[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 233 (Monday, December 4, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 75591-75595]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-30394]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000-NM-227-AD; Amendment 39-12015; AD 2000-24-08]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A319, A320, and A321 
Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

[[Page 75592]]


ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), 
applicable to all Airbus Model A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes, 
that requires a revision to the Airplane Flight Manual; inspection to 
detect damage of the wiring and adjacent structure along the length of 
the fairing of the fuel boost pump; corrective actions, if necessary; 
and modification of the fuel pump wire and fairing. The actions 
specified by this AD are intended to prevent electrical arcing of the 
fuel boost pump wire, which could result in wing structural damage, 
fire, and/or fuel vapor explosion. This action is intended to address 
the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Effective January 8, 2001.

ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be 
obtained from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 
Blagnac Cedex, France. This information may be examined at the Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 
Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Dulin, Aerospace Engineer, ANM-
116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 
Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 227-2141; fax (425) 227-
1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal 
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness 
directive (AD) that is applicable to all Airbus Model A319, A320, and 
A321 series airplanes was published in the Federal Register on August 
24, 2000 (65 FR 51560). That action proposed to require a revision to 
the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM); inspection to detect damage of the 
wiring and adjacent structure along the length of the fairing of the 
fuel boost pump; corrective actions, if necessary; and modification of 
the fuel pump wire and fairing.

Action Since the Issuance of Proposed AD

    The Direction Generale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC), which is the 
airworthiness authority for France, has issued French airworthiness 
directive 2000-419-154(B), dated October 4, 2000. That airworthiness 
directive includes a procedure for revising the AFM. In addition, if a 
fuel boost pump malfunctions, airworthiness directive procedures 
specify removing the wiring fairing to inspect the electrical wiring, 
fairing, and wing skin within the fairing area; and corrective actions, 
if necessary. Procedures also include a reporting requirement.

Comments

    Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate 
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to 
the comments received.
    One commenter supports the AFM revision specified by the proposed 
AD.

Request To Delete the Inspection Requirement

    Five commenters request deleting the requirement in paragraph (b) 
of the proposed AD, which specifies an inspection of the wiring and 
adjacent structure along the length of the fairing. All of the 
commenters are concerned that the inspection could induce more damage, 
even if operators exercise caution as recommended in the proposed AD.
    One commenter states that in-service experience indicates that 
arcing of the underwing fuel pump wiring is mainly linked to poor 
maintenance action rather than to damage due to vibration and chafing. 
That commenter considers that most of the damage has occurred during 
fairing replacement when the fuel boost pump wire can be pinched and 
damaged. A second commenter concurs and suggests that the inspection 
specified in paragraph (b) be included in paragraph (c) of this AD, in 
case a circuit breaker tripped. A third commenter considers that 
removing the fairing is unnecessary, and that such action may cause 
needless damage to the wiring upon re-installation. In addition, the 
design of the system is such that, if a wire is trapped, the circuit 
breaker will trip and avert danger. A fourth commenter considers that 
the inspection increases the probability of inducing a fault despite 
heightened awareness, and that the inspection should be required only 
when terminating action is identified and applied before reinstalling 
the fairing. A fifth commenter notes that, if a fuel pump circuit 
breaker trips, a full inspection of the wiring underneath the fairing 
is required prior to further use of that pump. Further, that 
requirement should be enough to remove the need for the inspection 
specified by the proposed AD.
    The FAA does not concur that the detailed visual inspection in 
paragraph (b) of the proposed AD should be deleted. We consider that 
the benefit from the one-time inspection outweighs the risk of wire 
damage during reassembly of the fairing. We have received reports of 
damaged wiring and arcing to the fuselage skin on in-service and newly 
manufactured airplanes, which indicate that additional airplanes may 
have pre-existing wire damage. In addition, we have found that 
intermittent arcing, which gradually eroded the adjacent aluminum 
structure and penetrated into the fuel tank, has occurred on other 
model airplanes without tripping the circuit breaker. Therefore, the 
possibility that such arcing damage could result in fuel leaking on top 
of the arcing wire justifies the one-time inspection.
    We do not agree that the inspection increases the probability of 
inducing damage. We point out that the original fairing installations 
were done without any installation precautions. However, to ensure that 
wiring damage is not induced during replacement action, we included 
specific instructions cautioning operators to take special care when 
replacing the fairing. Those instructions, which were added to 
paragraph (b) of the proposed AD, make it unlikely that improper 
installation of the fairing will occur.
    For these reasons, we consider that the one-time detailed visual 
inspection required by paragraph (b) of this AD is needed to ensure 
that no critical condition exists in the fleet. Paragraph (b) has not 
been deleted in the final rule.

