Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 Airplanes, 60444-60446 [E6-17006]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
60444
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 198 / Friday, October 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
subsequent fresh-fruit marketing.
However, the 50 percent limitation on
mechanically separated, freeze-damaged
fruit will not apply to tangerines of
Citrus IV.
(e) Any citrus fruit of Citrus I, II, III,
and VI damaged by freeze, but that can
be processed into products for human
consumption, will be considered as
marketable for juice. The percent of
damage will be determined by relating
the juice content of the damaged fruit to:
(1) The average juice content of the
fruit produced on the unit for the three
previous crop years based on your
records, if they are acceptable to us; or
(2) The following juice content, if
acceptable records are not furnished:
(i) Citrus I—52 pounds of juice per
box;
(ii) Citrus II—54 pounds of juice per
box;
(iii) Citrus III—45 pounds of juice per
box; and
(iv) Citrus VI—43 pounds of juice per
box;
(f) Any individual citrus fruit on the
ground that is not collected and
marketed will be considered as 100
percent damaged if the damage was due
to an insured cause.
(g) Any individual citrus fruit that is
unmarketable either as fresh fruit or as
juice because it is immature,
unwholesome, decomposed,
adulterated, or otherwise unfit for
human consumption due to an insured
cause will be considered as 100 percent
damaged.
(h) Individual citrus fruit of Citrus IV,
V, VII, and VIII, that are unmarketable
as fresh fruit due to serious damage
from hail as defined in the applicable
United States Standards for Grades of
Florida fruit, or wind damage from a
hurricane or tornado that results in the
fruit not meeting the standards for
packing as fresh fruit, will be
considered 100 percent damaged.
11. Late and Prevented Planting
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
The late and prevented planting
provisions of the Basic Provisions are
not applicable.
Signed in Washington, DC, on September
29, 2006.
Eldon Gould,
Manager, Federal Crop Insurance
Corporation.
[FR Doc. E6–16635 Filed 10–12–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–08–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:51 Oct 12, 2006
Jkt 211001
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2006–26051; Directorate
Identifier 2006–NM–154–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model
A318, A319, A320, and A321 Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This proposed
AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI)
issued by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct
an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The proposed AD would
require actions that are intended to
address the unsafe condition described
in the MCAI.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by November 13,
2006.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments by
any of the following methods:
• DOT Docket Web site: Go to https://
dms.dot.gov and follow the instructions
for sending your comments
electronically.
• Fax: (202) 493–2251.
• Mail: Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building,
Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590–
0001.
• 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.
• Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://dms.dot.gov; 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
proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other
information. The street address for the
Docket Office (telephone (800) 647–
5227) is in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Tim
Dulin, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM–116, FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601
Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–2141;
fax (425) 227–1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Streamlined Issuance of AD
The FAA is implementing a new
process for streamlining the issuance of
ADs related to MCAI. This streamlined
process will allow us to adopt MCAI
safety requirements in a more efficient
manner and will reduce safety risks to
the public. This process continues to
follow all FAA AD issuance processes to
meet legal, economic, Administrative
Procedure Act, and Federal Register
requirements. We also continue to meet
our technical decision-making
responsibilities to identify and correct
unsafe conditions on U.S.-certificated
products.
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments about
this proposed AD. Send your comments
to an address listed under the
ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No.
FAA–2006–26051; Directorate Identifier
2006–NM–154–AD’’ at the beginning of
your comments. We specifically invite
comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy
aspects of this proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the
closing date and may amend this
proposed AD because 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 we receive
about this proposed AD.
Discussion
The European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA), which is the airworthiness
authority for the European Union, has
issued Airworthiness Directive 2006–
0153, dated May 30, 2006 (referred to
after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an
unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states that an
operator reported black smoke at the
rear of the fuselage during taxi after
landing. The smoke was caused by a fire
in the auxiliary power unit (APU) air
intake. Analysis has demonstrated that
following numerous unsuccessful APU
start attempts in flight, there is a risk of
reverse flow, leading to flame
propagation to the APU air inlet and air
intake duct. If this zone is
E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM
13OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 198 / Friday, October 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
contaminated, a fire may be initiated.
