Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310-200 and -300 Series Airplanes, 12152-12154 [E6-3345]

Download as PDF 12152 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 46 / Thursday, March 9, 2006 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2006–24104; Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–231–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310–200 and –300 Series Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS AGENCY: SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Airbus Model A310–200 and –300 series airplanes. This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections for cracking of the flap transmission shafts, and replacing the transmission shafts if necessary. This proposed AD also would provide an optional terminating action for the repetitive inspections. This proposed AD results from reports of longitudinal cracks due to stress corrosion in the transmission shafts between the power control unit (PCU) and the torque limiters of the flap transmission system. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct cracking of the flap transmission shaft, which could compromise shaft structural integrity and lead to a disabled flap transmission shaft and reduced controllability of the airplane. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 10, 2006. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this proposed AD. • DOT Docket Web site: Go to https://dms.dot.gov and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590. • Fax: (202) 493–2251. • Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Contact Airbus, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France, for service information identified in this proposed AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Stafford, Aerospace Engineer, VerDate Aug<31>2005 12:47 Mar 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–1622; fax (425) 227–6590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number ‘‘FAA–2006–24104; Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–231–AD’’ at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD in light of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https:// dms.dot.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78), or you may visit https:// dms.dot.gov. Examining the Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket Management Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Management Facility office (telephone (800) 647–5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at the DOT street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System receives them. Discussion ´ ´ The Direction Generale de l’Aviation Civile (DGAC), which is the airworthiness authority for France, notified us that an unsafe condition may exist on certain Airbus Model A310–200 and –300 series airplanes. The DGAC advises that reports have been received of longitudinal cracks due to stress corrosion in the transmission shafts between the power control unit and the PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 torque limiters of the flap transmission system. This condition, if not corrected, could result in cracking of the flap transmission shafts, which could compromise shaft structural integrity and lead to a disabled flap transmission shaft and reduced controllability of the airplane. Relevant Service Information Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A310–27–2092, Revision 02, dated April 11, 2005. The service bulletin describes procedures for performing repetitive detailed inspections for stress corrosion cracking of the flap transmission shafts and replacing the transmission shafts with new or reconditioned shafts if necessary. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. The DGAC mandated the service information and issued French airworthiness directive F–2005– 174, dated October 26, 2005, to ensure the continued airworthiness of these airplanes in France. Service Bulletin A310–27–2092, Revision 02, refers to Lucas Liebherr Service Bulletin 551A–27–624, Revision 1, dated August 18, 2000, as an additional source of service information for accomplishing the specified inspections. Service Bulletin A310–27–2092, Revision 02, refers to Airbus Service Bulletin A310–27–2095, dated March 29, 2000, as a source of service information for replacing the flap transmission shafts. Accomplishing the actions specified by Service Bulletin A310–27–2095 would terminate the inspections required by this proposed AD. Service Bulletin A310–27–2095 refers to Lucas Liebherr Service Bulletin 551A–27–M551–05, dated January 12, 2000, as an additional source of service information for replacing the flap transmission shafts. FAA’s Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD These airplane models are manufactured in France and are type certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral airworthiness agreement, the DGAC has kept the FAA informed of the situation described above. We have examined the DGAC’s findings, evaluated all pertinent information, and determined that we need to issue an AD for airplanes of this type design that are certificated for operation in the United States. E:\FR\FM\09MRP1.SGM 09MRP1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 46 / Thursday, March 9, 2006 / Proposed Rules Therefore, we are proposing this AD, which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the Airbus service information described previously, except as discussed under ‘‘Difference Between French Airworthiness Directive and This Proposed AD.’’ Difference Between French Airworthiness Directive and This Proposed AD The applicability of French airworthiness directive F–2005–174 excludes airplanes on which Airbus Service Bulletin A310–27–2095 was accomplished in service. However, we have not excluded those airplanes in the applicability of this proposed AD; rather, this proposed AD includes a requirement to accomplish the actions specified in that service bulletin. This requirement would ensure that the actions specified in the service bulletin and required by this proposed AD are accomplished on all affected airplanes. Operators must continue to operate the airplane in the configuration required by this proposed AD unless an alternative method of compliance is approved. This difference has been coordinated with the DGAC. Clarification of Compliance Time French airworthiness directive F– 2005–174 states, ‘‘If necessary, replace any defective shaft before the next flight * * *’’ However, we have determined that the words ‘‘if necessary’’ could be taken to mean that, when discovered, some defects might not be considered severe enough to require replacing the transmission shaft before further flight. Therefore, this proposed AD does not use the words ‘‘if necessary’’, but would require any defective shaft to be replaced before further flight. hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Costs of Compliance This proposed AD would affect about 59 airplanes of U.S. registry. The proposed inspections would take about 1 work hour per airplane, at an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the proposed AD for U.S. operators is $3,835 or $65 per airplane, per inspection cycle. 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, VerDate Aug<31>2005 12:47 Mar 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 12153 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. Comments Due Date (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by April 10, 2006. Regulatory Findings Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from reports of longitudinal cracks due to stress corrosion in the transmission shafts between the power control unit (PCU) and the torque limiters of the flap transmission system. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking of the flap transmission shaft, which could compromise shaft structural integrity and lead to a disabled flap transmission shaft and reduced controllability of the airplane. We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would 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 the proposed regulation: 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 proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 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. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2006–24104; Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–231–AD. PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Affected ADs (b) None. Applicability (c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A310– 203, –204, –221, –222, –304, –322, –324, and –325 airplanes, certificated in any category; except for airplanes on which Airbus Modification 12247 has been embodied in production. Compliance (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done. Inspection and Corrective Action (f) At the earlier of the compliance times specified in paragraph (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this AD: Perform a detailed inspection for stress corrosion cracking of the flight transmission shafts located between the PCU and the torque limiters in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A310–27–2092, Revision 02, dated April 11, 2005. Thereafter, repeat the inspections as required by paragraph (g) of this AD. Before further flight, replace any cracked transmission shaft discovered during any inspection required by this AD with a new or reconditioned shaft in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A310–27–2095, dated March 29, 2000. (1) Within 2,000 flight hours after the last flap asymmetry protection test performed in accordance with Maintenance Planning Document (MPD) task 275600–01–1. (2) Within 8,000 flight cycles after the last flap asymmetry protection test performed in accordance with MPD task 275600–02–1 or 800 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever comes later. Note 1: Airbus Service Bulletin A310–27– 2092, Revision 02, dated April 11, 2005, refers to Lucas Liebherr Service Bulletin 551A–27–624, Revision 1, dated August 18, 2000, as an additional source of service information for accomplishing the inspections. Note 2: Airbus Service Bulletin A310–27– 2092, Revision 02, refers to Airbus Service Bulletin A310–27–2095, dated March 29, 2000, as a source of service information for replacing the flap transmission shafts. Note 3: Airbus Service Bulletin A310–27– 2095 refers to Lucas Liebherr Service Bulletin 551A–27–M551–05, dated January 12, 2000, E:\FR\FM\09MRP1.SGM 09MRP1 12154 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 46 / Thursday, March 9, 2006 / Proposed Rules as an additional source of service information for replacing the flap transmission shafts. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS Repetitive Inspections 38 CFR Part 17 (g) Repeat the inspection required by paragraph (f) of this AD at the applicable times specified in paragraph (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD. (1) Before further flight after any occurrence of jamming of the flap transmission system. (2) At intervals not to exceed 2,000 flight hours after each flap asymmetry protection test performed in accordance with MPD task 275600–01–1. (3) At intervals not to exceed 8,000 flight cycles after each flap asymmetry protection test performed in accordance with MPD task 275600–02–1. Optional Terminating Action (h) Replacing any flap transmission shaft with a new or reconditioned transmission shaft in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A310–27–2095, dated March 29, 2000, ends the inspections required for that transmission shaft only. Actions Performed Using Previously Issued Service Information (i) Actions performed in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A310–27–2092, dated April 9, 1999, or Revision 01, dated December 11, 2001, are considered acceptable for compliance with the corresponding requirements of this AD. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (j)(1) The Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. (2) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office. Related Information hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS (k) French airworthiness directive F–2005– 174, dated October 26, 2005, also addresses the subject of this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 28, 2006. Kalene C. Yanamura, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6–3345 Filed 3–8–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P VerDate Aug<31>2005 12:47 Mar 08, 2006 Jkt 208001 RIN 2900–AM19 Medical: Informed Consent—Extension of Time Period and Modification of Witness Requirement for Signature Consent Department of Veterans Affairs. Proposed rule. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: This document proposes to amend the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical regulations on informed consent by making two substantive changes. We propose to extend the period of time during which a signed consent form remains valid from 30 to 60 days and eliminate the requirement that a third party witness the patient or surrogate and practitioner signing the consent form, except in those circumstances where the patient or surrogate signs with an ‘‘X’’ due to a debilitating illness or disability, i.e., significant physical impairment and/or difficulty in executing a signature due to an underlying health condition(s), or is unable to read or write. DATES: Comments must be received on or before: May 8, 2006. ADDRESSES: Written comments may be submitted by mail or hand delivery to: Director, Regulations Management (00REG1), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave., NW., Room 1068, Washington, DC 20420; fax comments to (202) 273–9026; or e-mail comments through https:// www.Regulations.gov. Comments should indicate that they are submitted in response to ‘‘RIN 2900–AM19.’’ All comments received will be available for public inspection in the Office of Regulation Policy and Management, Room 1063B, between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday (except holidays). Please call (202) 273–9515 for an appointment. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ruth Cecire, PhD., Policy Analyst, Ethics Policy Service, National Center for Ethics in Health Care (10E), Veterans Health Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420; 202–501– 2012 (this is not a toll-free number). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 7331 of title 38, United States Code (U.S.C.), directs the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to promulgate regulations to ensure that, to the maximum extent practicable, all patient care carried out under the authority of title 38 U.S.C. is accomplished with the PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 informed consent of the patient or the patient’s surrogate. These VA medical regulations, set forth at 38 CFR 17.32 and titled ‘‘Informed Consent’’, were published in the Federal Register as a final rule on October 2, 1997 (62 FR 53961). The proposed rule would amend VA medical regulations on informed consent. Specifically, it would extend the time during which a signed consent form is valid from 30 to 60 days. Also, it would eliminate the requirement that a consent form be witnessed, except in those situations where the patient or surrogate signs with an ‘‘X’’. We are specifically interested in obtaining comments from non-VA providers, patients and other concerned community members with respect to both of these changes. Often, the informed consent discussion takes place and the requisite forms are signed before a procedure is scheduled. Under the current rule, a signed consent form is valid for 30 days. If the procedure is later scheduled for a date beyond that 30 day window, the patient and practitioner must sign and date a new consent form. In our experience a number of treatments or procedures that require signature consent are scheduled more than 30 days in advance. Extending the period during which signed consent forms remain valid would enable patients to avoid having to return to the facility just to sign a new form or to re-sign when they come for the procedure. Under current regulations, witnesses who sign the consent form only attest to the fact that they saw the patient and the practitioner sign the form. They do not attest to the content of the informed consent discussion, or that the process was voluntary, or that the patient was capable of giving informed consent. Nor do they attest to the identity of the individuals signing the form. Experience has shown that finding an appropriate witness is sometimes difficult and creates an impediment to the timely completion of the informed consent process. Given the above, it is not clear that the witness requirement benefits the veteran, especially since there are other means to verify the signatures if there is a dispute, e.g., by comparing the signature on the form against other documents signed by the patient. Therefore, we do not think it necessary to continue this practice for general signature consent. However, two witnesses would still be required to sign the consent form when the patient or surrogate signs with an ‘‘X’’. In addition, we propose to make the following non-substantive changes to § 17.32: in paragraph (a), removing ‘‘, E:\FR\FM\09MRP1.SGM 09MRP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 46 (Thursday, March 9, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12152-12154]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-3345]



