Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 Airplanes, 16749-16752 [E7-6343]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 65 / Thursday, April 5, 2007 / Proposed Rules Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 26, 2007. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7–6236 Filed 4–4–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2007–27776; Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–170–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). ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS AGENCY: SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness directive (AD) that applies to all Airbus Model A318–100, A319–100, A320–200, A321–100, and A321–200 series airplanes, and Model A320–111 airplanes. The existing AD currently requires an inspection to determine whether certain braking and steering control units (BSCUs) are installed or have ever been installed. For airplanes on which certain BSCUs are installed or have ever been installed, the existing AD requires an inspection of the nose landing gear (NLG) upper support and corrective action if necessary, and a check of the NLG strut inflation pressure and an adjustment if necessary. For some of these airplanes, the existing AD also requires a revision to the aircraft flight manual to incorporate an operating procedure to recover normal steering in the event of a steering failure. This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections of the NLG upper support, and related investigative/corrective actions in accordance with new service information; and would remove the onetime inspection that was required by the existing AD. This proposed AD also would provide an optional terminating action for the repetitive inspections. This proposed AD results from a report of an incident where an airplane landed with the NLG turned 90 degrees from centerline, and from additional reports of NLG upper support anti-rotation lugs rupturing in service. We are proposing this AD to prevent landings with the NLG turned 90 degrees from centerline, VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:32 Apr 04, 2007 Jkt 211001 which could result in reduced controllability of the airplane. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 7, 2007. 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: 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: 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 ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2007–27776; Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–170– 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 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 16749 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 On November 16, 2005, we issued AD 2005–24–06, amendment 39–14386 (70 FR 70715, November 23, 2005), for all Airbus Model A318–100, A319–100, A320–200, A321–100, and A321–200 series airplanes, and Model A320–111 airplanes. That AD requires an inspection to determine whether certain braking and steering control units (BSCUs) are installed or have ever been installed. For airplanes on which certain BSCUs are installed or have ever been installed, that AD requires an inspection of the nose landing gear (NLG) upper support and corrective action if necessary, and a check of the NLG strut inflation pressure and an adjustment if necessary. For some of these airplanes, that AD also requires a revision to the aircraft flight manual (AFM) to incorporate an operating procedure to recover normal steering in the event of a steering failure. That AD resulted from a report of an incident where an airplane landed with the NLG turned 90 degrees from centerline. We issued that AD to prevent landings with the NLG turned 90 degrees from centerline, which could result in reduced controllability of the airplane. Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued Since we issued AD 2005–24–06, several additional NLG upper support anti-rotation lugs have ruptured in service, which could lead to the inability to retract the NLG and possible landings with the nose wheel turned 90 degrees from centerline. Investigations showed that the affected airplanes were all equipped with enhanced manufacturing and maintainability (EMM) BSCU (Standard L4.1 and L4.5). The NLG shock absorber was also found to be over-pressurized on some of these airplanes, which resulted in increased loads on the upper support. As a result, E:\FR\FM\05APP1.SGM 05APP1 16750 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 65 / Thursday, April 5, 2007 / Proposed Rules the manufacturer developed a repetitive boroscope inspection of the NLG upper support lugs and cylinder lugs to replace the one-time inspection, and an optional terminating action for the repetitive inspections. Relevant Service Information Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A320–32–1310, dated February 8, 2006. The service bulletin describes procedures for doing a records review to determine if the airplane is equipped with or has ever been equipped with an EMM BSCU. For those airplanes that are equipped with an EMM BSCU, the service bulletin describes procedures for doing a repetitive special detailed inspection (boroscopic) for broken or cracked NLG upper support lugs and missing cylinder lugs, and related investigative/corrective actions. The related investigative/corrective actions follow: • If the upper support anti-rotation lugs are broken or cracked, or if a cylinder lug is missing: Do a pressure check of the NLG shock absorber (weight on and weight off wheels); report the measured pressure, ‘H’ dimension, temperature, and boroscopic inspection findings to Airbus for further assessment; and restore the NLG in accordance with Airbus recommendations. • If there are no findings: At the initial threshold inspection, do a servicing check (weight on wheels) of the NLG shock absorber. If the pressure is not within permissible tolerance, adjust the pressure and do the servicing check again with the weight off the wheels. If the pressure is not within permissible tolerance with the weight off the wheels, do a full service of the NLG shock absorber. The service previously, except as discussed under ‘‘Differences among the Proposed AD, the EASA Airworthiness Directive, and the Service Bulletin.’’ bulletin states that it is not necessary to do these actions again at the repetitive intervals unless there is a finding during the boroscopic inspection. The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, mandated the service information and issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2006–0174, dated June 21, 2006, to ensure the continued airworthiness of these airplanes in the European Union. Differences Among the Proposed AD, the EASA Airworthiness Directive, and the Service Bulletin The service bulletin specifies to contact the manufacturer for further assessment of the reported measured pressure, ‘H’ dimension, temperature, and boroscope inspection findings of the NLG shock absorber, but this proposed AD does not require such reporting and assessment. The service bulletin also specifies restoring the NLG in accordance with Airbus recommendations, but this proposed AD would require restoring the NLG in accordance with a method approved by the FAA or the EASA (or its delegated agent). 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. As described in FAA Order 8100.14A, ‘‘Interim Procedures for Working with the European Community on Airworthiness Certification and Continued Airworthiness,’’ dated August 12, 2005, EASA has kept the FAA informed of the situation described above. We have examined EASA’s findings, evaluated all pertinent information, and determined that AD action is necessary for airplanes of this type design that are certificated for operation in the United States. This proposed AD would supersede AD 2005–24–06 and would retain the requirements of the existing AD, except for the boroscope inspection required within 90 days specified in paragraph (i)(2), and the repair requirements of paragraph (j) of AD 2005–24–06. This proposed AD would also require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described Changes to Existing AD We have changed the airplane model designations in the applicability and in paragraph (f), ‘‘Records Review,’’ of this proposed AD to be consistent with the parallel EASA airworthiness directive. We have clarified paragraph (f) of this proposed AD to refer to BSCU standard L4.1 and L4.5, and added that Airbus Service Bulletin A320–32–1310, dated February 8, 2006, is one approved method for doing the records review. Costs of Compliance This proposed AD would affect about 720 airplanes of U.S. registry. The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work hour. ESTIMATED COSTS Action Records review (required by AD 2005–24–06) ...................................................... AFM revision (required by AD 2005–24–06) .......................................................... Special detailed inspection in accordance with new service information (new proposed action). ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS 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. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:32 Apr 04, 2007 Jkt 211001 Parts Cost per airplane Fleet cost None ........... None ........... None ........... $80 .............. $80 .............. $80, ............. per inspection cycle. $57,600. $57,600. $57,600, per inspection cycle. Work hours 1 1 1 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 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 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 E:\FR\FM\05APP1.SGM 05APP1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 65 / Thursday, April 5, 2007 / Proposed Rules 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 removing amendment 39–14386 (70 FR 70715, November 23, 2005) and adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2007–27776; Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–170–AD. Comments Due Date (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by May 7, 2007. Affected ADs (b) This AD supersedes AD 2005–24–06. ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS Applicability (c) This AD applies to all Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 airplanes. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from a report of an incident where an airplane landed with the nose landing gear (NLG) turned 90 degrees from centerline, and from additional reports of NLG upper support anti-rotation lugs rupturing in service. We are issuing this AD to prevent landings with the NLG turned 90 VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:32 Apr 04, 2007 Jkt 211001 degrees from centerline, which could result in 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. Restatement of Certain Requirements of AD 2005–24–06 Records Review (f) Within 5 days after November 30, 2005 (the effective date of AD 2005–24–06), perform a records review to determine whether the airplane is equipped with or has ever been equipped with an enhanced manufacturing and maintainability (EMM) braking and steering control unit (BSCU) part number (P/N) E21327001 (standard L4.1, installed by Airbus Modification 26965, or Airbus Service Bulletin A320–32–1912) or P/ N E21327003 (standard L4.5, installed by Airbus Modification 33376, or Airbus Service Bulletin A320–32–1261). Airbus Service Bulletin A320–32–1310, dated February 8, 2006, is one approved method for doing the records review. (g) For airplanes on which a records review required by paragraph (f) of this AD conclusively determines that the airplane is not and never has been equipped with a BSCU P/N E21327001 or P/N E21327003, no further action is required by this AD. Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) Revision (h) For airplanes that are not specified in paragraph (g) of this AD and on which Airbus Modification 31152 has not been incorporated in production (i.e., applicable only to aircraft with steering powered by the green hydraulic system): Within 10 days after November 30, 2005, revise the Limitation Section of the Airbus A318/319/320/321 Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM) to include the following information. This may be done by inserting a copy of this AD into the AFM: ‘‘The ECAM message, in case of a nose wheel steering failure, will be worded as follows: —‘‘WHEEL N/W STRG FAULT’’ for aircraft with the FWC E3 and subsequent standards —‘‘WHEEL N.W STEER FAULT’’ for aircraft with the FWC E2 Standard. • If the L/G SHOCK ABSORBER FAULT ECAM caution is triggered at any time in flight, and the WHEEL N/W STRG FAULT ECAM caution is triggered after the landing gear extension: • When all landing gear doors are indicated closed on ECAM WHEEL page, reset the BSCU: —A/SKID&N/W STRG—OFF THEN ON • If the WHEEL N/W STRG FAULT ECAM caution is no longer displayed, this indicates a successful nose wheel recentering and steering recovery. • Rearm the AUTO BRAKE, if necessary. • If the WHEEL N/W STRG FAULT ECAM caution remains displayed, this indicates that the nose wheel steering remains lost, and that the nose wheels are not centered. —During landing, delay nose wheel touchdown for as long as possible. PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 16751 —Refer to the ECAM STATUS. • If the WHEEL N/W STRG FAULT ECAM caution appears, without the L/G SHOCK ABSORBER FAULT ECAM caution: —No specific crew action is requested by the WHEEL N/W STRG FAULT ECAM caution procedure. —Refer to the ECAM STATUS.’’ Note 1: When a statement identical to that in paragraph (h) of this AD has been included in the general revisions of the AFM, the general revisions may be inserted into the AFM, and the copy of this AD may be removed from the AFM. New Requirements of This AD Inspection Thresholds (i) For airplanes that are not specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, at the earlier of the times specified in paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this AD: Do a special detailed inspection (boroscopic) for broken or cracked NLG upper support lugs and missing cylinder lugs, and do all applicable related investigative/corrective actions before further flight. Do all actions in accordance with Airbus Technical Note 957.1901/05, dated October 18, 2005, or the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320– 32–1310, dated February 8, 2006. After the effective date of this AD, only Airbus Service Bulletin A320–32–1301, dated February 8, 2006, may be used. Where the service bulletin specifies that restoring the NLG is necessary in accordance with Airbus recommendations, this AD requires restoring the NLG in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (or its delegated agent). Repeat the inspection thereafter at the applicable interval specified in paragraph (j) or (k) of this AD. (1) Within 100 flight cycles following an electronic centralized aircraft monitoring (ECAM) caution ‘‘L/G SHOCK ABSORBER FAULT’’ associated with at least one of the following centralized fault display system (CFDS) messages specified in paragraph (i)(1)(i), (i)(1)(ii), or (i)(1)(iii) of this AD. (i) ‘‘N L/G EXT PROX SNSR 24GA TGT POS.’’ (ii) ‘‘N L/G EXT PROX SNSR 25GA TGT POS.’’ (iii) ‘‘N L/G SHOCK ABSORBER FAULT 2526GM.’’ (2) At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (i)(2)(i) and (i)(2)(ii) of this AD. (i) Within 20 months, 6,000 flight hours, or 4,500 flight cycles since the date of issuance of the original French standard airworthiness certificate, or French export certificate of airworthiness, whichever occurs first. (ii) Within 6 months, 1,800 flight hours, or 1,350 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first. Repetitive Inspection Intervals (j) For airplanes not specified in paragraph (g) of this AD that are equipped with EMM BSCU standard L4.1 or L4.5: Repeat the inspection specified in paragraph (i) of this AD thereafter at intervals not to exceed the earliest of 6 months; 1,800 flight hours; 1,350 E:\FR\FM\05APP1.SGM 05APP1 16752 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 65 / Thursday, April 5, 2007 / Proposed Rules flight cycles; or 100 flight cycles following certain ECAM cautions and CFDS messages, as specified in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD. (k) For airplanes not specified in paragraph (g) of this AD that are equipped with EMM BSCU standard L4.8 or a non-EMM BSCU: Repeat the inspection specified in paragraph (i) of this AD thereafter at intervals not to exceed the earliest of 20 months; 6,000 flight hours; 4,500 flight cycles; or 100 flight cycles following certain ECAM cautions and CFDS messages, as specified in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD. Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a special detailed inspection is: ‘‘An intensive examination of a specific item, installation, or assembly to detect damage, failure, or irregularity. The examination is likely to make extensive use of specialized inspection techniques and/or equipment. Intricate cleaning and substantial access or disassembly procedure may be required.’’ Optional Terminating Action (l) For airplanes that are not specified in paragraph (g) of this AD: Installation of an NLG with new upper support anti-rotation lugs and new cylinder lugs, or installation of an NLG that was never driven by EMM BSCU standard L4.1 and L4.5; combined with installation of an EMM BSCU standard L4.8 or a non-EMM BSCU; constitutes terminating action for the requirements of this AD. Do the installations in accordance with a method approved by either the Manager, International Branch, ANM–116; or the EASA (or its delegated agent). Chapter 32 of the Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) is one approved method for doing the installations. No Report Required (m) Although Airbus Service Bulletin A320–32–1310, dated February 8, 2006, specifies sending certain inspection results to Airbus, this AD does not include that requirement. ycherry on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS Credit Paragraph (n) Inspections done before the effective date of this AD in accordance with Chapter 12, Subject 12–14–32 of the Airbus A318/ A319/A320/A321 AMM, as revised by Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 AMM Temporary Revision 12–001, dated November 13, 2005, are acceptable for compliance with the requirements of paragraph (i) of this AD. