Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310 Series Airplanes; and Airbus Model A300-600 Series Airplanes, 11302-11305 [E7-4534]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
11302
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 48 / Tuesday, March 13, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Table No. in document
Affected areas
(i) Table No. 1 .............................................................................
(ii) Table No. 2 ............................................................................
(iii) Table No. 3 ............................................................................
(iv) Table No. 3 ...........................................................................
(v) Table No. 4 and Table No. 5 .................................................
(vi) Table No. 6 and Table No. 7 ................................................
(vii) Table No. 8 ...........................................................................
(viii) Table No. 9 ..........................................................................
(ix) Table No. 10 .........................................................................
(x) Table No. 11 ..........................................................................
(xi) Table No. 12 .........................................................................
Wing, Fuselage, Fin, Tailplane, Engine mounting, Flap system
Electrical Power (all Items) .........................................................
Rudder pedal/brake master cylinder attachment brackets .........
Gust lock system .........................................................................
Ice and rain protection (all items) ...............................................
Landing gear (all items) ..............................................................
Lighting (all items) .......................................................................
Doors (all items) ..........................................................................
Fuselage (all items) .....................................................................
Stabilizers (all items) ...................................................................
Wings (all items) .........................................................................
(2) The owner/operator holding at least a
private pilot certificate as authorized by
section 43.7 of the Federal Aviation
Regulations (14 CFR 43.7) may do the actions
of this AD. Make an entry into the aircraft
records showing compliance with this AD in
accordance with section 43.9 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 43.9).
FAA AD Differences
Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/
or service information as follows:
(1) The MCAI requires you to comply with
a version of a maintenance manual that
changes life limits. The FAA requires such
changes through a change to the
Airworthiness Limitations Section of the
Instructions for Continued Airworthiness or
other FAA-approved maintenance document,
and the FAA is mandating this through this
AD.
(2) We added information in paragraph (f)
that allows the owner/operator to insert this
information into the Airworthiness
Limitations Section of the Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness or other FAAapproved maintenance document. Without
this information, a licensed mechanic would
be required to do the action.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Other FAA AD Provisions
(g) The following provisions also apply to
this AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Staff,
FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, ATTN:
Taylor Martin, Aerospace Engineer, 901
Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone: (816) 329–4138; fax: (816)
329–4090, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2) 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.
(3) Reporting Requirements: For any
reporting requirement in this AD, under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection
requirements and has assigned OMB Control
Number 2120–0056.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:00 Mar 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
Related Information
(h) Refer to MCAI Civil Aviation Authority
AD No. G–2004–0024, Issue Date: September
22, 2004, EASA approved on September 16,
2004, under approval number 2004–9648, for
related information.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on March
6, 2007.
Kim Smith,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E7–4518 Filed 3–12–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2007–27361; Directorate
Identifier 2006–NM–237–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model
A310 Series Airplanes; and Airbus
Model A300–600 Series 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 MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as explosion risks. Chafing of
the fuel pump cables could result in
short circuits leading to fuel pump
failure, intermittent operation, arcing,
and possible fuel tank explosion. 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 April 12, 2007.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
AD applies
Yes.
No.
Yes.
No.
No.
Yes.
No.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
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 eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
ADDRESSES:
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: Tom
Stafford, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM–116, FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601
Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–1622;
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
E:\FR\FM\13MRP1.SGM
13MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 48 / Tuesday, March 13, 2007 / Proposed Rules
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.
This proposed AD references the
MCAI and related service information
that we considered in forming the
engineering basis to correct the unsafe
condition. The proposed AD contains
text copied from the MCAI and for this
reason might not follow our plain
language principles.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
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–2007–27361; Directorate Identifier
2006–NM–237–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 Technical Agent
for the Member States of the European
Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2006–0284 R1,
dated February 13, 2007 (referred to
after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an
unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states that the FAA
has published SFAR 88 (Special Federal
Aviation Regulation 88). In their letters
referenced 04/00/02/07/01–L296, dated
March 4, 2002, and 04/00/02/07/03–
L024, dated February 3, 2003, the JAA
(Joint Aviation Authorities)
recommended the application of a
similar regulation to the National
Aviation Authorities (NAA). Under this
regulation, all holders of type
certificates for passenger transport
aircraft with either a passenger capacity
of 30 or more, or a payload capacity of
7,500 pounds (3,402 kilograms) or more,
which have received their certification
since January 1, 1958, are required to
conduct a design review against
explosion risks.
