Steve R. Reed

There are three issues that concern me with this AD and the Airworthiness Limitation Items that are affected by it: 1) With regards to the eddy current of the aft upper landing gear trunnions; these tasks show effectivity by trunnion P/N. I believe that this leave a lot to interpretation, especially since the IPC gives the P/N’s for the undrilled trunnions. I think that Embraer needs to supply the acft s/n effectivity since they should have this information available. 2) There is too much left to interpretation of these ALI’s. Several tasks have been renumbered in order to accommodate new intervals & effectivity with regards to mod status or model type (eg. 135ER, 145LR, 145XR) These new task numbers need to have a note stating that they are equivalent to the original task number and that performance of the inspection under the original task number is in compliance with the requirement. If this is not written into the document then the tasks with new numbers will need to be performed as if it were a new task with no previous credit given. 3) In paragraph (f) (1) Actions and Compliance, it states to revise the ICA's to include Section 4 - Structural Inspection Requirements and Section 5 - Corrosion Prevention and Control Program. This is in addition to including the ALI Section. I believe that the intent is to ensure that operators include the ALI's in their maintenance program. The MRB tasks from Section 4 and 5 should not be mandated by AD.