Requests To Specify a Difference Regarding the Inspection 
Requirement

    Two commenters state that, although the proposed AD specifies a 
one-time inspection (of all Model A319, A320, and A321 series 
airplanes), the previously referenced French airworthiness directive 
does not specify such an inspection. This difference should be included 
in the final rule so that other Civil Aviation Authorities can decide 
on the corrective actions they consider appropriate, and so that any 
confusion for the operators is avoided.
    We concur with the request to specify this difference in the final 
rule. Note 4 of the final rule includes a statement that notifies 
operators of the difference between this AD and the French 
airworthiness directive.

Request To Add a Reference to an Airplane Flight Manual (AFM)

    One commenter requests adding a reference to the DGAC-approved AFM 
Temporary Revision (TR) 2.05.00/31 in paragraph (a) of the proposed AD 
as a means of compliance. That TR includes the same basic requirements 
defined in paragraph (a) of the proposed AD.
    We concur with this request, and agree that the TR includes the 
same basic requirements defined in paragraph (a) of the proposed AD. 
Paragraph (a) of the final rule now states that ``This may

[[Page 75593]]

be accomplished by inserting a copy of this AD or Airbus Temporary 
Revision 2.04.00/31 into the AFM.''

Requests To Delete the Modification Requirement

    Two commenters request deleting the modification requirement 
specified by paragraph (e) of the proposed AD. One commenter states 
that a final fix is being developed and should be available by the end 
of this year. When the final fix is available, a new AD should be 
issued to mandate the modification. Another commenter considers that 
the modification should be required within 18 months after the 
modification is made available. However, since the modification is not 
currently available, that requirement should be removed from the AD.
    We partially concur with the requests regarding the modification 
requirement in paragraph (e) of the proposed AD. Although a final 
modification has not been completely defined, we consider it imperative 
to speed up the development and installation of a modification to 
prevent any chance of the wires being damaged either during removal and 
replacement of the fairing, or due to vibration while the airplane is 
in service. We have determined that allowing an additional 6 months for 
development and testing of the modification is appropriate to ensure 
that the modification is effective and to allow enough time for 
incorporating the modification on in-service airplanes. The compliance 
time for the modification is extended from 18 to 24 months in paragraph 
(e) of the final rule.

Request To Revise the Cost Estimate

    The Air Transport Association (ATA) of America, on behalf of one of 
its members, states that re-installation of the fairing, per the 
``Installation of Fuel Pump Fairing'' section of Airbus Airplane 
Maintenance Manual (AMM) Task 28-21-49-400-001, requires the use of a 
sealant with a cure time of up to 16 hours. The commenter adds that the 
sealant curing process will have a severe economic impact on the 
airlines, which does not appear to be addressed in the Cost Impact 
paragraph of the NPRM.
    We infer that the commenter requests a revision of the cost 
estimate in the proposed AD, but we do not concur that a revision to 
the cost estimate is necessary. While we agree that the previously 
referenced AMM specifies the use of sealant to reassemble the front 
fairing and cover plate, upon further review we have determined that it 
is not necessary to remove the front fairing and cover plate to inspect 
the portion of the wiring where damage has been found. Therefore, we 
have revised paragraph (b) in the final rule to require removal of only 
the ``rear and intermediate'' fairing. With this change, there is no 
requirement to apply sealant during accomplishment of the action 
required by paragraph (b) of this AD. No change to the cost estimate 
was made in the final rule.

