[Federal Register: May 6, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 88)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 24864-24866]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06my08-5]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2007-0371; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-269-AD;
Amendment 39-15511; AD 2008-10-05]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model
BAe 146 and Model Avro 146-RJ 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 service history of
incidents and accidents involving transport category turbojet airplanes
without leading edge high lift devices. This service history shows that
even small amounts of frost, ice, snow, or slush on the wing leading
edges or forward upper wing surfaces can cause an adverse change in the
stall speeds and stall characteristics, and can negate the protection
provided by a stall protection system. While there have been no
accidents or incidents related to wing contamination associated with
the BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model BAe 146 and Model Avro 146-
RJ airplanes, these airplanes are also transport category turbojet
airplanes without leading edge high lift devices, and therefore may be
similarly sensitive to small amounts of wing contamination. This AD
requires revising the airplane flight manual to include a new cold
weather operations limitation. We are issuing this AD to prevent
possible loss of control on takeoff resulting from even small amounts
of frost, ice, snow, or slush on the wing leading edges or forward
upper wing surfaces. We are issuing this AD to require actions to
correct the unsafe condition on these products.
DATES: This AD becomes effective June 10, 2008.
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: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1175; fax (425) 227-1149.
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 December 26, 2007
(72 FR 72968). That NPRM proposed to require revising the airplane
flight manual to include a new cold weather operations limitation.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We have considered the comment received.
Request to Withdraw NPRM or Revise Paragraph (e)
BAE Systems (Operations) Limited, type certificate holder for Model
BAe 146 and Model Avro 146-RJ airplanes, states that it has reviewed
the NPRM and is preparing advice in an expanded flight crew operations
manual (FCOM) to explain the importance of a ``clean wing'' prior to
takeoff. The information in that manual, including the use of tactile
checks, permits operators and de-/anti-icing service providers to
develop procedures to suit local arrangements. BAE Systems states that
this approach is consistent with other regional aircraft types for
which airplane flight manual (AFM) revisions have not been mandated.
While BAE Systems fully supports safety initiatives aimed at minimizing
wing contamination, BAE Systems asserts that a safety concern does not
exist on the Model BAe 146 and Model Avro 146-RJ airplanes for the
following reasons:
No accidents or incidents due to upper surface
contamination have occurred on Model BAe 146 and Model Avro 146-RJ
airplanes (this information was not included in the Summary of the
NPRM).
The different wing shape on Model BAe 146 and Model Avro
146-RJ airplanes make them less susceptible to the effects of leading
edge and upper surface contamination.
There is no evidence that small/visually imperceptible
amounts of ice on the wing of these airplanes would lead to loss of
control during takeoff.
BAE Systems asks that if we amend 14 CFR part 39 to require the
additional limitations in the AFM, we revise paragraph (e) ``Reason''
of the NPRM to include the words: ``Whilst there is no service history
that indicates the BAe146 and Avro 146-RJ will be similarly affected. *
* *''
We acknowledge BAE Systems' concerns, and partially agree with its
requests. We agree that no accidents or incidents due to upper surface
contamination have occurred on Model BAe 146 and Model Avro 146-RJ
airplanes. We have revised the AD to include that acknowledgement in
the Summary and in paragraph (e).
However, we disagree that a safety concern does not exist on the
Model BAe 146 and Model Avro 146-RJ airplanes and therefore, by
implication, that we should withdraw the NPRM.
Section 39.1 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 39.1)
states:
[[Page 24865]]
``This part prescribes airworthiness directives that apply to
aircraft * * * when--
(a) An unsafe condition exists in a product; and
(b) That condition is likely to exist or develop in other products
of the same type design.''
The Model BAe 146 and Model Avro 146-RJ airplanes share common type
design characteristics with airplanes that have been involved in
takeoff accidents and incidents resulting from small amounts of wing
leading edge or upper surface contamination. The accident and incident
history shows that transport category turbojet airplanes without
leading edge high lift devices have been involved in a number of
takeoff accidents and incidents where undetected upper wing ice
contamination has been cited as the probable cause or sole contributing
factor. Although BAE Systems contends that differences between the
wings of the Model BAe 146/Avro 146-RJ airplanes and the wings of the
airplane types involved in the accidents and incidents make the Model
BAe 146/Avro 146-RJ airplanes less susceptible to the effects of wing
leading edge and upper surface contamination, BAE Systems has not
supplied data that directly address the FAA's safety concern. We
evaluated all relevant information, including information submitted by
BAE Systems before and after issuance of the NPRM, and determined the
unsafe condition is likely to exist or develop in Model BAe 146 and
Model Avro 146-RJ airplanes.
BAE Systems' proposal to include advice in an expanded FCOM to
explain the importance of a clean wing prior to takeoff, while
commendable, is insufficient to address the potential unsafe condition.
Mandatory tactile checks of the wing leading edges and upper surfaces
in potential ground icing conditions are needed to address the
potential unsafe condition, and advice provided in an FCOM is not
mandatory. An airplane operating limitation provided in the AFM is
necessary to ensure the tactile check is performed. Contrary to BAE
Systems' assertion that their proposed FCOM approach is consistent with
the action taken on some other regional airplane types, the only
instances where similar operating limitations have not been instituted
on transport category turbojet airplanes without leading edge high lift
devices have been where the airplane manufacturer provided data showing
that adequate safety margins would be retained for takeoffs with small
amounts of undetected wing upper surface contamination.
For these reasons we do not find it necessary to withdraw the NPRM
and we have not changed the AD in this regard. However, under the
provisions of paragraph (g)(1) of the AD, we will consider requests for
approval of an alternative method of compliance if sufficient data are
submitted to substantiate that the alternative method would provide an
acceptable level of safety.