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (o)(1) The Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, 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 (p) EASA airworthiness directive 2006– 0174, dated June 21, 2006, also addresses the subject of this AD. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:32 Apr 04, 2007 Jkt 211001 Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 26, 2007. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E7–6343 Filed 4–4–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [CGD05–07–025] RIN 1625–AA09 Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Wicomico River (North Prong), Salisbury MD Coast Guard, DHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the drawbridge operation regulations of two Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT) bridges: The Main Street and U.S. 50 Bridges, at mile 22.4, across Wicomico River (North Prong) in Salisbury, MD. This proposal would allow the bridges to open on signal if four hours advance notice is given and eliminate the continual attendance of draw tender services while still providing the reasonable needs of navigation. DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before May 21, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may mail comments and related material to Commander (dpb), Fifth Coast Guard District, Federal Building, 1st Floor, 431 Crawford Street, Portsmouth, VA 23704–5004. The Fifth Coast Guard District maintains the public docket for this rulemaking. Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket, will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at Commander (dpb), Fifth Coast Guard District between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Waverly W. Gregory, Jr., Bridge Administrator, Fifth Coast Guard District, at (757) 398–6222. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Request for Comments We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 comments and related material. If you do so, please include your name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking CGD05–07–025, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. Please submit all comments and related material in an unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying. If you would like a return receipt, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all submittals received during the comment period. We may change this proposed rule in view of them. Public Meeting We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a request for a meeting by writing to Commander (dpb), Fifth Coast Guard District at the address under ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register. Background and Purpose The State Highway Administration (SHA), a division under MDOT, is responsible for the operation of both the Main Street and US 50 Bridges, at mile 22.4, across Wicomico River in Salisbury. SHA requested advance notification for vessel openings and a reduction in draw tender services due to the infrequency of requests for vessel openings of the drawbridges. The Main Street and US 50 Bridges have vertical clearances of four feet, above mean high water, in the closedto-navigation position. The existing operating regulations for these drawbridges are set out in 33 CFR § 117.579, which requires the draws to open on signal, except from 7 a.m. to 9 a.m., from 12 noon to 1 p.m. and from 4 p.m. to 6 p.m., the draw need not be opened for the passage of vessels, except for tugs with tows, if at least three hours of advance notice is given, and the reason for passage through the bridges during a closure period is due to delay caused by inclement weather or other emergency or unforeseen circumstances. Bridge opening data supplied by SHA revealed a significant decrease in yearly openings. In the past three years from 2004 to 2006, the bridges opened for vessels 522, 282 and 157 times, respectively. Due to the infrequency of requests for vessel openings of the drawbridges, SHA requested to change the current operating regulations by requiring the draw spans to open on signal if at least four hours notice is E:\FR\FM\05APP1.SGM 05APP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 65 (Thursday, April 5, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16749-16752]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-6343]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-27776; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-170-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: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness 
directive (AD) that applies to all Airbus Model A318-100, A319-100, 
A320-200, A321-100, and A321-200 series airplanes, and Model A320-111 
airplanes. The existing AD currently requires an inspection to 
determine whether certain braking and steering control units (BSCUs) 
are installed or have ever been installed. For airplanes on which 
certain BSCUs are installed or have ever been installed, the existing 
AD requires an inspection of the nose landing gear (NLG) upper support 
and corrective action if necessary, and a check of the NLG strut 
inflation pressure and an adjustment if necessary. For some of these 
airplanes, the existing AD also requires a revision to the aircraft 
flight manual to incorporate an operating procedure to recover normal 
steering in the event of a steering failure. This proposed AD would 
require repetitive inspections of the NLG upper support, and related 
investigative/corrective actions in accordance with new service 
information; and would remove the one-time inspection that was required 
by the existing AD. This proposed AD also would provide an optional 
terminating action for the repetitive inspections. This proposed AD 
results from a report of an incident where an airplane landed with the 
NLG turned 90 degrees from centerline, and from additional reports of 
NLG upper support anti-rotation lugs rupturing in service. We are 
proposing this AD to prevent landings with the NLG turned 90 degrees 
from centerline, which could result in reduced controllability of the 
airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 7, 2007.

