Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes, 12409-12413 [2016-04545]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
the life limit established by the manufacturer
for that generator.
(k) Credit for Previous Actions
This paragraph provides credit for the
applicable actions required by paragraphs (g),
(h), and (i) of this AD, if those actions were
performed before the effective date of this AD
using Airbus AOT A35L007–14, dated
December 18, 2014.
(l) Parts Installation Limitation
As of the effective date of this AD, no
person may install a passenger chemical
oxygen generator on any airplane, unless the
passenger chemical oxygen generator is
determined to be a serviceable unit, as
defined in paragraph (j) of this AD.
(m) Other FAA AD Provisions
Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
The following provisions also apply to this
AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs): The Manager, International
Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your
request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the International Branch, send it to ATTN:
Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM–116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356;
telephone 425–227–1138; fax 425–227–1149.
Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-116AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. Before using
any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal
inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding
district office. The AMOC approval letter
must specifically reference this AD.
(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any
requirement in this AD to obtain corrective
actions from a manufacturer, the action must
be accomplished using a method approved
by the Manager, International Branch, ANM–
116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or
the European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA); or Airbus’s EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by
the DOA, the approval must include the
DOA-authorized signature.
(n) Related Information
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2015–0119, dated
June 24, 2015, correction January 12, 2016,
for related information. This MCAI may be
found in the AD docket on the Internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2015–3149.
(2) Service information identified in this
AD that is not incorporated by reference is
available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (o)(3) and (o)(5) of this AD.
(o) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
(IBR) of the service information listed in this
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:06 Mar 08, 2016
Jkt 238001
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51.
(2) You must use this service information
as applicable to do the actions required by
this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Airbus Alert Operators Transmission
(AOT) A35L007–14, Revision 01, June 17,
2015; including Appendix A, Revision 01,
dated June 17, 2015. The revision date is not
shown on Appendix A.
(ii) B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin
117042–35–001, dated December 10, 2014.
(3) For Airbus service information
identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS,
Airworthiness Office—EAL, 1 Rond Point
Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex,
France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33
5 61 93 45 80; email airworthiness.A330A340@airbus.com; Internet https://
www.airbus.com.
(4) For B/E Aerospace service information
identified in this AD, contact B/E Aerospace
Inc., 10800 Pflumm Road, Lenexa, KS 66215;
telephone 913–338–9800; fax 913–469–8419;
Internet https://beaerospace.com/home/global
support.
(5) You may view this service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.
(6) You may view this service information
that is incorporated by reference at the
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at NARA, call
202–741–6030, or go to: https://
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on February
19, 2016.
Dorr M. Anderson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–04538 Filed 3–8–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2015–0243; Directorate
Identifier 2014–NM–114–AD; Amendment
39–18423; AD 2016–05–05]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus Model A300 series airplanes;
Model A300 B4–600, B4–600R, and F4–
600R series airplanes, and A300 C4–
605R Variant F airplanes (collectively
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
12409
called Model A300–600 series
airplanes); and Model A310 series
airplanes. This AD was prompted by
reports of cracked aluminum support
struts of the trimmable horizontal
stabilizer (THS) caused by stress
corrosion. This AD requires inspections
to identify the part number of each
support strut, repetitive inspections for
cracking of the THS support strut ends,
installation of reinforcing clamps on
strut ends, and replacement of support
struts, if necessary. We are issuing this
AD to detect and correct cracked THS
support struts, which could lead to the
rupture of all four support struts making
the remaining structure unable to carry
limit loads, which could result in loss
of the THS and reduced control of the
airplane.
DATES: This AD becomes effective April
13, 2016.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of certain publications listed in this AD
as of April 13, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD
docket on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov/#!docket
Detail;D=FAA-2015-0243 or in person at
the Docket Management Facility, U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M–30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC.
For service information identified in
this final rule, contact Airbus SAS,
Airworthiness Office—EAW, 1 Rond
Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac
Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36
96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email
account.airworth-eas@airbus.com;
Internet https://www.airbus.com. You
may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue
SW., Renton, WA. For information on
the availability of this material at the
FAA, call 425–227–1221. It is also
available on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2015–
0243.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan
Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM–116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA
98057–3356; telephone 425–227–2125;
fax 425–227–1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would
apply to all Airbus Model A300 series
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
12410
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
airplanes; Model A300 B4–600, B4–
600R, and F4–600R series airplanes, and
A300 C4–605R Variant F airplanes
(collectively called Model A300–600
series airplanes); and Model A310 series
airplanes. The NPRM published in the
Federal Register on February 18, 2015
(80 FR 8571).
The European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA), which is the Technical Agent
for the Member States of the European
Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness
Directive 2014–0164, dated July 11,
2014 (referred to after this as the
Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness
Information, or ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct
an unsafe condition for all Airbus
Model A300 series airplanes; Model
A300 B4–600, B4–600R, and F4–600R
series airplanes, and A300 C4–605R
Variant F airplanes (collectively called
Model A300–600 series airplanes); and
Model A310 series airplanes. The MCAI
states:
During scheduled maintenance, several
Trimmable Horizontal Stabilizer (THS)
support struts were found cracked at the strut
ends. The THS is supported and articulated
at frame (FR) 91 in the tail cone. Lateral
movement is prevented by four diagonal
support struts.
Investigations revealed that the cracks were
caused by stress corrosion and propagated
from the inside to the outside of the strut.
