DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0191; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-256-AD;
Amendment 39-18030; AD 2014-23-14]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Bombardier, Inc. Model DHC-8-400 series airplanes. This AD was prompted
by reports of swing arm assemblies of engine fuel feed ejector pumps
detaching from the outlet port of the engine fuel feed ejector pump and
partially blocking the engine fuel feed line. This AD requires
installing a restrictor into the engine fuel feed line. We are issuing
this AD to prevent blocked engine fuel flow and possible engine
flameout.

DATES: This AD becomes effective December 31, 2014.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of December 31, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-0191 or in person at
the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.
For service information identified in this AD, contact Bombardier,
Inc., Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt Boulevard, Toronto,
Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone 416-375-4000; fax 416-375-4539;
email thd.qseries@aero.bombardier.com; Internet http://www.bombardier.com.
You may view this referenced service information at
the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call 425-227-1221.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Morton Lee, Propulsion Engineer,
Propulsion & Services Branch, ANE-173, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY
11590; telephone 516-228-7355; fax 516-794-5531.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier, Inc.
Model DHC-8-400 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal
Register on April 9, 2014 (79 FR 19546).
Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-
2013-35, dated November 15, 2013 (referred to after this as the
Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to
correct an unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model DHC-8-
400 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

There have been incidents of the ``ENG FUEL PRESS'' caution
light illuminating in-flight. An investigation revealed the engine
fuel feed ejector pump swing arm assembly became detached from the
outlet port of the engine fuel feed ejector pump and partially
blocked the engine fuel feed line. If the failed swing arm assembly
migrates along the fuel line downstream of the Fuel Tank AUX Pump
junction, it could block the engine fuel flow and the affected
engine may experience a flameout condition.
Bombardier issued Service Bulletin (SB) 84-28-16 to introduce a
restrictor into the engine fuel feed line that is designed to
contain a detached ejector pump swing arm assembly.
This [Canadian] AD mandates the installation of a restrictor
into the engine fuel feed line to prevent possible engine flameout.

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-0191-0002.

Comments

We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM (79
FR 19546, April 9, 2014) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Require Compliance With Relevant Instructions in Service
Information

Horizon Air asked that we revise the NPRM (79 FR 19546, April 9,
2014) to specify only those instructions required to correct the unsafe
condition. Horizon Air explained that paragraph (g) of the NPRM is more
restrictive than necessary to ensure safety of flight, and that the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-16,
Revision B, dated June 17, 2013, should not be mandated in its
entirety. Horizon Air stated that the job set-up and close-out sections
of the Accomplishment Instructions do not directly correct the unsafe
condition; incorporating those sections as a requirement of the AD
restricts an operator's ability to perform other maintenance, in
conjunction with incorporation of the instructions in the service
information.
We agree to refer only to the procedures that address the
identified unsafe condition. We have revised paragraph (g) of this AD
to refer paragraph 3.B., ``Procedure,'' of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-28-16, Revision B, dated
June 17, 2013.