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: 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: 

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 ``Docket No. 
FAA-2007-27776; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-170-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

    On November 16, 2005, we issued AD 2005-24-06, amendment 39-14386 
(70 FR 70715, November 23, 2005), for all Airbus Model A318-100, A319-
100, A320-200, A321-100, and A321-200 series airplanes, and Model A320-
111 airplanes. That AD requires an inspection to determine whether 
certain braking and steering control units (BSCUs) are installed or 
have ever been installed. For airplanes on which certain BSCUs are 
installed or have ever been installed, that AD requires an inspection 
of the nose landing gear (NLG) upper support and corrective action if 
necessary, and a check of the NLG strut inflation pressure and an 
adjustment if necessary. For some of these airplanes, that AD also 
requires a revision to the aircraft flight manual (AFM) to incorporate 
an operating procedure to recover normal steering in the event of a 
steering failure. That AD resulted from a report of an incident where 
an airplane landed with the NLG turned 90 degrees from centerline. We 
issued that AD to prevent landings with the NLG turned 90 degrees from 
centerline, which could result in reduced controllability of the 
airplane.

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2005-24-06, several additional NLG upper support 
anti-rotation lugs have ruptured in service, which could lead to the 
inability to retract the NLG and possible landings with the nose wheel 
turned 90 degrees from centerline. Investigations showed that the 
affected airplanes were all equipped with enhanced manufacturing and 
maintainability (EMM) BSCU (Standard L4.1 and L4.5). The NLG shock 
absorber was also found to be over-pressurized on some of these 
airplanes, which resulted in increased loads on the upper support. As a 
result,

[[Page 16750]]

the manufacturer developed a repetitive boroscope inspection of the NLG 
upper support lugs and cylinder lugs to replace the one-time 
inspection, and an optional terminating action for the repetitive 
inspections.