This condition, if not detected and
corrected, could lead to the rupture of all
four THS support struts at FR91, which
would make the remaining structure unable
to carry limit loads, potentially resulting in
loss of the Horizontal Tail Plane.
To address this unsafe condition, EASA
issued AD 2014–0121 [https://
ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2014-0121] to require
repetitive High Frequency Eddy Current
(HFEC) inspections of the THS support strut
ends, installation of reinforcing clamps on
strut ends and, depending on findings,
replacement of damaged support struts.
Installation of reinforcing clamps on strut
ends is considered a temporary solution
pending introduction of a re-designed
support strut.
Since that [EASA] AD was issued, it was
discovered that the [EASA] AD appeared to
also require HFEC inspections of steel struts,
which are not prone to cracking. The unsafe
condition exists only on support struts made
of aluminum, which were introduced
through Airbus modification (mod) 06101,
but may also have been installed in service
as replacement parts on aeroplanes in premod 06101 configuration.
For the reason described above, this
[EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA
AD 2014–0121, which is superseded, and
clarifies the need for an initial identification
of the support struts installed on aeroplanes
in pre-mod 06101 configuration. The related
Airbus Service Bulletins (SB) remain
unchanged.
You may examine the MCAI in the
AD docket on the Internet at https://
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:06 Mar 08, 2016
Jkt 238001
www.regulations.gov/#!document
Detail;D=FAA-2015-0243-0002.
not changed this final rule in this
regard.
Comments
Request To Remove Certain References
From Paragraph (l) of the NPRM
UPS requested that we remove
reference to paragraphs (i)(1) through
(i)(3) of the proposed AD from
paragraph (l) of the proposed AD. UPS
stated the service bulletins identified in
paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(3) of the
proposed AD do not include an
inspection form or inspection
requirements within the
accomplishment instructions of the
service information and therefore these
documents should not be referenced in
paragraph (l) of the proposed AD, which
specifies reporting inspection results.
We agree with the request because
paragraph (l) of this AD only requires
the reporting of certain inspections
results. Paragraph (i) of this AD requires
an installation of reinforcing clamps.
We have revised paragraph (l) of this AD
to remove the reference to paragraphs
(i)(1) through (i)(3) of this AD.
We have also revised paragraph (l) of
this AD by removing a reference to
paragraph (h) of this AD in order to
match the reporting requirement
specified in the MCAI. Paragraph (l) of
the proposed AD refers to inspections
required by both paragraphs (g) and (h)
of the proposed AD. However, reporting
is only required for inspections required
by paragraph (g) of this AD.
We gave the public the opportunity to
participate in developing this AD. We
have considered the comments received.
The following presents the comments
received on the NPRM (80 FR 8571,
February 18, 2015) (‘‘the NPRM’’) and
the FAA’s response to each comment.
Request To Remove Repetitive
Inspections From the NPRM
FedEx stated that Airbus Service
Bulletin A300–53–6172, dated February
14, 2014 and Airbus Service Bulletin
A310–53–2136, dated February 14,
2014, require an application of sealant
and installation of a clamp over the
affected area. FedEx stated periodic reinspections for cracking of the THS
support strut ends would induce further
damage since it requires removal of the
reinforcing clamps and sealant before
accomplishing the HFEC inspection.
We infer from the commenter’s
statement that FedEx requests removal
of the repetitive inspection requirement
from the proposed AD. We disagree
because if operators follow established
procedures, removal of the sealant
should not introduce damage to the
support struts installed on the THS. We
have not changed this final rule in this
regard.
Request To Remove Installation
Requirement From the NPRM
FedEx and United Parcel Service
(UPS) stated they disagree with the
requirement to install the clamping.
Both commenters claimed that installing
reinforcing clamps will not resolve any
stress mitigation and crack progression.
UPS stated that the NPRM proposed to
require repair prior to further flight, if
cracking is identified. FedEx and UPS
stated that repetitive inspections
provide a sufficient level of safety on
the struts and that the installation of
reinforcement clamps does not enhance
the support strut installation, but adds
an additional cost without a
corresponding safety benefit. FedEx and
UPS requested removal of the clamp
installation requirement specified by
paragraphs (i) and (j) of the proposed
AD.
We disagree to remove the
requirement to install clamping from
paragraphs (i) and (j) of this AD. The
clamping reduces the circumferential
stresses in the rod-ends and supports
the circular shape of the rod ends. As a
result, stress corrosion of the rod is
stopped, or partially reduced, due to the
lower circumferential stresses. We have
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Request To Revise Costs of Compliance
FedEx requested that we revise the
Costs of Compliance paragraph of the
proposed AD to accurately reflect the
cost of replacing cracked struts. FedEx
stated it agrees that struts that are
determined to be cracked should be
replaced but finds that this adds an
additional financial burden to the
airlines. FedEx stated there are no
warranty provisions stated in the
manufacturer’s service information to
mitigate the additional expense of
replacing struts, nor is it accounted for
in the NPRM.
We disagree because the conditional
cost of replacing the struts was
accounted for in the NPRM by using the
standard part cost for non-avionics parts
of $10,000 and an estimate that any
necessary follow-on actions would take
about 15 work-hours. Further, we do not
control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. We have not changed this
final rule in this regard.
Request To Include Installation of Steel
Struts as Terminating Action
FedEx requested that we revise the
NPRM to state that the installation of
steel struts constitutes a terminating
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
action for the repetitive inspections
specified by paragraph (h) of the
proposed AD. FedEx noted that Airbus
may be developing a solution that
would terminate the repetitive
inspections, but as of yet, Airbus has not
published any service information that
would eliminate the need for the
repetitive inspections specified by
paragraph (h) of the proposed AD.
