AD 2001-23-12

[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 227 (Monday, November 26, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58927-58929]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 01-29184]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2001-NM-91-AD; Amendment 39-12511; AD 2001-23-12]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Saab Model SAAB SF340A and SAAB 340B 
Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), 
applicable to certain Saab Model SAAB SF340A and SAAB 340B series 
airplanes, that requires a one-time review of records to determine 
whether an airplane has been repainted since its delivery from the 
factory; and a one-time inspection to detect damage associated with 
improper preparation for the repainting, and corrective action if 
necessary. This amendment is prompted by mandatory continuing 
airworthiness information from a foreign civil airworthiness authority. 
The actions specified by this AD are intended to detect and correct 
damage to the aluminum skin of the airplane, which could result in a 
weakening of the structure of the airplane.

DATES: Effective December 31, 2001.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in 
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as 
of December 31, 2001.

ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be 
obtained from Saab Aircraft AB, SAAB Aircraft Product Support, S-
581.88, Linkoping, Sweden. This information may be examined at the 
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, 
Rules Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the 
Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 
700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, 
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 
227-1175; fax (425) 227-1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal 
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness 
directive (AD) that is applicable to certain Saab Model SAAB SF340A and 
SAAB 340B series airplanes was published in the Federal Register on 
August 17, 2001 (66 FR 43130). That action proposed to require a one-
time review of records to determine whether an airplane has been 
repainted since its delivery from the factory; and a one-time 
inspection to detect damage associated with improper preparation for 
the repainting, and corrective action if necessary.

Comments

    Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate 
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to 
the comments received.

Requests To Revise Compliance Time for Initial Actions

    The compliance time of the proposed AD is 200 flight hours, which 
corresponds to the compliance time mandated by parallel Swedish 
airworthiness directive SAD 1-161 R1, dated March 5, 2001. Several 
commenters note that the parallel Swedish airworthiness directive has 
been further revised to correct a printing error. SAD 1-161 R2, dated 
March 13, 2001, was issued to revise the compliance time to 2,000 
flight hours. The commenters request that the proposed AD be revised to 
reflect the longer compliance time. They assert that there is no 
correlation between 200 flight hours and 1 year, and that the average 
fleet utilization is approximately 2,000 flight hours annually or about 
200 flight hours every 2 to 3 months.
    The FAA concurs, for the reasons identified by the commenters. The 
compliance times for the initial actions specified by paragraphs (a) 
and (b) of the final rule have been revised accordingly.

Requests To Extend Compliance Time for Corrective Action

    Paragraph (b)(2) of the proposed AD specifies that chemical 
stripping and corrective action must be accomplished prior to further 
flight after detection of discrepancies. Two commenters request that 
the proposed AD be revised to extend this compliance time to correspond 
to that specified in Saab Service Bulletin 340-51-020: 4,000 flight 
hours or 2 years. One commenter states that the proposed compliance 
time is far too restrictive, and requests that the airplane be allowed 
to continue in service for the period of time specified by the service 
bulletin. The commenter anticipates that requiring immediate repair 
might ground numerous airplanes and impose

[[Page 58928]]

significant economic impact on Saab operators.
    Based on the comments and the findings of the manufacturer and the 
Luftfartsverket (LFV), which is the airworthiness authority for Sweden, 
FAA agrees that allowing up to 4,000 flight hours or 2 years for those 
actions would not compromise the safety of affected airplanes. Such an 
interim period of flight with known discrepancies is acceptable in 
light of the safety implications, the average utilization rate of the 
affected fleet, the practical aspects of scheduling repair during 
regular maintenance periods, and the availability of required parts. 
Paragraph (b)(2) of this final rule has been revised accordingly.