Relevant Service Information

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A320-32-1310, dated February 8, 
2006. The service bulletin describes procedures for doing a records 
review to determine if the airplane is equipped with or has ever been 
equipped with an EMM BSCU. For those airplanes that are equipped with 
an EMM BSCU, the service bulletin describes procedures for doing a 
repetitive special detailed inspection (boroscopic) for broken or 
cracked NLG upper support lugs and missing cylinder lugs, and related 
investigative/corrective actions. The related investigative/corrective 
actions follow:
     If the upper support anti-rotation lugs are broken or 
cracked, or if a cylinder lug is missing: Do a pressure check of the 
NLG shock absorber (weight on and weight off wheels); report the 
measured pressure, `H' dimension, temperature, and boroscopic 
inspection findings to Airbus for further assessment; and restore the 
NLG in accordance with Airbus recommendations.
     If there are no findings: At the initial threshold 
inspection, do a servicing check (weight on wheels) of the NLG shock 
absorber. If the pressure is not within permissible tolerance, adjust 
the pressure and do the servicing check again with the weight off the 
wheels. If the pressure is not within permissible tolerance with the 
weight off the wheels, do a full service of the NLG shock absorber. The 
service bulletin states that it is not necessary to do these actions 
again at the repetitive intervals unless there is a finding during the 
boroscopic inspection.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical 
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, mandated the 
service information and issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2006-0174, 
dated June 21, 2006, to ensure the continued airworthiness of these 
airplanes in the European Union.

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. As described in FAA 
Order 8100.14A, ``Interim Procedures for Working with the European 
Community on Airworthiness Certification and Continued Airworthiness,'' 
dated August 12, 2005, EASA has kept the FAA informed of the situation 
described above. We have examined EASA's findings, evaluated all 
pertinent information, and determined that AD action is necessary for 
airplanes of this type design that are certificated for operation in 
the United States.
    This proposed AD would supersede AD 2005-24-06 and would retain the 
requirements of the existing AD, except for the boroscope inspection 
required within 90 days specified in paragraph (i)(2), and the repair 
requirements of paragraph (j) of AD 2005-24-06. This proposed AD would 
also require accomplishing the actions specified in the service 
information described previously, except as discussed under 
``Differences among the Proposed AD, the EASA Airworthiness Directive, 
and the Service Bulletin.''

Differences Among the Proposed AD, the EASA Airworthiness Directive, 
and the Service Bulletin

    The service bulletin specifies to contact the manufacturer for 
further assessment of the reported measured pressure, `H' dimension, 
temperature, and boroscope inspection findings of the NLG shock 
absorber, but this proposed AD does not require such reporting and 
assessment. The service bulletin also specifies restoring the NLG in 
accordance with Airbus recommendations, but this proposed AD would 
require restoring the NLG in accordance with a method approved by the 
FAA or the EASA (or its delegated agent).

Changes to Existing AD

    We have changed the airplane model designations in the 
applicability and in paragraph (f), ``Records Review,'' of this 
proposed AD to be consistent with the parallel EASA airworthiness 
directive.
    We have clarified paragraph (f) of this proposed AD to refer to 
BSCU standard L4.1 and L4.5, and added that Airbus Service Bulletin 
A320-32-1310, dated February 8, 2006, is one approved method for doing 
the records review.

Costs of Compliance

    This proposed AD would affect about 720 airplanes of U.S. registry. 
The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to 
comply with this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work 
hour.