[[Page 12152]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2006-24104; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-231-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310-200 and -300 Series 
Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) 
for certain Airbus Model A310-200 and -300 series airplanes. This 
proposed AD would require repetitive inspections for cracking of the 
flap transmission shafts, and replacing the transmission shafts if 
necessary. This proposed AD also would provide an optional terminating 
action for the repetitive inspections. This proposed AD results from 
reports of longitudinal cracks due to stress corrosion in the 
transmission shafts between the power control unit (PCU) and the torque 
limiters of the flap transmission system. We are proposing this AD to 
detect and correct cracking of the flap transmission shaft, which could 
compromise shaft structural integrity and lead to a disabled flap 
transmission shaft and reduced controllability of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 10, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on 
this proposed AD.
     DOT Docket Web site: Go to https://dms.dot.gov and follow 
the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your 
comments electronically.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, room PL-401, 
Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: (202) 493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the 
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Contact Airbus, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, 
France, for service information identified in this proposed AD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Stafford, Aerospace Engineer, 
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 
227-1622; fax (425) 227-6590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited

    We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or 
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address 
listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number ``FAA-2006-
24104; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-231-AD'' at the beginning of your 
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will 
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the 
proposed AD in light of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https://
dms.dot.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will 
also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA 
personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of 
that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our 
dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or 
signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, 
etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the 
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you 
may visit https://dms.dot.gov.

Examining the Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov, or in person at the Docket Management Facility office 
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays. The Docket Management Facility office (telephone (800) 647-
5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at the DOT 
street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 
available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System 
receives them.

Discussion

    The Direction G[eacute]n[eacute]rale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC), 
which is the airworthiness authority for France, notified us that an 
unsafe condition may exist on certain Airbus Model A310-200 and -300 
series airplanes. The DGAC advises that reports have been received of 
longitudinal cracks due to stress corrosion in the transmission shafts 
between the power control unit and the torque limiters of the flap 
transmission system. This condition, if not corrected, could result in 
cracking of the flap transmission shafts, which could compromise shaft 
structural integrity and lead to a disabled flap transmission shaft and 
reduced controllability of the airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A310-27-2092, Revision 02, dated 
April 11, 2005. The service bulletin describes procedures for 
performing repetitive detailed inspections for stress corrosion 
cracking of the flap transmission shafts and replacing the transmission 
shafts with new or reconditioned shafts if necessary. Accomplishing the 
actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately 
address the unsafe condition. The DGAC mandated the service information 
and issued French airworthiness directive F-2005-174, dated October 26, 
2005, to ensure the continued airworthiness of these airplanes in 
France.
    Service Bulletin A310-27-2092, Revision 02, refers to Lucas 
Liebherr Service Bulletin 551A-27-624, Revision 1, dated August 18, 
2000, as an additional source of service information for accomplishing 
the specified inspections.
    Service Bulletin A310-27-2092, Revision 02, refers to Airbus 
Service Bulletin A310-27-2095, dated March 29, 2000, as a source of 
service information for replacing the flap transmission shafts. 
Accomplishing the actions specified by Service Bulletin A310-27-2095 
would terminate the inspections required by this proposed AD.
    Service Bulletin A310-27-2095 refers to Lucas Liebherr Service 
Bulletin 551A-27-M551-05, dated January 12, 2000, as an additional 
source of service information for replacing the flap transmission 
shafts.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    These airplane models are manufactured in France and are type 
certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of 
section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and 
the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to this 
bilateral airworthiness agreement, the DGAC has kept the FAA informed 
of the situation described above. We have examined the DGAC's findings, 
evaluated all pertinent information, and determined that we need to 
issue an AD for airplanes of this type design that are certificated for 
operation in the United States.

[[Page 12153]]

    Therefore, we are proposing this AD, which would require 
accomplishing the actions specified in the Airbus service information 
described previously, except as discussed under ``Difference Between 
French Airworthiness Directive and This Proposed AD.''

Difference Between French Airworthiness Directive and This Proposed AD

    The applicability of French airworthiness directive F-2005-174 
excludes airplanes on which Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2095 was 
accomplished in service. However, we have not excluded those airplanes 
in the applicability of this proposed AD; rather, this proposed AD 
includes a requirement to accomplish the actions specified in that 
service bulletin. This requirement would ensure that the actions 
specified in the service bulletin and required by this proposed AD are 
accomplished on all affected airplanes. Operators must continue to 
operate the airplane in the configuration required by this proposed AD 
unless an alternative method of compliance is approved. This difference 
has been coordinated with the DGAC.