The flightcrew operating manual limits
the number of APU start attempts as
follows: After three starter motor duty
cycles, wait 60 minutes before
attempting three more cycles. The MCAI
mandates repetitive inspections of the
APU starter motor, APU inlet plenum,
and APU air intake, as well as repetitive
cleaning of the APU air intake; and
applicable corrective actions. You may
obtain further information by examining
the MCAI in the AD docket.
Relevant Service Information
Airbus has issued Service Bulletin
A320–49–1068, Revision 01, dated
February 2, 2006. The applicable
corrective actions include replacement
of the APU starter motor, if necessary.
The actions described in this service
information are intended to correct the
unsafe condition identified in the
MCAI.
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
FAA’s Determination and Requirements
of This Proposed AD
This product has been approved by
the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation
in the United States. Pursuant to our
bilateral agreement with this State of
Design Authority, they have notified us
of the unsafe condition described in the
MCAI and service information
referenced above. We are proposing this
AD because we evaluated all
information and determined the unsafe
condition exists and is likely to exist or
develop on other products of the same
type design.
Differences Between This AD and the
MCAI or Service Information
We have reviewed the MCAI and
related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But
we might have found it necessary to use
different words from those in the MCAI
to ensure the AD is clear for U.S.
operators and is enforceable. In making
these changes, we do not intend to differ
substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related
service information.
We might also have proposed
different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA
policies. Any such differences are
described in a separate paragraph of the
proposed AD. These requirements, if
ultimately adopted, will take
precedence over the actions copied from
the MCAI.
Costs of Compliance
Based on the service information, we
estimate that this proposed AD would
affect about 675 products of U.S.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:51 Oct 12, 2006
Jkt 211001
registry. We also estimate that it would
take about 4 work-hours per product to
comply with this proposed AD. The
average labor rate is $80 per work-hour.
Based on these figures, we estimate the
cost of the proposed AD on U.S.
operators to be $210,240, or $320 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 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 this 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.
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,
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
60445
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 FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new AD:
Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2006–26051;
Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–154–AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments by
November 13, 2006.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A318,
A319, A320 and A321 aircraft, all certified
models, all serial numbers, certificated in any
category.
Reason
(d) An operator reported black smoke at the
rear of the fuselage during taxi after landing.
The smoke was caused by a fire in the
auxiliary power unit (APU) air intake.
Analysis has demonstrated that following
numerous unsuccessful APU start attempts in
flight, there is a risk of reverse flow, leading
to flame propagation to the APU air inlet and
air intake duct. If this zone is contaminated,
a fire may be initiated. The flightcrew
operating manual limits the number of APU
start attempts as follows: After three starter
motor duty cycles, wait 60 minutes before
attempting three more cycles. The MCAI
mandates repetitive inspections of the APU
starter motor, APU inlet plenum, and APU
air intake, as well as repetitive cleaning of
the APU air intake; and applicable corrective
actions.
Actions and Compliance
(e) Unless already done, do the following
actions except as stated in paragraph (f)
below.
(1) Within the next 600 flight hours
following the effective date of this AD:
Inspect the APU starter motor, APU air inlet
plenum, and APU air intake, and do the
applicable corrective actions before further
flight, in accordance with the instructions
given in Airbus Service Bulletin A320–49–
1068, Revision 01, dated February 2, 2006.
(2) Repeat the inspection per above
paragraph (e)(1) of this AD, at intervals not
exceeding 600 flight hours.
(3) Prior to the accumulation of 2,400 flight
hours since the aircraft’s first flight, or within
the next 600 flight hours after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs later,
unless accomplished before the effective date
of this AD in accordance with Airbus Service
Bulletin A320–49–1068, dated June 2, 2005:
Clean the APU air intake in accordance with
the instructions given in Airbus Service
Bulletin A320–49–1068, Revision 01, dated
February 2, 2006.