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Action                 Work hours            Parts          Cost per airplane        Fleet cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Records review (required by AD                 1  None................  $80................  $57,600.
 2005-24-06).
AFM revision (required by AD                   1  None................  $80................  $57,600.
 2005-24-06).
Special detailed inspection in                 1  None................  $80,...............  $57,600, per
 accordance with new service                                            per inspection        inspection cycle.
 information (new proposed                                               cycle.
 action).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

[[Page 16751]]

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 
removing amendment 39-14386 (70 FR 70715, November 23, 2005) and adding 
the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2007-27776; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-
170-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by May 7, 
2007.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2005-24-06.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all Airbus Model A318, A319, A320, and 
A321 airplanes.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from a report of an incident where an 
airplane landed with the nose landing gear (NLG) turned 90 degrees 
from centerline, and from additional reports of NLG upper support 
anti-rotation lugs rupturing in service. We are issuing this AD to 
prevent landings with the NLG turned 90 degrees from centerline, 
which could result in 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.

Restatement of Certain Requirements of AD 2005-24-06

Records Review

    (f) Within 5 days after November 30, 2005 (the effective date of 
AD 2005-24-06), perform a records review to determine whether the 
airplane is equipped with or has ever been equipped with an enhanced 
manufacturing and maintainability (EMM) braking and steering control 
unit (BSCU) part number (P/N) E21327001 (standard L4.1, installed by 
Airbus Modification 26965, or Airbus Service Bulletin A320-32-1912) 
or P/N E21327003 (standard L4.5, installed by Airbus Modification 
33376, or Airbus Service Bulletin A320-32-1261). Airbus Service 
Bulletin A320-32-1310, dated February 8, 2006, is one approved 
method for doing the records review.
    (g) For airplanes on which a records review required by 
paragraph (f) of this AD conclusively determines that the airplane 
is not and never has been equipped with a BSCU P/N E21327001 or P/N 
E21327003, no further action is required by this AD.

Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) Revision

    (h) For airplanes that are not specified in paragraph (g) of 
this AD and on which Airbus Modification 31152 has not been 
incorporated in production (i.e., applicable only to aircraft with 
steering powered by the green hydraulic system): Within 10 days 
after November 30, 2005, revise the Limitation Section of the Airbus 
A318/319/320/321 Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM) to include the 
following information. This may be done by inserting a copy of this 
AD into the AFM:

    ``The ECAM message, in case of a nose wheel steering failure, 
will be worded as follows:

--``WHEEL N/W STRG FAULT'' for aircraft with the FWC E3 and 
subsequent standards
--``WHEEL N.W STEER FAULT'' for aircraft with the FWC E2 Standard.

     If the L/G SHOCK ABSORBER FAULT ECAM caution is 
triggered at any time in flight, and the WHEEL N/W STRG FAULT ECAM 
caution is triggered after the landing gear extension:
     When all landing gear doors are indicated closed on 
ECAM WHEEL page, reset the BSCU:

    --A/SKID&N/W STRG--OFF THEN ON

     If the WHEEL N/W STRG FAULT ECAM caution is no longer 
displayed, this indicates a successful nose wheel re-centering and 
steering recovery.

     Rearm the AUTO BRAKE, if necessary.

     If the WHEEL N/W STRG FAULT ECAM caution remains 
displayed, this indicates that the nose wheel steering remains lost, 
and that the nose wheels are not centered.

    --During landing, delay nose wheel touchdown for as long as 
possible.
    --Refer to the ECAM STATUS.

     If the WHEEL N/W STRG FAULT ECAM caution appears, 
without the L/G SHOCK ABSORBER FAULT ECAM caution:

    --No specific crew action is requested by the WHEEL N/W STRG 
FAULT ECAM caution procedure.
    --Refer to the ECAM STATUS.''

    Note 1: When a statement identical to that in paragraph (h) of 
this AD has been included in the general revisions of the AFM, the 
general revisions may be inserted into the AFM, and the copy of this 
AD may be removed from the AFM.