Request To Delete Paragraph (c)

    One commenter requests that paragraph (c) of the proposed AD be 
deleted from the final rule. The airplane trouble-shooting manual (TSM) 
addresses what to do when a circuit breaker trips and includes 
procedures for checking the wiring, if necessary. The commenter adds 
that mandating the removal of the fairing to check the wiring when it 
is unnecessary may induce problems. In the past, the TSM procedure has 
been used to effectively locate any arcing of the pump wiring.
    We do not concur that paragraph (c) should be deleted from this AD. 
While we agree that the TSM includes a procedure for checking the 
continuity of the wire, the check may not detect an exposed wire 
condition. In addition, there have been cases where the wire was not 
inspected and was later found to be damaged. Therefore, we consider 
that an inspection to determine the condition of the wire is necessary 
to ensure that no arcing condition exists. Paragraph (c) was not 
deleted in the final rule.

Request To Revise the Repair Requirements

    One commenter recommends revising paragraph (b)(2) of the proposed 
AD to include a reference to the Airbus Standard Repair Manual (SRM), 
and points out that paragraph (b)(1) of the proposed AD references 
standard practices of the manufacturer's Aircraft Wiring Manual. The 
commenter notes that, if any damage beyond SRM limits is found, [the 
commenter's] procedures specify seeking FAA or DGAC repair approval for 
structures that are the subject of AD's.
    We concur with the request to revise the repair requirements. 
Because the SRM is approved by the DGAC, it may be used as the approved 
data source to repair any damage that does not exceed the limits 
specified in the SRM. We have revised paragraph (b)(2) in the final 
rule to include the SRM as another approved method for repairing the 
airplane structure.

Explanation of Change Made to Proposal

    We have clarified the inspection requirement contained in the 
proposed AD.
    Although NOTE 2 in the proposal specified a detailed inspection, we 
have revised this final rule to clarify that its intent is to require a 
detailed visual inspection. NOTE 2 of the final rule has been changed 
accordingly.

Editorial Changes to the Final Rule

    Airbus advises that the circuit breakers for the wing fuel tank 
pump are designated as 1QA, 2QA, 7QA, and 8QA. We have added these 
circuit breaker designators to paragraph (a) of the final rule.
    Airbus also advises that the Aircraft Wiring Manual (AWM), Standard 
Practices, Chapter 20, includes procedures for repairing damaged wire. 
As a result of this information, we have added repair to the existing 
replacement action as another method of compliance in paragraph (b)(1) 
of the final rule. We have determined that this change will neither 
increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of 
the AD. This change provides operators with an option to either repair 
or replace the wire per the AWM.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the available data, including the comments 
noted above, we have determined that air safety and the public interest 
require the adoption of the rule with the changes described previously. 
These changes will neither increase the economic burden on any operator 
nor increase the scope of the AD.

Cost Impact

    We estimate that 306 Model A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes of 
U.S. registry will be affected by this AD.
    It will take approximately 1 work hour per airplane to accomplish 
the required AFM revision, at an average labor rate of $60 per work 
hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the AFM revision on 
U.S. operators is estimated to be $18,360, or $60 per airplane.
    It will take approximately 2 work hours per airplane to accomplish 
the required inspection (including time to remove the fairing), at an 
average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the 
cost impact of the wiring inspection on U.S. operators is estimated to 
be $36,720, or $120 per airplane.
    Since the manufacturer has not yet developed a modification 
commensurate with the requirements of

[[Page 75594]]

this AD, we are unable at this time to provide specific information as 
to the number of work hours or cost of parts that will be required to 
accomplish the modification. The compliance time of 24 months should 
provide ample time for the development, approval, and installation of 
an appropriate modification.
    The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions 
that no operator has yet accomplished any of the requirements of this 
AD action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in the 
future if this AD were not adopted. The cost impact figures discussed 
in AD rulemaking actions represent only the time necessary to perform 
the specific actions actually required by the AD. These figures 
typically do not include incidental costs, such as the time required to 
gain access and close up, planning time, or time necessitated by other 
administrative actions.

Regulatory Impact

    The regulations adopted herein 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. Therefore, it 
is determined that this final rule does not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (1) is 
not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; 
(2) is not a ``significant rule'' under 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. A final evaluation has been prepared for this action 
and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained 
from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption 
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of 
the Federal Aviation Regulations (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. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new 
airworthiness directive:

2000-24-08  Airbus Industrie: Amendment 39-12015. Docket 2000-NM-
227-AD.