We disagree to change this final rule
because terminating action is not
available at this time. When terminating
action becomes available, the FAA may
consider installation of the new design
struts as an alternative method of
compliance (AMOC) to this AD once the
manufacturer’s design solution is
released. We have not changed this final
rule in this regard.
Request To Extend the Repetitive
Inspection Interval
UPS requested that we extend the
repetitive inspection interval required
by paragraph (h) of the proposed AD.
UPS stated that a manufacturer’s
investigation identified the cracking to
be the result of inter-granular stress
corrosion and that for cracking to
develop, three factors need to be
present: a material flaw at the granular
level, an environmental condition for
corrosion to develop, and a tensile load
to induce damage development/
propagation at the material flaw. UPS
added that the area is already protected
with anti-corrosion materials. UPS
stated that based on the low occurrence
of cracking, the propagation properties
of cracking due to stress corrosion, and
the age of the fleet, fleet airworthiness
can be maintained using all three
operational parameters—flight hours,
flight cycles, and calendar time. UPS
requested that we revise the repetitive
inspection interval from 24 months to
5,000 flight hours, 2,500 flight cycles, or
36 months, whichever occurs first.
We do not agree with the request to
extend the repetitive inspection
required by paragraph (h) of this AD
because the UPS proposal is not
supported by analysis or data. In
developing an appropriate compliance
time for the actions specified in
paragraph (h) of this AD, we considered
the safety implications and normal
maintenance schedules for the timely
accomplishment of the specified
actions. We have determined that the
proposed interval will ensure an
acceptable level of safety and allow the
actions to be done during scheduled
maintenance intervals for most affected
operators. However, affected operators
may request an AMOC to request an
extension of the repetitive inspection
interval under the provisions of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:06 Mar 08, 2016
Jkt 238001
paragraph (m)(1) of this AD by
submitting data and analysis
substantiating that the change would
provide an acceptable level of safety.
We have not changed this final rule in
this regard.
Request To Delay Rule Due to Pending
Release of New Design of Support Strut
and Service Information
FedEx and UPS requested that the
release date of the NPRM be suspended
pending Airbus’s release of a newly
designed support strut that, if installed,
would be terminating action for the
repetitive inspections proposed by the
NPRM. FedEx stated the manufacturer is
working on service information that
contains a terminating action for the
repetitive inspections proposed in the
NPRM, but as of yet, has not been
published. UPS stated that suspending
the release of the NPRM would prevent
extra work for the FAA and operators.
We disagree with delaying issuance of
this final rule until new service
information or a new design becomes
available. We consider that to delay this
AD action would be inappropriate, in
light of the identified unsafe condition.
When new service information or a new
design becomes available, we may
consider additional rulemaking. We
may also consider new service
information and/or installation of the
new design struts as an AMOC to this
AD. Operators may apply for an AMOC
in accordance with the provisions of
paragraph (m)(1) of this AD. We have
not changed this final rule in this
regard.
Conclusion
We reviewed the relevant data,
considered the comments received, and
determined that air safety and the
public interest require adopting this AD
as proposed except for minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these
minor changes:
• Are consistent with the intent that
was proposed in the NPRM for
correcting the unsafe condition; and
• Do not add any additional burden
upon the public than was already
proposed in the NPRM.
Related Service Information Under 1
CFR Part 51
Airbus has issued the following
service information.
• Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–
0394, dated February 14, 2014. This
service information describes
procedures for reinforcing the support
struts of the THS at frame 91 in the
fuselage tail section of Airbus Model
A300 series airplanes.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
12411
• Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–
0395, dated February 14, 2014. This
service information describes
procedures for inspecting for cracking of
the support struts of the THS at frame
91 in the fuselage tail section of Airbus
Model A300 series airplanes.
• Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–
6172, dated February 14, 2014. This
service information describes
procedures for reinforcing the support
struts of the THS at frame 91 in the
fuselage tail section of Airbus Model
A300–600 series airplanes.
• Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–
6174, dated February 14, 2014. This
service information describes
procedures for inspecting for cracking of
the support struts of the THS at frame
91 in the fuselage tail section of Airbus
Model A300–600 series airplanes.
• Airbus Service Bulletin A310–53–
2136, dated February 14, 2014. This
service information describes
procedures for reinforcing the support
struts of the THS at frame 91 in the
fuselage tail section of Airbus Model
A310 series airplanes.
• Airbus Service Bulletin A310–53–
2137, dated February 14, 2014. This
service information describes
procedures for inspecting for cracking of
the support struts of the THS at frame
91 in the fuselage tail section of Airbus
Model A310 series airplanes.
This service information is reasonably
available because the interested parties
have access to it through their normal
course of business or by the means
identified in the ADDRESSES section.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD affects 174
airplanes of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take
about 5 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of
this AD, and 1 work-hour per product
for reporting. The average labor rate is
$85 per work-hour. Required parts will
cost about $2,100 per product. Based on
these figures, we estimate the cost of
this AD on U.S. operators to be
$454,140, or $2,610 per product.
In addition, we estimate that any
necessary follow-on actions will take
about 15 work-hours and require parts
costing $10,000, for a cost of $11,275
per product. We have no way of
determining the number of aircraft that
might need these actions.