Request To Allow Alternative Paint

    One commenter requests that the proposed AD be revised to allow use 
of an alternative paint system that would extend the compliance time 
temporarily until final corrective action, if necessary, can be 
accomplished. The commenter asserts that other paint systems commonly 
used in the industry, if appropriately applied, would provide adequate 
protection for another two years if no corrosion is found.
    The FAA does not concur with the request. Developing an exhaustive 
list of all possible paint systems that would be acceptable for 
compliance with this AD would be very difficult. However, under the 
provisions of paragraph (c) of the final rule, the FAA may approve 
requests to use an alternative paint system if data are submitted to 
substantiate that such an alternative paint system would provide an 
acceptable level of safety.

Request To Allow Manufacturer Approval of Corrective Action

    The proposed AD specifies that the FAA or the LFV (or its delegated 
agent) must approve methods of corrective action if pitting corrosion 
or reduced skin thickness is detected. One commenter requests that the 
proposed AD be revised to specify that the manufacturer, rather than 
the FAA or the LFV, approve the repair methods. The commenter asserts 
that repair approval by the manufacturer would omit unnecessary 
approval actions by the FAA or the LFV. The commenter adds that the FAA 
has always accepted manufacturer's data, and that this policy of 
manufacturer involvement should continue in this case to avoid 
inappropriate repairs.
    The FAA does not concur with the request to allow manufacturer 
approval of repair methods, which would constitute delegating the FAA's 
rulemaking authority to the manufacturer. However, as the proposed AD 
stated, the approval may be obtained from either the FAA or the LFV (or 
the LFV's designated agent). The LFV's designated agent is often a 
representative of the manufacturer. In any event, the manufacturer is 
consulted on issues related to appropriate repair methods so that the 
approved repair scheme will be consistent with methods previously used 
on a particular airplane. No change to the final rule is necessary in 
this regard.

Requests for Definition of ``Approved'' Paint System

    Two commenters request that paragraph (b) of the proposed AD be 
revised to clearly define an ``approved'' paint system. One of the 
commenters notes that the proposed AD does not account for previous 
paint systems applied on the airplane. That commenter requests that the 
AD provide specifications that will enable operators to distinguish 
approved from unapproved paint systems to avoid confusion. The other 
commenter questions whether a paint system is ``approved'' by the 
manufacturer or by virtue of being performed at a paint facility using 
an FAA-approved paint system.
    The FAA agrees that clarification may be necessary. The SAAB 340 
paint system is approved by the LFV as part of the type design. The FAA 
accepts the LFV approval and considers the paint system to be FAA-
approved. Criteria for an approved paint system are found in section 
51-20-43 of the Saab 340 Structural Repair Manual, as referred to by 
Saab Service Bulletin 340-51-020, Revision 01, dated May 16, 2001. 
Paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(B) of this AD has been revised to include this 
definition.

Additional Change to Final Rule

    The FAA notes that paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(B)(2) of the proposed AD 
inadvertently referred to airplanes that were ``painted,'' instead of 
``repainted,'' using an unapproved paint system. This final rule has 
been revised accordingly.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the available data, including the comments 
noted above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public 
interest require the adoption of the rule with the changes described 
previously. The FAA has determined that these changes will neither 
increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of 
the AD.

Cost Impact

    The FAA estimates that 288 airplanes of U.S. registry will be 
affected by this AD.
    It will take 1 work hour per airplane to review the records, at an 
average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the 
cost impact of the records review on U.S. operators is estimated to be 
$17,280, or $60 per airplane.
    For those airplanes that have been repainted, it will take 20 to 45 
work hours per airplane to accomplish the inspection, at an average 
labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost 
impact of the inspection is estimated to be $1,200 to $2,700 per 
airplane.
    The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions 
that no operator has yet accomplished any of the requirements of this 
AD action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in the 
future if this AD were not adopted. The cost impact figures discussed 
in AD rulemaking actions represent only the time necessary to perform 
the specific actions actually required by the AD. These figures 
typically do not include incidental costs, such as the time required to 
gain access and close up, planning time, or time necessitated by other 
administrative actions.