Request To Remove Repair Approval Language

Horizon Air asked that we remove the ``Airworthy Product'' language
in paragraph (i)(2) of the NPRM (79 FR 19546, April 9, 2014), which
states, in part, ``For a repair method to be approved, the repair
approval must specifically refer to this AD.'' Horizon Air stated that
this sentence should not be included in the final rule, or at the very
least it should be modified, because it will place an unnecessary
regulatory burden on operators with airplanes built in Canada. Horizon
Air added that Transport Canada Civil Aviation is the State holding
design authority for Bombardier Model DHC-8-400 series airplanes; the
NPRM simply restates the requirements of the TCCA AD. Horizon Air noted
that any repairs created by Bombardier would have to be in compliance
with the TCAA AD, and the repair would specifically refer to the TCCA
AD. Horizon Air also stated that the bilateral agreement between Canada
and the United States accepts documents approved by TCAA as meeting the
requirements for FAA approval. Horizon Air does not see the need for
referencing the U.S. AD number when the repair is approved by TCCA and
refers to the Canadian AD; therefore, the repair meets the approval
requirements from the State holding the Design Authority. Horizon Air
concluded that if this requirement is retained, it would force
operators to go back to the manufacturer and request a revision to the
repair method to add the U.S. AD number, even if the repair method is
referenced in the TCCA AD.
We concur with the commenter's request to remove the requirement to
refer to this AD in repair approvals. Since late 2006, we have included
the paragraph titled ``Airworthy Product'' in all MCAI ADs in which the
FAA develops an AD based on a foreign authority's AD. The MCAI or
referenced service information in an FAA AD often directs the owner/
operator to contact the manufacturer for corrective actions, such as a
repair. Briefly, the Airworthy Product paragraph allowed owners/
operators to use corrective actions provided by the manufacturer if
those actions were FAA-approved. In addition, the paragraph stated that
any actions approved by the State of Design Authority (or its delegated
agent) are considered to be FAA-approved.
In the NPRM (79 FR 19546, April 9, 2014), we proposed to prevent
the use of repairs that were not specifically developed to correct the
unsafe condition, by requiring that the repair approval provided by the
State of Design Authority or its delegated agent specifically refer to
this FAA AD. This change was intended to clarify the method of
compliance and to provide operators with better visibility of repairs
that are specifically developed and approved to correct the unsafe
condition. In addition, we proposed to change the phrase ``its
delegated agent'' to include a design approval holder (DAH) with State
of Design Authority design organization approval (DOA), as applicable,
to refer to a DAH authorized to approve required repairs for the
proposed AD.
In addition to Horizon Air's comments to the NPRM (79 FR 19546,
April 9, 2014) about these proposed
changes, a comment was provided for an NPRM having Directorate
Identifier 2012-NM-101-AD (78 FR 78285, December 26, 2013). The
commenter stated the following: ``The proposed wording, being specific
to repairs, eliminates the interpretation that Airbus messages are
acceptable for approving minor deviations (corrective actions) needed
during accomplishment of an AD mandated Airbus service bulletin.''
This comment has made the FAA aware that some operators have
misunderstood or misinterpreted the Airworthy Product paragraph to
allow the owner/operator to use messages provided by the manufacturer
as approval of deviations during the accomplishment of an AD-mandated
action. The Airworthy Product paragraph does not approve messages or
other information provided by the manufacturer for deviations to the
requirements of the AD-mandated actions. The Airworthy Product
paragraph only addresses the requirement to contact the manufacturer
for corrective actions for the identified unsafe condition and does not
cover deviations from other AD requirements. However, deviations to AD-
required actions are addressed in 14 CFR 39.17, and anyone may request
the approval for an alternative method of compliance to the AD-required
actions using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
To address this misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the
Airworthy Product paragraph, we have changed the paragraph and retitled
it ``Contacting the Manufacturer.'' This paragraph now clarifies that
for any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a
manufacturer, the actions must be accomplished using a method approved
by the FAA, TCCA, or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval
Organization (DAO).
The Contacting the Manufacturer paragraph also clarifies that, if
approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized
signature. The DAO signature indicates that the data and information
contained in the document are TCCA-approved, which is also FAA-
approved. Messages and other information provided by the manufacturer
that does not contain the DAO-authorized signature approval are not
TCCA-approved, unless TCCA directly approves the manufacturer's message
or other information.
This clarification does not remove flexibility previously afforded
by the Airworthy Product paragraph. Consistent with long-standing FAA
policy, such flexibility was never intended for required actions. This
is also consistent with the recommendation of the Airworthiness
Directive Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee to increase
flexibility in complying with ADs by identifying those actions in
manufacturers' service instructions that are ``Required for
Compliance'' with ADs. We continue to work with manufacturers to
implement this recommendation. But once we determine that an action is
required, any deviation from the requirement must be approved as an
alternative method of compliance.
Other commenters to the NPRM having Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-
101-AD (78 FR 78285, December 26, 2013) pointed out that in many cases
the foreign manufacturer's service bulletin and the foreign authority's
MCAI might have been issued some time before the FAA AD. Therefore, the
DOA might have provided U.S. operators with an approved repair,
developed with full awareness of the unsafe condition, before the FAA
AD is issued. Under these circumstances, to comply with the FAA AD, the
operator would be required to go back to the manufacturer's DOA and
obtain a new approval document, adding time and expense to the
compliance process with no safety benefit.
Based on these comments, we removed the requirement that the DAH-
provided repair specifically refer to this AD. Before adopting such a
requirement, the FAA will coordinate with affected DAHs and verify they
are prepared to implement means to ensure that their repair approvals
consider the unsafe condition addressed in this AD. Any such
requirements will be adopted through the normal AD rulemaking process,
including notice-and-comment procedures, when appropriate.
We also have decided not to include a generic reference to either
the ``delegated agent'' or ``DAH with State of Design Authority design
organization approval,'' but instead we have provided the specific
delegation approval granted by the State of Design Authority for the
DAH throughout this AD.

Conclusion

We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these changes:
Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (79 FR 19546, April 9, 2014) for correcting the unsafe condition;
and
Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 19546, April 9, 2014).
We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this AD affects 81 airplanes of U.S. registry. We
estimate the following costs to comply with this AD.
We also estimate that it takes about 12 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $85 per work-hour. Required parts cost about $0 per product. Based
on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. operators to
be $82,620, or $1,020 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 that 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);
3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
4. 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.

Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0191; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information.
The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section.

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

1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec. 39.13 [Amended]

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