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
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
12412
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
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 AD will not
have federalism implications under
Executive Order 13132. This AD will
not have a substantial direct effect on
the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify that this AD:
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);
3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in
Alaska; and
4. 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.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov/#!docket
Detail;D=FAA-2015-0243; 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 AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Operations
office (telephone 800–647–5527) is in
the ADDRESSES section.
Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as
follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:06 Mar 08, 2016
Jkt 238001
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
■
2016–05–05 Airbus: Amendment 39–18423.
Docket No. FAA–2015–0243; Directorate
Identifier 2014–NM–114–AD.
(a) Effective Date
This AD becomes effective April 13, 2016.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes
specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(6)
of this AD, certificated in any category, all
manufacturer serial numbers.
(1) Airbus Model A300 B2–1A, B2–1C,
B2K–3C, B2–203, B4–2C, B4–103, and B4–
203 airplanes.
(2) Airbus Model A300 B4–601, B4–603,
B4–620, and B4–622 airplanes.
(3) Airbus Model A300 B4–605R and B4–
622R airplanes.
(4) Airbus Model A300 F4–605R and F4–
622R airplanes.
(5) Airbus Model A300 C4–605R Variant F
airplanes.
(6) Airbus Model A310–203, –204, –221,
–222, –304, –322, –324, and –325 airplanes.
(d) Subject
Air Transport Association (ATA) of
America Code 53, Fuselage.
(e) Reason
This AD was prompted by reports of
cracked aluminum support struts of the
trimmable horizontal stabilizer (THS) caused
by stress corrosion. We are issuing this AD
to detect and correct cracked THS support
struts, which could lead to the rupture of all
four support struts making the remaining
structure unable to carry limit loads, which
could result in loss of the THS and reduced
control of the airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(g) Inspection for Part Number
For airplanes in pre-modification 06101
configuration: Within 12 months after the
effective date of this AD, do an inspection to
identify the part number of each support
strut installed on the THS at frame (FR) 91,
in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of the applicable service bulletin
identified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(3)
of this AD. A review of airplane maintenance
records is acceptable in lieu of this
inspection, provided those records can be
relied upon for that purpose and the part
number can be positively identified from that
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
review. If no aluminum strut(s) having part
number (P/N) R21449, R21449D, R21449G, or
R21449H is found during any inspection
required by this paragraph, no further action
is required by this AD for that horizontal
stabilizer, except for paragraph (l) of this AD.
(1) For Airbus Model A300 series
airplanes: Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–
0395, dated February 14, 2014.
(2) For Airbus Model A300 B4–600, B4–
600R, and F4–600R series airplanes, and
A300 C4–605R Variant F airplanes
(collectively called Model A300–600 series
airplanes): Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–
6174, dated February 14, 2014.
(3) For Airbus Model A310 series
airplanes: Airbus Service Bulletin A310–53–
2137, dated February 14, 2014.
(h) Repetitive High Frequency Eddy Current
(HFEC) Inspections
For airplanes in post-modification 06101
configuration; and for airplanes in premodification 06101 configuration on which
any aluminum support strut(s) having P/N
R21449, P/N R21449D, P/N R21449G, or P/
N R21449H is found: Within the applicable
compliance times specified in paragraph
(h)(1), (h)(2), or (h)(3) of this AD, do an HFEC
inspection for cracking of the aluminum THS
support strut ends at FR 91, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of the
applicable service bulletin identified in
paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(3) of this AD.
Reinforcing clamps already installed on strut
ends must be removed before accomplishing
the HFEC inspection and re-installed after
the inspection, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of the
applicable service bulletin specified in
paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(3) of this AD.
Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals
not to exceed 24 months.
(1) For airplanes having manufacturer
serial number (MSN) 0499 through MSN
0747 inclusive (post-mod 06101): Within 12
months after the effective date of this AD.
(2) For airplanes having MSN 0748 through
MSN 0878 inclusive (post-mod 06101):
Within 18 months after the effective date of
this AD.
(3) For airplanes having MSN 0001 through
MSN 0498 inclusive (pre-mod 06101) having
one or more aluminum struts: Within 24
months after the effective date of this AD.
(i) Installation of Reinforcing Clamps
Concurrently with the initial HFEC
inspection required by paragraph (h) of this
AD, identify struts having P/N R21449, P/N
R21449D, P/N R21449G, or P/N R21449H
with no reinforcing clamps previously
installed, and before next flight, install
reinforcing clamps on each strut end, in
accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of the applicable service bulletin
specified in paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(3) of
this AD.
(1) For Airbus Model A300 series
airplanes: Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–
0394, dated February 14, 2014.
(2) For Airbus Model A300 B4–600,
B4600R, and F4–600R series airplanes, and
A300 C4–605R Variant F airplanes
(collectively called Model A300–600 series
airplanes): Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–
6172, dated February 14, 2014.
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(3) For Airbus Model A310 series
airplanes: Airbus Service Bulletin A310–53–
2136, dated February 14, 2014.
(j) Corrective Actions
If, during any inspection required by
paragraph (h) of this AD, any cracking is
found, before further flight, replace the
affected THS support strut(s) with
serviceable struts and install clamps on each
strut end, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of the
applicable service bulletin identified in
paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(3) of this AD.
(k) Clarification
Installation of reinforcing clamps as
required by paragraph (i) of this AD, and the
replacement of support struts and/or the
installation of clamps as required by
paragraph (j) of this AD, do not constitute
terminating action for the repetitive
inspections required by paragraph (h) of this
AD.
Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
(l) Reporting
At the applicable time specified in
paragraphs (l)(1) and (l)(2) of this AD: After
accomplishment of any inspection required
by paragraph (g) of this AD, report all
inspection results to Airbus, including no
findings, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of the
applicable service bulletins specified in
paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(3) of this AD.
(1) If the inspection was done on or after
the effective date of this AD: Submit the
report within 30 days after the inspection.
(2) If the inspection was done before the
effective date of this AD: Submit the report
within 30 days after the effective date of this
AD.
(m) Other FAA AD Provisions
The following provisions also apply to this
AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs): The Manager, International
Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your
request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the International Branch, send it to ATTN:
Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM–116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356;
telephone 425–227–2125; fax 425–227–1149.
Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-116AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. Before using
any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal
inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding
district office. The AMOC approval letter
must specifically reference this AD.
(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any
requirement in this AD to obtain corrective
actions from a manufacturer, the action must
be accomplished using a method approved
by the Manager, International Branch, ANM–
116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or
the European Aviation Safety Agency
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:06 Mar 08, 2016
Jkt 238001
(EASA); or Airbus’s EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by
the DOA, the approval must include the
DOA-authorized signature.
(3) Reporting Requirements: A federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a
person is not required to respond to, nor
shall a person be subject to a penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of
information subject to the requirements of
the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that
collection of information displays a current
valid OMB Control Number. The OMB
Control Number for this information
collection is 2120–0056. Public reporting for
this collection of information is estimated to
be approximately 5 minutes per response,
including the time for reviewing instructions,
completing and reviewing the collection of
information. All responses to this collection
of information are mandatory. Comments
concerning the accuracy of this burden and
suggestions for reducing the burden should
be directed to the FAA at 800 Independence
Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn:
Information Collection Clearance Officer,
AES–200.
(n) Related Information
Refer to Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2014–0164, dated
July 11, 2014, for related information. This
MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov/
#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2015-0243-0002.
(o) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
(IBR) of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51.
(2) You must use this service information
as applicable to do the actions required by
this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–0394,
dated February 14, 2014.
(ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–0395,
dated February 14, 2014.
(iii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–
6172, dated February 14, 2014.
(iv) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–
6174, dated February 14, 2014.
(v) Airbus Service Bulletin A310–53–2136,
dated February 14, 2014.
(vi) Airbus Service Bulletin A310–53–
2137, dated February 14, 2014.
(3) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness
Office—EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France;
telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61
93 44 51; email account.airworth-eas@
airbus.com; Internet https://www.airbus.com.
(4) You may view this service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.
(5) You may view this service information
that is incorporated by reference at the
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at NARA, call
202–741–6030, or go to: https://
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
12413
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on February
23, 2016.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–04545 Filed 3–8–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2014–0529; Directorate
Identifier 2013–NM–260–AD; Amendment
39–18420; AD 2016–05–02]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are superseding
Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2011–13–
11 and AD 2013–16–09 for all Airbus
Model A318, A319, A320, and A321
series airplanes. AD 2011–13–11
required an amendment of the airplane
flight manual (AFM), repetitive checks
of specific centralized fault display
system (CFDS) messages, an inspection
of the opening sequence of the main
landing gear (MLG) door for
discrepancies if certain messages are
found, and corrective actions if
necessary. AD 2013–16–09 required an
inspection to determine airplane
configuration and part numbers of the
landing gear control interface unit and
MLG door actuators; and, for affected
airplanes, repetitive inspections of the
opening sequence of the MLG door, and
replacement of the MLG door actuator if
necessary. AD 2013–16–09 also
provided optional terminating action for
the repetitive inspections. This new AD
reduces the interval of the MLG door
opening sequence inspection, requires
replacing or modifying certain MLG
door actuators, and also requires a
flushing procedure to be performed
when installing a new MLG door
actuator. This AD was prompted by a
determination that the interval of the
MLG door opening sequence inspection
must be reduced. We are issuing this AD
to detect and correct deterioration of the
damping ring and associated retaining
ring of the MLG door actuator, which
can sufficiently increase the friction
inside the actuator to restrict opening of
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 46 (Wednesday, March 9, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12409-12413]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-04545]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2015-0243; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-114-AD;
Amendment 39-18423; AD 2016-05-05]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus Model A300 series airplanes; Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-
600R series airplanes, and A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes
(collectively called Model A300-600 series airplanes); and Model A310
series airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of cracked aluminum
support struts of the trimmable horizontal stabilizer (THS) caused by
stress corrosion. This AD requires inspections to identify the part
number of each support strut, repetitive inspections for cracking of
the THS support strut ends, installation of reinforcing clamps on strut
ends, and replacement of support struts, if necessary. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct cracked THS support struts, which could
lead to the rupture of all four support struts making the remaining
structure unable to carry limit loads, which could result in loss of
the THS and reduced control of the airplane.
DATES: This AD becomes effective April 13, 2016.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of April 13,
2016.
ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2015-0243 or in person at the
Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.
For service information identified in this final rule, contact
Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte,
31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61
93 44 51; email account.airworth-eas@airbus.com; Internet https://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
0243.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-2125;
fax 425-227-1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Airbus Model A300
series
[[Page 12410]]
airplanes; Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series airplanes,
and A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called Model A300-
600 series airplanes); and Model A310 series airplanes. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on February 18, 2015 (80 FR 8571).