The MCAI design review found that
fuel pump cables can possibly become
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:00 Mar 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
chafed in their metallic conduits. The
chafing of the fuel pump cables can
result in short circuits leading to fuel
pump failure, intermittent operation,
arcing, and possible fuel tank explosion.
The MCAI, which requires modification
of the fuel pump wiring against short
circuits, is a consequence of this design
review. You may obtain further
information by examining the MCAI in
the AD docket.
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
new maintenance requirements, this
rule included Special Federal Aviation
Regulation No. 88 (‘‘SFAR 88,’’
Amendment 21–78, and subsequent
Amendments 21–82 and 21–83).
Among other actions, SFAR 88
requires certain type design (i.e., type
certificate (TC) and supplemental type
certificate (STC)) holders to substantiate
that their fuel tank systems can prevent
ignition sources in the fuel tanks. This
requirement applies to type design
holders for large turbine-powered
transport airplanes and for subsequent
modifications to those airplanes. It
requires them to perform design reviews
and to develop design changes and
maintenance procedures if their designs
do not meet the new fuel tank safety
standards. As explained in the preamble
to the rule, we intended to adopt
airworthiness directives to mandate any
changes found necessary to address
unsafe conditions identified as a result
of these reviews.
In evaluating these design reviews, we
have established four criteria intended
to define the unsafe conditions
associated with fuel tank systems that
require corrective actions. The
percentage of operating time during
which fuel tanks are exposed to
flammable conditions is one of these
criteria. The other three criteria address
the failure types under evaluation:
single failures, single failures in
combination with a latent condition(s),
and in-service failure experience. For all
four criteria, the evaluations included
consideration of previous actions taken
that may mitigate the need for further
action.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
11303
The Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA)
has issued a regulation that is similar to
SFAR 88. (The JAA is an associated
body of the European Civil Aviation
Conference (ECAC) representing the
civil aviation regulatory authorities of a
number of European States who have
agreed to co-operate in developing and
implementing common safety regulatory
standards and procedures.) Under this
regulation, the JAA stated that all
members of the ECAC that hold type
certificates for transport category
airplanes are required to conduct a
design review against explosion risks.
We have determined that the actions
identified in this AD are necessary to
reduce the potential of ignition sources
inside fuel tanks, which, in combination
with flammable fuel vapors, could result
in fuel tank explosions and consequent
loss of the airplane.
Relevant Service Information
Airbus has issued Service Bulletins
A300–24–6094, Revision 01, dated July
18, 2006; and A310–24–2097, Revision
01, dated October 11, 2006. 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 the 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 provided by the State of
Design Authority 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
E:\FR\FM\13MRP1.SGM
13MRP1
11304
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 48 / Tuesday, March 13, 2007 / Proposed Rules
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 205 products of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it would
take about 72 work-hours per product to
comply with this proposed AD. The
average labor rate is $80 per work-hour.
Required parts would cost about $7,190
per product. Where the service
information lists required parts costs
that are covered under warranty, we
have assumed that there will be no
charge for these costs. As we do not
control warranty coverage for affected
parties, some parties may incur costs
higher than estimated here. Based on
these figures, we estimate the cost of the
proposed AD on U.S. operators to be
$2,654,750, or $12,950 per product.
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.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
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
15:00 Mar 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
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:
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new AD:
Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2007–27361;
Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–237–AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments by April 12,
2007.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A310
series airplanes; and Model A300–600 series
airplanes; certificated in any category; all
certified models, all serial numbers, except
for aircraft which have received in
production Airbus modification 13118 or
Airbus Service Bulletin (SB) A310–24–2097
or A300–24–6094.
Reason
(d) The mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) states that
the FAA has published SFAR 88 (Special
Federal Aviation Regulation 88). In their
letters referenced 04/00/02/07/01–L296,
dated March 4th, 2002 and 04/00/02/07/03–
L024, dated February 3, 2003, the JAA (Joint
Aviation Authorities) recommended the
application of a similar regulation to the
National Aviation Authorities (NAA). Under
this regulation, all holders of type certificates
for passenger transport aircraft with either a
passenger capacity of 30 or more, or a
payload capacity of 7,500 pounds (3,402
kilograms) or more, which have received
their certification since January 1, 1958, are
required to conduct a design review against
explosion risks. The MCAI design review
found that fuel pump cables can possibly
become chafed in their metallic conduits.
The chafing of the fuel pump cables can
result in short circuits leading to fuel pump
failure, intermittent operation, arcing, and
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
possible fuel tank explosion. The MCAI,
which requires modification of the fuel pump
wiring against short circuits, is a
consequence of this design review.