Regulatory Impact

    The regulations adopted herein 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. Therefore, it 
is determined that this final rule does not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (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. A final evaluation has been prepared for this action 
and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained 
from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption 
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

[[Page 58929]]

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of 
the Federal Aviation Regulations (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. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new 
airworthiness directive:

2001-23-12  Saab Aircraft AB: Amendment 39-12511. Docket 2001-NM-91-
AD.

    Applicability: Model SAAB SF340A series airplanes having serial 
numbers -004 through -159 inclusive, and SAAB 340B series airplanes 
having serial numbers -160 through -459 inclusive; certificated in 
any category.

    Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the 
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been 
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the 
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified, 
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of 
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an 
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (c) of 
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of 
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition 
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been 
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to 
address it.

    Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished 
previously.
    To detect and correct damage to the aluminum skin of the 
airplane, which could result in a weakening of the structure of the 
airplane, accomplish the following:

Review of Records

    (a) Within 2,000 flight hours or 1 year after the effective date 
of this AD, whichever occurs first: Perform a review of records to 
determine whether an airplane subject to this AD has been repainted 
since its delivery from the factory. If the airplane has not been 
repainted, no further action is needed.

Inspection and Corrective Action

    (b) If an airplane has been repainted since its delivery from 
the factory: Within 2,000 flight hours or 1 year after the effective 
date of this AD, whichever occurs first, perform chemical stripping 
of local areas of the skin and inspection to detect damage to (or 
removal of) the protective coat of bonding primer, in accordance 
with Saab Service Bulletin 340-51-020, Revision 01, dated May 16, 
2001.
    (1) If no damage to the protective coat of bonding primer is 
detected: Prior to further flight, repaint the stripped areas, in 
accordance with the service bulletin.
    (2) If damage to (or removal of) the protective coat of bonding 
primer is detected: Prior to further flight, repaint the stripped 
areas, in accordance with the service bulletin; and within 4,000 
flight hours or 2 years after detection of the damage or removed 
protective coating, perform additional chemical stripping and 
inspection of the skin for pitting corrosion, in accordance with the 
service bulletin.
    (i) If pitting corrosion is detected: Perform corrective action 
in a manner and within a compliance time approved by the Manager, 
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 
or the Luftfartsverket (or its designated agent).
    (ii) If no pitting corrosion is detected: Prior to further 
flight, measure the thickness of the skin of the airplane, in 
accordance with the service bulletin.
    (A) If a reduction in skin thickness is detected: Perform 
corrective action in a manner and within a compliance time approved 
by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, or the 
Luftfartsverket (or its designated agent).
    (B) If no reduction in skin thickness is detected: Prior to 
further flight, check records to determine whether the airplane was 
repainted using an approved paint system. For purposes of this AD, 
criteria for an ``approved'' paint system are found in section 51-
20-43 of the Saab 340 Structural Repair Manual.
    (1) If the airplane was repainted using an approved paint 
system: Prior to further flight, repaint the stripped areas of the 
airplane, in accordance with the service bulletin.
    (2) If the airplane was repainted using an unapproved paint 
system: Prior to further flight, chemically strip the entire 
airplane and repaint it, in accordance with the service bulletin.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (c) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the 
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be 
used if approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116. 
Operators shall submit their requests through an appropriate FAA 
Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send 
it to the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116.

    Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved 
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be 
obtained from the International Branch, ANM-116.

Special Flight Permits

    (d) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with 
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where 
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.

Incorporation by Reference

    (e) Except as required by paragraphs (a), (b)(2)(i), 
(b)(2)(ii)(A), and (b)(2)(ii)(B) of this AD: The actions shall be 
done in accordance with Saab Service Bulletin 340-51-020, Revision 
01, dated May 16, 2001. This incorporation by reference was approved 
by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from Saab Aircraft 
AB, SAAB Aircraft Product Support, S-581.88, Linkoping, Sweden. 
Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of the 
Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, 
Washington, DC.

    Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed in Swedish 
airworthiness directive SAD 1-161R2, dated March 13, 2001.

Effective Date

    (f) This amendment becomes effective on December 31, 2001.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 15, 2001.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 01-29184 Filed 11-23-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P