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2014-0164, dated July 11, 2014 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Model A300
series airplanes; Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series
airplanes, and A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called
Model A300-600 series airplanes); and Model A310 series airplanes. The
MCAI states:
During scheduled maintenance, several Trimmable Horizontal
Stabilizer (THS) support struts were found cracked at the strut
ends. The THS is supported and articulated at frame (FR) 91 in the
tail cone. Lateral movement is prevented by four diagonal support
struts.
Investigations revealed that the cracks were caused by stress
corrosion and propagated from the inside to the outside of the
strut.
This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to the
rupture of all four THS support struts at FR91, which would make the
remaining structure unable to carry limit loads, potentially
resulting in loss of the Horizontal Tail Plane.
To address this unsafe condition, EASA issued AD 2014-0121
[https://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2014-0121] to require repetitive High
Frequency Eddy Current (HFEC) inspections of the THS support strut
ends, installation of reinforcing clamps on strut ends and,
depending on findings, replacement of damaged support struts.
Installation of reinforcing clamps on strut ends is considered a
temporary solution pending introduction of a re-designed support
strut.
Since that [EASA] AD was issued, it was discovered that the
[EASA] AD appeared to also require HFEC inspections of steel struts,
which are not prone to cracking. The unsafe condition exists only on
support struts made of aluminum, which were introduced through
Airbus modification (mod) 06101, but may also have been installed in
service as replacement parts on aeroplanes in pre-mod 06101
configuration.
For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD retains the
requirements of EASA AD 2014-0121, which is superseded, and
clarifies the need for an initial identification of the support
struts installed on aeroplanes in pre-mod 06101 configuration. The
related Airbus Service Bulletins (SB) remain unchanged.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2015-0243-0002.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We have considered the comments received. The following
presents the comments received on the NPRM (80 FR 8571, February 18,
2015) (``the NPRM'') and the FAA's response to each comment.
Request To Remove Repetitive Inspections From the NPRM
FedEx stated that Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6172, dated
February 14, 2014 and Airbus Service Bulletin A310-53-2136, dated
February 14, 2014, require an application of sealant and installation
of a clamp over the affected area. FedEx stated periodic re-inspections
for cracking of the THS support strut ends would induce further damage
since it requires removal of the reinforcing clamps and sealant before
accomplishing the HFEC inspection.
We infer from the commenter's statement that FedEx requests removal
of the repetitive inspection requirement from the proposed AD. We
disagree because if operators follow established procedures, removal of
the sealant should not introduce damage to the support struts installed
on the THS. We have not changed this final rule in this regard.
Request To Remove Installation Requirement From the NPRM
FedEx and United Parcel Service (UPS) stated they disagree with the
requirement to install the clamping. Both commenters claimed that
installing reinforcing clamps will not resolve any stress mitigation
and crack progression. UPS stated that the NPRM proposed to require
repair prior to further flight, if cracking is identified. FedEx and
UPS stated that repetitive inspections provide a sufficient level of
safety on the struts and that the installation of reinforcement clamps
does not enhance the support strut installation, but adds an additional
cost without a corresponding safety benefit. FedEx and UPS requested
removal of the clamp installation requirement specified by paragraphs
(i) and (j) of the proposed AD.
We disagree to remove the requirement to install clamping from
paragraphs (i) and (j) of this AD. The clamping reduces the
circumferential stresses in the rod-ends and supports the circular
shape of the rod ends. As a result, stress corrosion of the rod is
stopped, or partially reduced, due to the lower circumferential
stresses. We have not changed this final rule in this regard.
Request To Remove Certain References From Paragraph (l) of the NPRM
UPS requested that we remove reference to paragraphs (i)(1) through
(i)(3) of the proposed AD from paragraph (l) of the proposed AD. UPS
stated the service bulletins identified in paragraphs (i)(1) through
(i)(3) of the proposed AD do not include an inspection form or
inspection requirements within the accomplishment instructions of the
service information and therefore these documents should not be
referenced in paragraph (l) of the proposed AD, which specifies
reporting inspection results.
We agree with the request because paragraph (l) of this AD only
requires the reporting of certain inspections results. Paragraph (i) of
this AD requires an installation of reinforcing clamps. We have revised
paragraph (l) of this AD to remove the reference to paragraphs (i)(1)
through (i)(3) of this AD.
We have also revised paragraph (l) of this AD by removing a
reference to paragraph (h) of this AD in order to match the reporting
requirement specified in the MCAI. Paragraph (l) of the proposed AD
refers to inspections required by both paragraphs (g) and (h) of the
proposed AD. However, reporting is only required for inspections
required by paragraph (g) of this AD.
Request To Revise Costs of Compliance
FedEx requested that we revise the Costs of Compliance paragraph of
the proposed AD to accurately reflect the cost of replacing cracked
struts. FedEx stated it agrees that struts that are determined to be
cracked should be replaced but finds that this adds an additional
financial burden to the airlines. FedEx stated there are no warranty
provisions stated in the manufacturer's service information to mitigate
the additional expense of replacing struts, nor is it accounted for in
the NPRM.
We disagree because the conditional cost of replacing the struts
was accounted for in the NPRM by using the standard part cost for non-
avionics parts of $10,000 and an estimate that any necessary follow-on
actions would take about 15 work-hours. Further, we do not control
warranty coverage for affected individuals. We have not changed this
final rule in this regard.