Actions and Compliance
(e) Unless already done, do the following
actions.
(1) Within 37 months after the effective
date of this AD: Modify the inner and outer
fuel pumps, route 1P and 2P harnesses in the
LH (left-hand) wing and in the RH (righthand) wing in accordance with the
instructions of Airbus Service Bulletins
A300–24–6094, dated February 15, 2006;
A300–24–6094, Revision 01, dated July 18,
2006; A310–24–2097, dated February 15,
2006; or A310–24–2097, Revision 01, dated
October 11, 2006; as applicable.
FAA AD Differences
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Authority for This Rulemaking
VerDate Aug<31>2005
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.
Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/
or service information as follows: No
differences.
Other FAA AD Provisions
(f) The following provisions also apply to
this AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs): The Manager, International
Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA, Attn: Tom Stafford,
Aerospace Engineer, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington 98057–3356, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19. 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.
(2) 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.
(3) 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
(g) Refer to MCAI European Aviation
Safety Agency Airworthiness Directive 2006–
0284 R1, dated February 13, 2007; and
Airbus Service Bulletins A300–24–6094,
dated February 15, 2006; A300–24–6094,
Revision 01, dated July 18, 2006; A310–24–
2097, dated February 15, 2006; and A310–
24–2097, Revision 01, dated October 11,
2006; for related information.
E:\FR\FM\13MRP1.SGM
13MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 48 / Tuesday, March 13, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 7,
2007.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E7–4534 Filed 3–12–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 71
[Docket No. FAA–2006–25852; Airspace
Docket No. 06–AAL–29]
RIN 2120–AA66
Proposed Modification to the Norton
Sound Low, Woody Island Low,
Control 1234L and Control 1487L
Offshore Airspace Areas; Alaska
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This action proposes to
amend the following four Offshore
Airspace Areas in Alaska: Norton Sound
Low, Woody Island Low, Control 1234L
and Control 1487L. This action proposes
to describe the airspace west of 160° W.
longitude as it is currently depicted on
aeronautical charts. Some of the existing
controlled airspace is described as
domestic Class E5 airspace around
Kodiak, AK. This airspace instead
would be listed within the Woody
Island Low Offshore Airspace Area. The
FAA is proposing this action to provide
additional controlled airspace for
aircraft instrument flight rules (IFR)
operations, and to correctly describe the
existing offshore airspace areas in FAA
Order 7400.9P, Airspace Designations
and Reporting Points, dated September
1, 2006, and effective September 15,
2006.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before April 27, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Send comments on this
proposal to the Docket Management
System, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Room Plaza 401, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC
20590–0001. You must identify FAA
Docket No. FAA–2006–25852 and
Airspace Docket No. 06–AAL–29, at the
beginning of your comments. You may
also submit comments through the
Internet at https://dms.dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken
McElroy, Airspace and Rules, Office of
System Operations Airspace and AIM,
Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue, SW.,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:00 Mar 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202)
267–8783.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
Interested parties are invited to
participate in this proposed rulemaking
by submitting such written data, views,
or arguments, as they may desire.
Comments that provide the factual basis
supporting the views and suggestions
presented are particularly helpful in
developing reasoned regulatory
decisions on the proposal. Comments
are specifically invited on the overall
regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related
aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both
docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA–
2006–25852 and Airspace Docket No.
06–AAL–29) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management
System (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may
also submit comments through the
Internet at https://dms.dot.gov.
Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those
comments a self-addressed, stamped
postcard on which the following
statement is made: ‘‘Comments to FAA
Docket No. FAA–2006–25852 and
Airspace Docket No. 06–AAL–29.’’ The
postcard will be date/time stamped and
returned to the commenter.
All communications received on or
before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before
taking action on the proposed rule. The
proposal contained in this action may
be changed in light of comments
received. All comments submitted will
be available for examination in the
public docket both before and after the
closing date for comments. A report
summarizing each substantive public
contact with FAA personnel concerned
with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.
Availability of NPRMs
An electronic copy of this document
may be downloaded through the
Internet at https://dms.dot.gov. Recently
published rulemaking documents can
also be accessed through the FAA’s Web
page at https://www.faa.gov., or the
Federal Register’s Web page at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/.
You may review the public docket
containing the proposal, any comments
received, and any final disposition in
person in the Dockets Office (see
ADDRESSES section for address and
phone number) between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. An informal docket
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
11305
may also be examined during normal
business hours at the office of the
Regional Air Traffic Division, Federal
Aviation Administration, 222 West 7th
Avenue 14, Anchorage, AK 99513.