E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM
13OCP1
60446
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 198 / Friday, October 13, 2006 / Proposed Rules
(4) Repeat the cleaning task per above
paragraph (e)(3) of this AD, at intervals not
exceeding 2,400 flight hours.
Other FAA AD Provisions
(g) The following provisions also apply to
this AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs): The Manager, International
Branch, ANM–116, FAA, ATTN: Tim Dulin,
Aerospace Engineer, International Branch,
ANM–116, FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425)
227–2141; fax (425) 227–1149, if requested,
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2) Notification of Principal Inspector:
Before using any AMOC approved in
accordance with 14 CFR 39.19 on any
airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify
the appropriate principal inspector in the
FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding
District Office.
(3) 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.
(4) 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) Refer to MCAI European Aviation
Safety Agency Airworthiness Directive 2006–
0153, dated May 30, 2006, which references
Airbus Service Bulletin A320–49–1068,
Revision 01, dated February 2, 2006, for
related information.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on October
4, 2006.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E6–17006 Filed 10–12–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with PROPOSALS
[Docket No. FAA–2006–26048; Directorate
Identifier 2006–NM–191–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell
Douglas Model 717–200 Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
AGENCY:
14:51 Oct 12, 2006
The FAA proposes to adopt a
new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain McDonnell Douglas Model 717–
200 airplanes. This proposed AD would
require replacing certain attaching
hardware of the bulkhead nipple
assemblies of the left and right wing
vent boxes with new electrical bonding
attaching hardware, doing resistance
testing of the new electrical bonds, and
doing fuel leakage testing of the
reworked nipple assemblies. This
proposed AD results from fuel system
reviews conducted by the manufacturer.
We are proposing this AD to provide a
conductive path, from the bulkhead
nipple assemblies of the left and right
wing vent boxes to the airframe
structure inside the wing fuel tanks, to
dissipate high amperage lightninginduced currents which might
otherwise create an ignition source for
fuel vapors inside the wing vent boxes
and lead to an explosion of the fuel
tanks.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by November 27,
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 Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855
Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach,
California 90846, Attention: Data and
Service Management, Dept. C1–L5A
(D800–0024), for the service information
identified in this proposed AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Samuel Lee, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Branch, ANM–140L, FAA,
Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard,
Lakewood, California 90712–4137;
telephone (562) 627–5262; fax (562)
627–5210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
FAA AD Differences
(f) None.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
ACTION:
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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–2006–26048; Directorate
Identifier 2006–NM–191–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 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 FAA has examined the
underlying safety issues involved in fuel
tank explosions on several large
transport airplanes, including the
adequacy of existing regulations, the
service history of airplanes subject to
those regulations, and existing
maintenance practices for fuel tank
systems. As a result of those findings,
we issued a regulation titled ‘‘Transport
Airplane Fuel Tank System Design
Review, Flammability Reduction and
Maintenance and Inspection
Requirements’’ (66 FR 23086, May 7,
2001). In addition to new airworthiness
standards for transport airplanes and
E:\FR\FM\13OCP1.SGM
13OCP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 198 (Friday, October 13, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 60444-60446]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-17006]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2006-26051; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-154-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321
Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) issued by an aviation
authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. The proposed AD would require actions
that are intended to address the unsafe condition described in the
MCAI.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 13,
2006.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
DOT Docket Web site: Go to https://dms.dot.gov and follow
the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401,
Washington, DC 20590-0001.
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.
Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov; 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 proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any
comments received, and other information. The street address for the
Docket Office (telephone (800) 647-5227) is in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Dulin, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-2141; fax (425) 227-1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Streamlined Issuance of AD
The FAA is implementing a new process for streamlining the issuance
of ADs related to MCAI. This streamlined process will allow us to adopt
MCAI safety requirements in a more efficient manner and will reduce
safety risks to the public. This process continues to follow all FAA AD
issuance processes to meet legal, economic, Administrative Procedure
Act, and Federal Register requirements. We also continue to meet our
technical decision-making responsibilities to identify and correct
unsafe conditions on U.S.-certificated products.
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2006-
26051; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-154-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because 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 we
receive about this proposed AD.