Request To Include Installation of Steel Struts as Terminating Action
FedEx requested that we revise the NPRM to state that the
installation of steel struts constitutes a terminating
[[Page 12411]]
action for the repetitive inspections specified by paragraph (h) of the
proposed AD. FedEx noted that Airbus may be developing a solution that
would terminate the repetitive inspections, but as of yet, Airbus has
not published any service information that would eliminate the need for
the repetitive inspections specified by paragraph (h) of the proposed
AD.
We disagree to change this final rule because terminating action is
not available at this time. When terminating action becomes available,
the FAA may consider installation of the new design struts as an
alternative method of compliance (AMOC) to this AD once the
manufacturer's design solution is released. We have not changed this
final rule in this regard.
Request To Extend the Repetitive Inspection Interval
UPS requested that we extend the repetitive inspection interval
required by paragraph (h) of the proposed AD. UPS stated that a
manufacturer's investigation identified the cracking to be the result
of inter-granular stress corrosion and that for cracking to develop,
three factors need to be present: a material flaw at the granular
level, an environmental condition for corrosion to develop, and a
tensile load to induce damage development/propagation at the material
flaw. UPS added that the area is already protected with anti-corrosion
materials. UPS stated that based on the low occurrence of cracking, the
propagation properties of cracking due to stress corrosion, and the age
of the fleet, fleet airworthiness can be maintained using all three
operational parameters--flight hours, flight cycles, and calendar time.
UPS requested that we revise the repetitive inspection interval from 24
months to 5,000 flight hours, 2,500 flight cycles, or 36 months,
whichever occurs first.
We do not agree with the request to extend the repetitive
inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD because the UPS
proposal is not supported by analysis or data. In developing an
appropriate compliance time for the actions specified in paragraph (h)
of this AD, we considered the safety implications and normal
maintenance schedules for the timely accomplishment of the specified
actions. We have determined that the proposed interval will ensure an
acceptable level of safety and allow the actions to be done during
scheduled maintenance intervals for most affected operators. However,
affected operators may request an AMOC to request an extension of the
repetitive inspection interval under the provisions of paragraph (m)(1)
of this AD by submitting data and analysis substantiating that the
change would provide an acceptable level of safety. We have not changed
this final rule in this regard.
Request To Delay Rule Due to Pending Release of New Design of Support
Strut and Service Information
FedEx and UPS requested that the release date of the NPRM be
suspended pending Airbus's release of a newly designed support strut
that, if installed, would be terminating action for the repetitive
inspections proposed by the NPRM. FedEx stated the manufacturer is
working on service information that contains a terminating action for
the repetitive inspections proposed in the NPRM, but as of yet, has not
been published. UPS stated that suspending the release of the NPRM
would prevent extra work for the FAA and operators.
We disagree with delaying issuance of this final rule until new
service information or a new design becomes available. We consider that
to delay this AD action would be inappropriate, in light of the
identified unsafe condition. When new service information or a new
design becomes available, we may consider additional rulemaking. We may
also consider new service information and/or installation of the new
design struts as an AMOC to this AD. Operators may apply for an AMOC in
accordance with the provisions of paragraph (m)(1) of this AD. We have
not changed this final rule in this regard.
Conclusion
We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD as proposed except for minor editorial changes. We have
determined that these minor changes:
Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51
Airbus has issued the following service information.
Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0394, dated February 14,
2014. This service information describes procedures for reinforcing the
support struts of the THS at frame 91 in the fuselage tail section of
Airbus Model A300 series airplanes.
Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0395, dated February 14,
2014. This service information describes procedures for inspecting for
cracking of the support struts of the THS at frame 91 in the fuselage
tail section of Airbus Model A300 series airplanes.
Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6172, dated February 14,
2014. This service information describes procedures for reinforcing the
support struts of the THS at frame 91 in the fuselage tail section of
Airbus Model A300-600 series airplanes.
Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6174, dated February 14,
2014. This service information describes procedures for inspecting for
cracking of the support struts of the THS at frame 91 in the fuselage
tail section of Airbus Model A300-600 series airplanes.
Airbus Service Bulletin A310-53-2136, dated February 14,
2014. This service information describes procedures for reinforcing the
support struts of the THS at frame 91 in the fuselage tail section of
Airbus Model A310 series airplanes.
Airbus Service Bulletin A310-53-2137, dated February 14,
2014. This service information describes procedures for inspecting for
cracking of the support struts of the THS at frame 91 in the fuselage
tail section of Airbus Model A310 series airplanes.
This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD affects 174 airplanes of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take about 5 work-hours per product
to comply with the basic requirements of this AD, and 1 work-hour per
product for reporting. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
Required parts will cost about $2,100 per product. Based on these
figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. operators to be
$454,140, or $2,610 per product.
In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions will
take about 15 work-hours and require parts costing $10,000, for a cost
of $11,275 per product. We have no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these actions.
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
[[Page 12412]]
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 AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
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);
3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
4. 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.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2015-0243; 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 AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information.
The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
0
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]
0
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
2016-05-05 Airbus: Amendment 39-18423. Docket No. FAA-2015-0243;
Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-114-AD.
(a) Effective Date
This AD becomes effective April 13, 2016.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes specified in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (c)(6) of this AD, certificated in any category, all
manufacturer serial numbers.
(1) Airbus Model A300 B2-1A, B2-1C, B2K-3C, B2-203, B4-2C, B4-
103, and B4-203 airplanes.
(2) Airbus Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, and B4-622
airplanes.
(3) Airbus Model A300 B4-605R and B4-622R airplanes.
(4) Airbus Model A300 F4-605R and F4-622R airplanes.
(5) Airbus Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes.