New Requirements of This AD

Inspection Thresholds

    (i) For airplanes that are not specified in paragraph (g) of 
this AD, at the earlier of the times specified in paragraphs (i)(1) 
and (i)(2) of this AD: Do a special detailed inspection (boroscopic) 
for broken or cracked NLG upper support lugs and missing cylinder 
lugs, and do all applicable related investigative/corrective actions 
before further flight. Do all actions in accordance with Airbus 
Technical Note 957.1901/05, dated October 18, 2005, or the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-32-1310, 
dated February 8, 2006. After the effective date of this AD, only 
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-32-1301, dated February 8, 2006, may be 
used. Where the service bulletin specifies that restoring the NLG is 
necessary in accordance with Airbus recommendations, this AD 
requires restoring the NLG in accordance with a method approved by 
the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane 
Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (or 
its delegated agent). Repeat the inspection thereafter at the 
applicable interval specified in paragraph (j) or (k) of this AD.
    (1) Within 100 flight cycles following an electronic centralized 
aircraft monitoring (ECAM) caution ``L/G SHOCK ABSORBER FAULT'' 
associated with at least one of the following centralized fault 
display system (CFDS) messages specified in paragraph (i)(1)(i), 
(i)(1)(ii), or (i)(1)(iii) of this AD.
    (i) ``N L/G EXT PROX SNSR 24GA TGT POS.''
    (ii) ``N L/G EXT PROX SNSR 25GA TGT POS.''
    (iii) ``N L/G SHOCK ABSORBER FAULT 2526GM.''
    (2) At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (i)(2)(i) 
and (i)(2)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Within 20 months, 6,000 flight hours, or 4,500 flight cycles 
since the date of issuance of the original French standard 
airworthiness certificate, or French export certificate of 
airworthiness, whichever occurs first.
    (ii) Within 6 months, 1,800 flight hours, or 1,350 flight cycles 
after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.

Repetitive Inspection Intervals

    (j) For airplanes not specified in paragraph (g) of this AD that 
are equipped with EMM BSCU standard L4.1 or L4.5: Repeat the 
inspection specified in paragraph (i) of this AD thereafter at 
intervals not to exceed the earliest of 6 months; 1,800 flight 
hours; 1,350

[[Page 16752]]

flight cycles; or 100 flight cycles following certain ECAM cautions 
and CFDS messages, as specified in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD.
    (k) For airplanes not specified in paragraph (g) of this AD that 
are equipped with EMM BSCU standard L4.8 or a non-EMM BSCU: Repeat 
the inspection specified in paragraph (i) of this AD thereafter at 
intervals not to exceed the earliest of 20 months; 6,000 flight 
hours; 4,500 flight cycles; or 100 flight cycles following certain 
ECAM cautions and CFDS messages, as specified in paragraph (i)(1) of 
this AD.

    Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a special detailed 
inspection is: ``An intensive examination of a specific item, 
installation, or assembly to detect damage, failure, or 
irregularity. The examination is likely to make extensive use of 
specialized inspection techniques and/or equipment. Intricate 
cleaning and substantial access or disassembly procedure may be 
required.''

Optional Terminating Action

    (l) For airplanes that are not specified in paragraph (g) of 
this AD: Installation of an NLG with new upper support anti-rotation 
lugs and new cylinder lugs, or installation of an NLG that was never 
driven by EMM BSCU standard L4.1 and L4.5; combined with 
installation of an EMM BSCU standard L4.8 or a non-EMM BSCU; 
constitutes terminating action for the requirements of this AD. Do 
the installations in accordance with a method approved by either the 
Manager, International Branch, ANM-116; or the EASA (or its 
delegated agent). Chapter 32 of the Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 
Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) is one approved method for doing 
the installations.

No Report Required

    (m) Although Airbus Service Bulletin A320-32-1310, dated 
February 8, 2006, specifies sending certain inspection results to 
Airbus, this AD does not include that requirement.

Credit Paragraph

    (n) Inspections done before the effective date of this AD in 
accordance with Chapter 12, Subject 12-14-32 of the Airbus A318/
A319/A320/A321 AMM, as revised by Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 AMM 
Temporary Revision 12-001, dated November 13, 2005, are acceptable 
for compliance with the requirements of paragraph (i) of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (o)(1) The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, 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

    (p) EASA airworthiness directive 2006-0174, dated June 21, 2006, 
also addresses the subject of this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 26, 2007.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
 [FR Doc. E7-6343 Filed 4-4-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.