direct final rule. If EPA receives no adverse comments, EPA will not
take further action on this proposed rule. If EPA receives adverse
comments, EPA will withdraw the direct final rule and it will not take
effect. EPA will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment
period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so
at this time. Please note that if EPA receives an adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may
be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those
provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 27, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2007-0646, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on line
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER> (please alert the individual listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing comments).
     Mail: Callie Videtich, Director, Air and Radiation
Program, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-
AR, 1595 Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129.
     Hand Delivery: Callie Videtich, Director, Air and
Radiation Program, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8,
Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. Such
deliveries are only accepted Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:55
p.m., excluding Federal holidays. Special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
    Please see the direct final rule, which is located in the Rules
Section of this Federal Register, for detailed instruction on how to
submit comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Domenico Mastrangelo, Air and
Radiation Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8,
Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, (303) 312-
6436<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the information provided in the Direct
Final action of the same title, which is located in the Rules and
Regulations section of this Federal Register.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: January 29, 2008.
Carol Rushin,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. E8-3339 Filed 2-25-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: October 29, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 208)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 55757-55759]
[DOCID:fr29oc09-3]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0399; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-226-AD;
Amendment 39-16060; AD 2009-22-09]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional
Jet Series 700, 701 & 702), CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705), and
CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This 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:

    A change in dimensions of the fuse blocks in the Auxiliary Power
Unit (APU) Start Contactor Assembly (ASCA) box assembly can cause an
incorrect interface between the bus bars and fuses. This condition
can result in an increase in temperature, which could damage the
ASCA box and/or compromise the availability of battery bus supply.

The unsafe condition could result in the ignition of a fire in the ASCA
box. We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective December 3, 2009.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of December 3,
2009.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wing Chan, Aerospace Engineer,
Avionics and Flight Test Branch, ANE-172, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New
York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on April 30, 2009 (74
FR 19902). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    A change in dimensions of the fuse blocks in the Auxiliary Power
Unit (APU) Start Contactor Assembly (ASCA) box assembly can cause an
incorrect interface between the bus bars and fuses. This condition
can result in an increase in temperature, which could damage the
ASCA box and/or compromise the availability of battery bus supply.

The unsafe condition could result in the ignition of a fire in the ASCA
box. The required actions include inspecting the ASCA boxes to
determine the part number; and for certain ASCA boxes, doing a detailed
inspection of the fuse block date code, and replacing the fuse block
with new hardware if necessary. You may obtain further information by
examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comment received.

Request To Change Compliance Time for Replacement

    American Eagle Airlines (AEA) requests that the compliance time in
paragraph (f)(1) of the NPRM for replacing the fuse blocks be changed
from ``before further flight'' to within 1,500 flight hours after the
effective date of this AD. AEA explains that the new compliance time
will give operators the benefit of knowing how much down-time will be
needed to replace the fuse blocks, while keeping to the restrictions of
1,500 flight hours required for inspecting the ASCA box.
    We disagree with the request. While we recognize that changing the
compliance time for replacing the fuse blocks from ``before further
flight'' to within 1,500 flight hours after the effective date of this
AD benefits the operators in their planning, we find that, to achieve
an adequate level of safety for the affected airplanes, fuse blocks
known to be un-airworthy must be replaced before further flight. We
have made no change to this AD in this regard.

Request To Allow a Records Check in Lieu of Inspection To Determine
Part Number

    AEA requests that a records check be allowed, if sufficient records
exist, to comply with the inspection of the ASCA box to determine the
part numbers. AEA explains that the records check would potentially
prevent unnecessary inspections.
    We agree. We have determined that a review of the airplane
maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of the inspection to
determine the part number of the ASCA boxes if the part number of the
ASCA boxes can be conclusively determined from that review. We have
revised paragraph (f)(1) of this AD accordingly.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD with the change described previously. We determined that this
change will not increase the economic burden on any operator or
increase the scope of the 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 required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow our FAA policies. Any such differences
are highlighted in a NOTE within the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 108 products of U.S. registry. We
also estimate that it takes about 5 work-hours per product to comply
with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $80
per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD
to U.S. operators to be $43,200, or $400 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 AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
    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 AD and placed it in the AD docket.

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 the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 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. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2009-22-09 Bombardier (Formerly Canadair): Amendment 39-16060.
Docket No. FAA-2009-0399; Directorate Identifier 2008-NM-226-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective December
3, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to the airplanes, certificated in any
category, identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Bombardier Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701 &
702), serial numbers 10112 through 10199 inclusive, and 10201
through 10206 inclusive.
    (2) Bombardier Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) and
CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900), serial numbers 15007 through
15026 inclusive, 15030, and 15031.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 49: Airborne
Auxiliary Power.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    A change in dimensions of the fuse blocks in the Auxiliary Power
Unit (APU) Start Contactor Assembly (ASCA) box assembly can cause an
incorrect interface between the bus bars and fuses. This condition
can result in an increase in temperature, which could damage the
ASCA box and/or compromise the availability of battery bus supply.
    The unsafe condition could result in the ignition of a fire in
the ASCA box. The required actions include inspecting the ASCA boxes
to determine the part number; and for certain ASCA boxes, doing a
detailed inspection of the fuse block date code, and replacing the
fuse block with new hardware if necessary.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions:
    (1) Within 1,500 flight hours after the effective date of this
AD, inspect the ASCA box to determine the part number and, for ASCA
boxes having part number (P/N) BA670-53328-1 or BA670-53328-951,
perform a detailed inspection of the fuse block date code, in
accordance with Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-49-012, Revision
A, dated August 28, 2008. Before further flight, replace all fuse
blocks that have a date code between K23 (0323) through M08 (0508)
inclusive, in accordance with Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-49-
012, Revision A, dated August 28, 2008. A review of airplane
maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of the inspection to
determine the part number of the ASCA boxes if the part number of
the ASCA boxes can be conclusively determined from that review.
    (2) Inspections and replacement actions are also acceptable for
compliance with the requirements of paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, if
done before the effective date of this AD in accordance with
Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-49-012, dated June 28, 2007.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1:  This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service
information as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Systems and Flight Test Branch, ANE-172, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Wing Chan, Aerospace
Engineer, Avionics and Flight Test Branch, ANE-172, FAA, New York
Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, New York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (516) 794-
5531. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the
AMOC applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
    (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 Transport Canada Civil Aviation Airworthiness
Directive CF-2008-34, dated December 2, 2008; and Bombardier Service
Bulletin 670BA-49-012, Revision A, dated August 28, 2008; for
related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-49-012,
Revision A, dated August 28, 2008, to do the actions required by
this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 514-855-
7401; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://
www.bombardier.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 19, 2009.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-25648 Filed 10-28-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P