Request to Revise Number of Airplanes of U.S. Registry
BAE Systems states that, although the ``Costs of Compliance''
section gives realistic costs for revising the AFM, it gives an
incorrect number of airplanes of U.S. Registry. The NPRM states that
there is only one affected airplane on the U.S. Register; BAE Systems
understands that the FAA registry currently shows up to 25 examples of
the affected airplane types.
We agree with BAE systems that there are additional U.S.-registered
airplanes affected by this AD. A detailed review shows that several
airplanes that appear in certain databases to be U.S.-registered are
instead registered in other countries. Certain other airplanes have
been scrapped. Therefore, although there are not 25 U.S.-registered
airplanes, we do agree that there is more than 1 airplane of U.S.
registry. Therefore, we have revised the Costs of Compliance to include
the costs for the 10 airplanes that we estimate are on the U.S.
Register.
Request to Include Costs for Ongoing Actions
BAE Systems also states that the ``Costs of Compliance'' section
excludes any assessment of the ongoing cost to operators for the time
taken to conduct the visual and tactile pre-flight inspections. BAE
Systems notes that access to the high wings on these airplanes requires
a tall ladder and that the inspection will take approximately 30
minutes. BAE Systems estimates that the conditions where tactile checks
would be required could exist up to 60 days per year, depending on the
operator's geographical location and route structure, which could cause
U.S. operators to incur up to 240 additional work hours per airplane
per year.
We disagree with adding costs for the pre-flight check to the AD.
We recognize that when accomplishing the requirements of any AD,
operators might incur costs in addition to the direct costs that are
reflected in the cost analysis presented in the AD preamble. However,
the cost analysis in AD rulemaking actions typically does not include
these incidental costs.
In the case of this AD, for example, the requirements are to revise
the AFM to include certain information. Further, because ADs require
specific actions to address specific unsafe conditions, they appear to
impose costs that would not otherwise be borne by operators. However,
because of the general obligation of operators to maintain and operate
their airplanes in an airworthy condition, this appearance is
deceptive. Attributing those costs solely to the issuance of this AD is
unrealistic because, in the interest of maintaining and operating safe
airplanes, prudent operators would accomplish the required actions even
if they were not required to do so by the AD.
We have not changed the AD in this regard.
Explanation of Change to Summary
We have revised the Summary to clarify that not all airplanes are
equipped with a stall protection system (by using the word ``a''
instead of ``the''). We have also clarified that the affected airplanes
are transport category turbojet airplanes without leading edge high
lift devices, and therefore may be similarly sensitive to small amounts
of wing contamination.
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.
Costs of Compliance
This AD affects about 10 products of U.S. registry. We estimate
that it takes about 1 work-hour per product to comply with this AD. The
average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we
estimate the cost of the AD on U.S. operators to be $800, or $80 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
[[Page 24866]]
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 that this AD:
(1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866;
(2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
(3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
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 (800) 647-5527) 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, 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:
2008-10-05 BAE Systems (Operations) Limited (Formerly British
Aerospace Regional Aircraft): Amendment 39-15511. Docket No. FAA-
2007-0371; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-269-AD.
Effective Date
(a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective June 10,
2008.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to all BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Model BAe 146-100A, -200A, and -300A series airplanes, certificated
in any category; and all Model Avro 146-RJ70A, 146-RJ85A, and 146-
RJ100A airplanes, certificated in any category.
Subject
(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 30: Ice and
Rain Protection.
Reason
(e) This AD results from service history of incidents and
accidents involving transport category turbojet airplanes without
leading edge high lift devices, that shows that even small amounts
of frost, ice, snow, or slush on the wing leading edges or forward
upper wing surfaces can cause an adverse change in the stall speeds
and stall characteristics, and can negate the protection provided by
a stall protection system. While there have been no accidents or
incidents related to wing contamination associated with the BAE
Systems (Operations) Limited Model BAe 146 and Model Avro 146-RJ
airplanes, these airplanes are also transport category turbojet
airplanes without leading edge high lift devices, and therefore may
be similarly sensitive to small amounts of wing contamination. We
are issuing this AD to prevent possible loss of control on takeoff
resulting from even small amounts of frost, ice, snow, or slush on
the wing leading edges or forward upper wing surfaces.
Actions and Compliance
(f) Within 14 days after the effective date of this AD, revise
the Limitations Section of the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) to
include the following statement. This may be done by inserting a
copy of this AD in the AFM.
``1. Takeoff is prohibited with frost, ice, snow, or slush
adhering to the wings, control surfaces, engine inlets, or other
critical surfaces.
2. A visual and tactile (hand on surface) check of the wing
leading edge and the wing upper surface must be performed to ensure
the wing is free from frost, ice, snow, or slush when the outside
air temperature is less than 42 degrees F (6 degrees C), or if it
cannot be ascertained that the wing fuel temperature is above 32
degrees F (0 degrees C); and
a. There is visible moisture (rain, drizzle, sleet, snow, fog,
etc.) present; or
b. Water is present on the wing; or
c. The difference between the dew point and the outside air
temperature is 5 degrees F (3 degrees C) or less; or
d. The atmospheric conditions have been conducive to frost
formation.''
Note 1: When a statement identical to that in paragraph (f) of
this AD has been included in the general revisions of the AFM, the
general revisions may be inserted into the AFM, and the copy of this
AD may be removed from the AFM.
Other FAA AD Provisions
(g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-116, 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: Todd
Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425) 227-1175; fax (425) 227-1149.
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) None.
Material Incorporated by Reference
(i) None.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 8, 2008.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-9876 Filed 5-5-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P