Historic Preservation, Advisory Council January 28, 2016 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Airbus Model A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report that a main landing gear (MLG) door could not be closed due to rupture of the actuator fitting. Later reports indicated that the forward monoblock fitting of the MLG door actuator (referred to as the nerve area) could be damaged after rupture of the actuator fitting. This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections of the MLG door actuator fitting and its components for cracking, and corrective actions if necessary. This proposed AD would also require eventual replacement of all affected MLG door actuator fittings with new monoblock fittings, which would terminate the repetitive inspections. We are proposing this AD to prevent rupture of the door actuator fittings, which could result in detachment of an MLG door and subsequent exterior damage and consequent reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

This action modifies Class D airspace, Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface, and removes Class E surface area airspace designated as an extension at Chico Municipal Airport, Chico, CA. The FAA found it necessary to amend the airspace area by increasing the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface for the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations for arriving and departing aircraft at the airport. The FAA found no standard instrument approach procedures requiring Class E surface area airspace designated as an extension to Class D airspace. This action changes from navigation aids to geographic coordinate references in the legal description and updates the geographic coordinates of Chico Municipal and Ranchaero Airports for the Class D and E airspace areas noted above.

We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 96-18-06 for certain Airbus Model A320-211 and -231 airplanes. AD 96-18-06 required visual inspections to detect cracks of the pressurized floor fittings at frame 36, and renewal of the zone protective finish or replacement of fittings with new fittings if necessary. Since we issued AD 96-18- 06, an extended service goal analysis by the manufacturer revealed that the compliance times and repetitive inspection intervals should be reduced to meet the design service goal. This AD retains the requirements of AD 96-18-06, with reduced compliance times and repetitive inspection intervals. This AD also adds Model A320-212 airplanes to the applicability. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking in the pressurized floor fittings at frame 36, which could result in failure of a floor fitting and subsequent depressurization of the fuselage.