Persons interested in being placed on
a mailing list for future NPRMs should
contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking,
(202) 267–9677, for a copy of Advisory
Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which
describes the application procedure.
The Proposal
The FAA is proposing an amendment
to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR) part 71 to modify the Norton
Sound Low, Woody Island Low, and
Control 1487L Offshore Airspace Areas,
AK, by lowering the floor to 1,200 feet
MSL within a 45-mile radius of Hooper
Bay Airport, within a 81.2-mile radius
of Perryville Airport, within a 73-mile
radius of Homer Airport, and within a
73-mile radius of St. Michael Airport.
The proposal would also modify Control
1234L Offshore Airspace Area, AK, by
lowering the floor to 1,200 feet above
the surface within an 81.2-mile radius of
Perryville Airport, AK. Additionally,
this proposal would establish controlled
airspace to support IFR operations at the
Hooper Bay, Perryville, Homer and St.
Michael Airports, AK. Additionally,
controlled airspace extending upward
from the surface, from 700 above the
surface, and from 1,200 feet above the
surface, would be established in Control
1234L Offshore Airspace Area. While
reviewing this action, an error in the
Control 1234L Offshore Airspace
description in FAAO 7400.9N was
discovered. The Offshore Airspace Area
Control 1234L begins at and extends
west of 160°00′00″ W. longitude. This
airspace covers all the land west of this
longitude including the Aleutian Island
chain and the Pribilof Islands. Control
1234L Offshore Airspace around or near
the Alaskan airports of; Adak, Atka,
Cold Bay, Dutch Harbor (Unalaska),
Nelson Lagoon, Sand Point, Eareckson
Air Station, St. George, Port Heiden,
Homer, and Chignik, would be lowered
from the 2,000 feet AGL floor to
incorporate Class E domestic airspace.
This action is concurrent with Airspace
Docket No. 06–AAL–34, proposing
revocation of the domestic airspace
descriptions for these airports.
Additionally, the airspace description in
FAA Order 7400.9P for Control 1234L
should refer to altitudes from ‘‘above the
surface’’. The current description
erroneously uses ‘‘MSL’’ for the airspace
associated with the Chignik Airport,
AK. The offshore airspace described
from 1,200 feet would be amended to
describe it from ‘‘above the surface’’.
E:\FR\FM\13MRP1.SGM
13MRP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 48 (Tuesday, March 13, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 11302-11305]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-4534]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2007-27361; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-237-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310 Series Airplanes; and
Airbus Model A300-600 Series 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 MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as explosion risks. Chafing of the fuel pump cables could
result in short circuits leading to fuel pump failure, intermittent
operation, arcing, and possible fuel tank explosion. 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 April 12, 2007.
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 eRulemaking 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: Tom Stafford, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1622; 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
[[Page 11303]]
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.
This proposed AD references the MCAI and related service
information that we considered in forming the engineering basis to
correct the unsafe condition. The proposed AD contains text copied from
the MCAI and for this reason might not follow our plain language
principles.
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-2007-
27361; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-237-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 Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2006-0284 R1, dated February 13, 2007 (referred
to after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states that the FAA has published SFAR 88
(Special Federal Aviation Regulation 88). In their letters referenced
04/00/02/07/01-L296, dated March 4, 2002, and 04/00/02/07/03-L024,
dated February 3, 2003, the JAA (Joint Aviation Authorities)
recommended the application of a similar regulation to the National
Aviation Authorities (NAA). Under this regulation, all holders of type
certificates for passenger transport aircraft with either a passenger
capacity of 30 or more, or a payload capacity of 7,500 pounds (3,402
kilograms) or more, which have received their certification since
January 1, 1958, are required to conduct a design review against
explosion risks.
The MCAI design review found that fuel pump cables can possibly
become chafed in their metallic conduits. The chafing of the fuel pump
cables can result in short circuits leading to fuel pump failure,
intermittent operation, arcing, and possible fuel tank explosion. The
MCAI, which requires modification of the fuel pump wiring against short
circuits, is a consequence of this design review. You may obtain
further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.
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 new maintenance requirements, this rule
included Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 88 (``SFAR 88,''
Amendment 21-78, and subsequent Amendments 21-82 and 21-83).