(6) Airbus Model A310-203, -204, -221, -222, -304, -322, -324,
and -325 airplanes.
(d) Subject
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.
(e) Reason
This AD was prompted by reports of cracked aluminum support
struts of the trimmable horizontal stabilizer (THS) caused by stress
corrosion. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracked THS
support struts, which could lead to the rupture of all four support
struts making the remaining structure unable to carry limit loads,
which could result in loss of the THS and reduced control of the
airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
(g) Inspection for Part Number
For airplanes in pre-modification 06101 configuration: Within 12
months after the effective date of this AD, do an inspection to
identify the part number of each support strut installed on the THS
at frame (FR) 91, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions
of the applicable service bulletin identified in paragraphs (g)(1)
through (g)(3) of this AD. A review of airplane maintenance records
is acceptable in lieu of this inspection, provided those records can
be relied upon for that purpose and the part number can be
positively identified from that review. If no aluminum strut(s)
having part number (P/N) R21449, R21449D, R21449G, or R21449H is
found during any inspection required by this paragraph, no further
action is required by this AD for that horizontal stabilizer, except
for paragraph (l) of this AD.
(1) For Airbus Model A300 series airplanes: Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-0395, dated February 14, 2014.
(2) For Airbus Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series
airplanes, and A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called
Model A300-600 series airplanes): Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-
6174, dated February 14, 2014.
(3) For Airbus Model A310 series airplanes: Airbus Service
Bulletin A310-53-2137, dated February 14, 2014.
(h) Repetitive High Frequency Eddy Current (HFEC) Inspections
For airplanes in post-modification 06101 configuration; and for
airplanes in pre-modification 06101 configuration on which any
aluminum support strut(s) having P/N R21449, P/N R21449D, P/N
R21449G, or P/N R21449H is found: Within the applicable compliance
times specified in paragraph (h)(1), (h)(2), or (h)(3) of this AD,
do an HFEC inspection for cracking of the aluminum THS support strut
ends at FR 91, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
the applicable service bulletin identified in paragraphs (g)(1)
through (g)(3) of this AD. Reinforcing clamps already installed on
strut ends must be removed before accomplishing the HFEC inspection
and re-installed after the inspection, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service bulletin
specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(3) of this AD. Repeat the
inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 24 months.
(1) For airplanes having manufacturer serial number (MSN) 0499
through MSN 0747 inclusive (post-mod 06101): Within 12 months after
the effective date of this AD.
(2) For airplanes having MSN 0748 through MSN 0878 inclusive
(post-mod 06101): Within 18 months after the effective date of this
AD.
(3) For airplanes having MSN 0001 through MSN 0498 inclusive
(pre-mod 06101) having one or more aluminum struts: Within 24 months
after the effective date of this AD.
(i) Installation of Reinforcing Clamps
Concurrently with the initial HFEC inspection required by
paragraph (h) of this AD, identify struts having P/N R21449, P/N
R21449D, P/N R21449G, or P/N R21449H with no reinforcing clamps
previously installed, and before next flight, install reinforcing
clamps on each strut end, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of the applicable service bulletin specified in
paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(3) of this AD.
(1) For Airbus Model A300 series airplanes: Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-0394, dated February 14, 2014.
(2) For Airbus Model A300 B4-600, B4600R, and F4-600R series
airplanes, and A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called
Model A300-600 series airplanes): Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-
6172, dated February 14, 2014.
[[Page 12413]]
(3) For Airbus Model A310 series airplanes: Airbus Service
Bulletin A310-53-2136, dated February 14, 2014.
(j) Corrective Actions
If, during any inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD,
any cracking is found, before further flight, replace the affected
THS support strut(s) with serviceable struts and install clamps on
each strut end, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions
of the applicable service bulletin identified in paragraphs (g)(1)
through (g)(3) of this AD.
(k) Clarification
Installation of reinforcing clamps as required by paragraph (i)
of this AD, and the replacement of support struts and/or the
installation of clamps as required by paragraph (j) of this AD, do
not constitute terminating action for the repetitive inspections
required by paragraph (h) of this AD.
(l) Reporting
At the applicable time specified in paragraphs (l)(1) and (l)(2)
of this AD: After accomplishment of any inspection required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, report all inspection results to Airbus,
including no findings, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of the applicable service bulletins specified in
paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(3) of this AD.
(1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the inspection.
(2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this
AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the effective date of
this AD.
(m) Other FAA AD Provisions
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Dan Rodina,
Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; telephone 425-227-2125; fax 425-227-1149. Information may be
emailed to: 9-ANM-116-AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office. The
AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.
(3) Reporting Requirements: A federal agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a
person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a
collection of information subject to the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information
displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number
for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for
this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 5
minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions,
completing and reviewing the collection of information. All
responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Comments
concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing
the burden should be directed to the FAA at 800 Independence Ave.
SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information Collection Clearance
Officer, AES-200.
(n) Related Information
Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI)
EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0164, dated July 11, 2014, for
related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2015-
0243-0002.
(o) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0394, dated February 14,
2014.
(ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0395, dated February 14,
2014.
(iii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6172, dated February 14,
2014.
(iv) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6174, dated February 14,
2014.
(v) Airbus Service Bulletin A310-53-2136, dated February 14,
2014.
(vi) Airbus Service Bulletin A310-53-2137, dated February 14,
2014.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email account.airworth-eas@airbus.com;
Internet https://www.airbus.com.
(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 23, 2016.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-04545 Filed 3-8-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