Clarification of Compliance Time

    French airworthiness directive F-2005-174 states, ``If necessary, 
replace any defective shaft before the next flight * * *'' However, we 
have determined that the words ``if necessary'' could be taken to mean 
that, when discovered, some defects might not be considered severe 
enough to require replacing the transmission shaft before further 
flight. Therefore, this proposed AD does not use the words ``if 
necessary'', but would require any defective shaft to be replaced 
before further flight.

Costs of Compliance

    This proposed AD would affect about 59 airplanes of U.S. registry. 
The proposed inspections would take about 1 work hour per airplane, at 
an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the 
estimated cost of the proposed AD for U.S. operators is $3,835 or $65 
per airplane, per inspection cycle.

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 have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would 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 the proposed 
regulation:
    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 proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the 
ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 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 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by 
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2006-24104; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-
231-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by April 10, 
2006.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A310-203, -204, -221, -222, 
-304, -322, -324, and -325 airplanes, certificated in any category; 
except for airplanes on which Airbus Modification 12247 has been 
embodied in production.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from reports of longitudinal cracks due to 
stress corrosion in the transmission shafts between the power 
control unit (PCU) and the torque limiters of the flap transmission 
system. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking of the 
flap transmission shaft, which could compromise shaft structural 
integrity and lead to a disabled flap transmission shaft and reduced 
controllability of the airplane.

Compliance

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

Inspection and Corrective Action

    (f) At the earlier of the compliance times specified in 
paragraph (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this AD: Perform a detailed inspection 
for stress corrosion cracking of the flight transmission shafts 
located between the PCU and the torque limiters in accordance with 
the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-
2092, Revision 02, dated April 11, 2005. Thereafter, repeat the 
inspections as required by paragraph (g) of this AD. Before further 
flight, replace any cracked transmission shaft discovered during any 
inspection required by this AD with a new or reconditioned shaft in 
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service 
Bulletin A310-27-2095, dated March 29, 2000.
    (1) Within 2,000 flight hours after the last flap asymmetry 
protection test performed in accordance with Maintenance Planning 
Document (MPD) task 275600-01-1.
    (2) Within 8,000 flight cycles after the last flap asymmetry 
protection test performed in accordance with MPD task 275600-02-1 or 
800 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever 
comes later.

    Note 1: Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2092, Revision 02, dated 
April 11, 2005, refers to Lucas Liebherr Service Bulletin 551A-27-
624, Revision 1, dated August 18, 2000, as an additional source of 
service information for accomplishing the inspections.


    Note 2: Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2092, Revision 02, 
refers to Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2095, dated March 29, 
2000, as a source of service information for replacing the flap 
transmission shafts.


    Note 3: Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2095 refers to Lucas 
Liebherr Service Bulletin 551A-27-M551-05, dated January 12, 2000,

[[Page 12154]]

as an additional source of service information for replacing the 
flap transmission shafts.

Repetitive Inspections

    (g) Repeat the inspection required by paragraph (f) of this AD 
at the applicable times specified in paragraph (g)(1), (g)(2), and 
(g)(3) of this AD.
    (1) Before further flight after any occurrence of jamming of the 
flap transmission system.
    (2) At intervals not to exceed 2,000 flight hours after each 
flap asymmetry protection test performed in accordance with MPD task 
275600-01-1.
    (3) At intervals not to exceed 8,000 flight cycles after each 
flap asymmetry protection test performed in accordance with MPD task 
275600-02-1.

Optional Terminating Action

    (h) Replacing any flap transmission shaft with a new or 
reconditioned transmission shaft in accordance with the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2095, 
dated March 29, 2000, ends the inspections required for that 
transmission shaft only.

Actions Performed Using Previously Issued Service Information

    (i) Actions performed in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin 
A310-27-2092, dated April 9, 1999, or Revision 01, dated December 
11, 2001, are considered acceptable for compliance with the 
corresponding requirements of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (j)(1) The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, 
Transport Airplane Directorate, has the authority to approve AMOCs 
for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 
14 CFR 39.19.
    (2) Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with Sec.  
39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the 
appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards 
Certificate Holding District Office.

Related Information

    (k) French airworthiness directive F-2005-174, dated October 26, 
2005, also addresses the subject of this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 28, 2006.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
 [FR Doc. E6-3345 Filed 3-8-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.