Among other actions, SFAR 88 requires certain type design (i.e.,
type certificate (TC) and supplemental type certificate (STC)) holders
to substantiate that their fuel tank systems can prevent ignition
sources in the fuel tanks. This requirement applies to type design
holders for large turbine-powered transport airplanes and for
subsequent modifications to those airplanes. It requires them to
perform design reviews and to develop design changes and maintenance
procedures if their designs do not meet the new fuel tank safety
standards. As explained in the preamble to the rule, we intended to
adopt airworthiness directives to mandate any changes found necessary
to address unsafe conditions identified as a result of these reviews.
In evaluating these design reviews, we have established four
criteria intended to define the unsafe conditions associated with fuel
tank systems that require corrective actions. The percentage of
operating time during which fuel tanks are exposed to flammable
conditions is one of these criteria. The other three criteria address
the failure types under evaluation: single failures, single failures in
combination with a latent condition(s), and in-service failure
experience. For all four criteria, the evaluations included
consideration of previous actions taken that may mitigate the need for
further action.
The Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) has issued a regulation that
is similar to SFAR 88. (The JAA is an associated body of the European
Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) representing the civil aviation
regulatory authorities of a number of European States who have agreed
to co-operate in developing and implementing common safety regulatory
standards and procedures.) Under this regulation, the JAA stated that
all members of the ECAC that hold type certificates for transport
category airplanes are required to conduct a design review against
explosion risks.
We have determined that the actions identified in this AD are
necessary to reduce the potential of ignition sources inside fuel
tanks, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result
in fuel tank explosions and consequent loss of the airplane.
Relevant Service Information
Airbus has issued Service Bulletins A300-24-6094, Revision 01,
dated July 18, 2006; and A310-24-2097, Revision 01, dated October 11,
2006. 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 the 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 provided by the State of Design Authority
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
[[Page 11304]]
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 205 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 72 work-hours per product to comply with this
proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Required
parts would cost about $7,190 per product. Where the service
information lists required parts costs that are covered under warranty,
we have assumed that there will be no charge for these costs. As we do
not control warranty coverage for affected parties, some parties may
incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these figures, we
estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to be
$2,654,750, or $12,950 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-2007-27361; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-
237-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments by April 12, 2007.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A310 series airplanes; and
Model A300-600 series airplanes; certificated in any category; all
certified models, all serial numbers, except for aircraft which have
received in production Airbus modification 13118 or Airbus Service
Bulletin (SB) A310-24-2097 or A300-24-6094.
Reason
(d) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states that the FAA has published SFAR 88 (Special Federal Aviation
Regulation 88). In their letters referenced 04/00/02/07/01-L296,
dated March 4th, 2002 and 04/00/02/07/03-L024, dated February 3,
2003, the JAA (Joint Aviation Authorities) recommended the
application of a similar regulation to the National Aviation
Authorities (NAA). Under this regulation, all holders of type
certificates for passenger transport aircraft with either a
passenger capacity of 30 or more, or a payload capacity of 7,500
pounds (3,402 kilograms) or more, which have received their
certification since January 1, 1958, are required to conduct a
design review against explosion risks. The MCAI design review found
that fuel pump cables can possibly become chafed in their metallic
conduits. The chafing of the fuel pump cables can result in short
circuits leading to fuel pump failure, intermittent operation,
arcing, and possible fuel tank explosion. The MCAI, which requires
modification of the fuel pump wiring against short circuits, is a
consequence of this design review.
Actions and Compliance
(e) Unless already done, do the following actions.
(1) Within 37 months after the effective date of this AD: Modify
the inner and outer fuel pumps, route 1P and 2P harnesses in the LH
(left-hand) wing and in the RH (right-hand) wing in accordance with
the instructions of Airbus Service Bulletins A300-24-6094, dated
February 15, 2006; A300-24-6094, Revision 01, dated July 18, 2006;
A310-24-2097, dated February 15, 2006; or A310-24-2097, Revision 01,
dated October 11, 2006; as applicable.
FAA AD Differences
Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No differences.
Other FAA AD Provisions
(f) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
Attn: Tom Stafford, Aerospace Engineer, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington 98057-3356, has the authority to approve AMOCs
for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. 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.
(2) 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.
(3) 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
(g) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness
Directive 2006-0284 R1, dated February 13, 2007; and Airbus Service
Bulletins A300-24-6094, dated February 15, 2006; A300-24-6094,
Revision 01, dated July 18, 2006; A310-24-2097, dated February 15,
2006; and A310-24-2097, Revision 01, dated October 11, 2006; for
related information.
[[Page 11305]]
Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 7, 2007.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E7-4534 Filed 3-12-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