    Applicability: All Model A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes; 
certificated in any category.

    Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the 
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been 
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the 
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified, 
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of 
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an 
alternative method of compliance per paragraph (f) of this AD. The 
request should include an assessment of the effect of the 
modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition 
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been 
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to 
address it.

    Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished 
previously.
    To prevent electrical arcing of the fuel boost pump wire, which 
could result in wing structural damage, or fire and/or fuel vapor 
explosion, accomplish the following:

Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) Revision

    (a) Within 10 days after the effective date of this AD, revise 
the Limitations Section of the FAA-approved AFM to include the 
following which may be accomplished by inserting a copy of this AD 
or Airbus Temporary Revision 2.04.00/31 into the AFM:

``FUEL SYSTEM
If circuit breaker 1QA, 2QA, 7QA, and 8QA for any wing tank fuel 
boost pump is tripped, do not reset.''

Inspection

    (b) Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD: For each 
fuel boost pump, remove the rear and intermediate fairings located 
on the lower wing skin and perform a detailed visual inspection of 
the wiring and the adjacent structure along the length of the 
fairings. Inspect to detect damage to the wires including chafed, 
pinched, or melted wires, and any signs of arcing damage to the 
structure. When replacing the fairing following the inspection, take 
care not to pinch or otherwise damage the wiring of the fuel boost 
pumps; incorrect replacement of the fairing could cause damage to 
the wiring.
    (1) If any damage to the wire, as described in paragraph (b) of 
this AD, is detected: Prior to further flight, either repair the 
wire or replace the wire with new wire per the manufacturer's 
Aircraft Wiring Manual, Standard Practices, Chapter 20. Submit a 
report at the time specified and per paragraph (d) of this AD.
    (2) If any arcing damage to the structure is detected: Prior to 
further flight, repair the damaged structure per the airplane 
Structural Repair Manual or a method approved by either the Manager, 
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate; 
or the Direction Generale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC), which is the 
airworthiness authority for France (or its delegated agent). For a 
repair method to be approved by the Manager, International Branch, 
ANM-116, as required by this paragraph, the Manager's approval 
letter must specifically reference this AD. Submit a report at the 
time specified and per paragraph (d) of this AD.

    Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed visual 
inspection is defined as: ``An intensive visual examination of a 
specific structural area, system, installation, or assembly to 
detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available lighting is 
normally supplemented with a direct source of good lighting at 
intensity deemed appropriate by the inspector. Inspection aids such 
as mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface cleaning 
and elaborate access procedures may be required.''

    (c) As of the effective date of this AD: For any fuel boost pump 
on which circuit breaker 1QA, 2QA, 7QA, and 8QA of the pump has 
tripped, prior to further use of that pump, accomplish the 
inspection and applicable corrective actions specified by paragraph 
(b) of this AD.

Reporting Requirement

    (d) If any damage is detected during any inspection required by 
paragraphs (b) and (c) of this AD: Within 10 days after 
accomplishing that inspection, submit a report of the inspection 
findings to the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, 
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 
Washington 98055-4056; fax (425) 227-1149. The report must include a 
description of the damage found, the airplane serial number, and the 
number of landings and flight hours on the airplane. Information 
collection requirements contained in this regulation have been 
approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq.) and have been assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Modification

    (e) Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD: Modify 
the fuel pump wire and fairing, per a method approved by the 
Manager, International Branch, ANM-116.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (f) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the 
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be 
used if approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116. 
Operators shall submit their requests through an appropriate FAA 
Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send 
it to the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116.


[[Page 75595]]


    Note 3: Information concerning the existence of approved 
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be 
obtained from the International Branch, ANM-116.

Special Flight Permits

    (g) Special flight permits may be issued per sections 21.197 and 
21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and 
21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where the requirements 
of this AD can be accomplished.

    Note 4: The subject of this AD is addressed in French 
airworthiness directive 2000-419-154(B), dated October 4, 2000. 
Operators should note that, although this AD requires a one-time 
detailed visual inspection, the French airworthiness directive does 
not mandate such an inspection.

Effective Date

    (h) This amendment becomes effective on January 8, 2001.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 22, 2000.
Donald L. Riggin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 00-30394 Filed 12-1-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P