Discussion
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the
airworthiness authority for the European Union, has issued
Airworthiness Directive 2006-0153, dated May 30, 2006 (referred to
after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states that an operator reported black
smoke at the rear of the fuselage during taxi after landing. The smoke
was caused by a fire in the auxiliary power unit (APU) air intake.
Analysis has demonstrated that following numerous unsuccessful APU
start attempts in flight, there is a risk of reverse flow, leading to
flame propagation to the APU air inlet and air intake duct. If this
zone is
[[Page 60445]]
contaminated, a fire may be initiated. The flightcrew operating manual
limits the number of APU start attempts as follows: After three starter
motor duty cycles, wait 60 minutes before attempting three more cycles.
The MCAI mandates repetitive inspections of the APU starter motor, APU
inlet plenum, and APU air intake, as well as repetitive cleaning of the
APU air intake; and applicable corrective actions. You may obtain
further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.
Relevant Service Information
Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A320-49-1068, Revision 01, dated
February 2, 2006. The applicable corrective actions include replacement
of the APU starter motor, if necessary. The actions described in this
service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition
identified in the MCAI.
FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD
This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they
have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because
we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type
design.
Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information
We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
described in a separate paragraph of the proposed AD. These
requirements, if ultimately adopted, will take precedence over the
actions copied from the MCAI.
Costs of Compliance
Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 675 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 4 work-hours per product to comply with this
proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Based on
these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S.
operators to be $210,240, or $320 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 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 this 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.
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 FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new AD:
Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2006-26051; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-
154-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments by November 13, 2006.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A318, A319, A320 and A321
aircraft, all certified models, all serial numbers, certificated in
any category.
Reason
(d) An operator reported black smoke at the rear of the fuselage
during taxi after landing. The smoke was caused by a fire in the
auxiliary power unit (APU) air intake. Analysis has demonstrated
that following numerous unsuccessful APU start attempts in flight,
there is a risk of reverse flow, leading to flame propagation to the
APU air inlet and air intake duct. If this zone is contaminated, a
fire may be initiated. The flightcrew operating manual limits the
number of APU start attempts as follows: After three starter motor
duty cycles, wait 60 minutes before attempting three more cycles.
The MCAI mandates repetitive inspections of the APU starter motor,
APU inlet plenum, and APU air intake, as well as repetitive cleaning
of the APU air intake; and applicable corrective actions.
Actions and Compliance
(e) Unless already done, do the following actions except as
stated in paragraph (f) below.
(1) Within the next 600 flight hours following the effective
date of this AD: Inspect the APU starter motor, APU air inlet
plenum, and APU air intake, and do the applicable corrective actions
before further flight, in accordance with the instructions given in
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-49-1068, Revision 01, dated February 2,
2006.
(2) Repeat the inspection per above paragraph (e)(1) of this AD,
at intervals not exceeding 600 flight hours.
(3) Prior to the accumulation of 2,400 flight hours since the
aircraft's first flight, or within the next 600 flight hours after
the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, unless
accomplished before the effective date of this AD in accordance with
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-49-1068, dated June 2, 2005: Clean the
APU air intake in accordance with the instructions given in Airbus
Service Bulletin A320-49-1068, Revision 01, dated February 2, 2006.
[[Page 60446]]
(4) Repeat the cleaning task per above paragraph (e)(3) of this
AD, at intervals not exceeding 2,400 flight hours.
FAA AD Differences
(f) None.
Other FAA AD Provisions
(g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, ATTN: Tim Dulin, Aerospace
Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356;
telephone (425) 227-2141; fax (425) 227-1149, if requested, using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2) Notification of Principal Inspector: Before using any AMOC
approved in accordance with 14 CFR 39.19 on any airplane to which
the AMOC applies, notify the appropriate principal inspector in the
FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office.
(3) 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.
(4) 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) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness
Directive 2006-0153, dated May 30, 2006, which references Airbus
Service Bulletin A320-49-1068, Revision 01, dated February 2, 2006,
for related information.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 4, 2006.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E6-17006 Filed 10-12-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
