[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 170 (Thursday, September 2, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53658-53661]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-20016]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2002-NM-246-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A330, A340-200, and A340-
300 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking; reopening of 
comment period.

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

SUMMARY: This document revises an earlier proposed airworthiness 
directive (AD), applicable to certain Airbus Model A330, A340-200, and 
A340-300 series airplanes. That proposed AD would have required 
repetitive inspections for evidence of corrosion and sheared attachment 
bolts of the sensor struts at flap track 4 on the left and right sides 
of the airplane; related investigative and corrective actions as 
necessary; and a terminating action for the repetitive inspections, by 
requiring the eventual replacement of all sensor struts with new, 
improved sensor struts that are less sensitive to corrosion. This new 
action revises the proposed AD by changing the threshold for the 
initial inspection and reducing the compliance time for the terminating 
action. The actions specified by this new proposed AD are intended to 
prevent loss of the sensor strut function, resulting in the inability 
to detect flap drive disconnection at flap track stations 4 and 5, 
which could lead to separation of the outboard flap from the airplane, 
and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane. This action is 
intended to address the identified unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by September 27, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, 
Attention: Rules Docket No. 2002-NM-246-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 
Renton, Washington 98055-4056. Comments may be inspected at this 
location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 
Federal holidays. Comments may be submitted via fax to (425) 227-1232. 
Comments may also be sent via the Internet using the following address: 
[email protected]. Comments sent via fax or the Internet must 
contain ``Docket No. 2002-NM-246-AD'' in the subject line and need not 
be submitted in triplicate. Comments sent via the Internet as attached 
electronic files must be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 or 2000 or 
ASCII text.
    The service information referenced in the proposed rule may be 
obtained from Airbus, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac 
Cedex, France. This information may be examined at the FAA, Transport 
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Backman, Aerospace Engineer, 
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 
227-2797; fax (425) 227-1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the 
proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as 
they may desire. Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number 
and be submitted in triplicate to the address specified above. All 
communications received on or before the closing date for comments, 
specified above, will be considered before taking action on the 
proposed rule. The proposals contained in this action may be changed in 
light of the comments received.
    Submit comments using the following format:
     Organize comments issue-by-issue. For example, discuss a 
request to change the compliance time and a request to change the 
service bulletin reference as two separate issues.
     For each issue, state what specific change to the proposed 
AD is being requested.
     Include justification (e.g., reasons or data) for each 
request.
    Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All 
comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing 
date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested 
persons. A report summarizing each FAA-public contact concerned with 
the substance of this proposal will be filed in the Rules Docket.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments 
submitted in response to this action must submit a self-addressed, 
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments 
to Docket Number 2002-NM-246-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped 
and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request 
to the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, Attention: Rules 
Docket No. 2002-NM-246-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 
98055-4056.

Discussion

    A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 
CFR part 39) to add an airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to 
certain Airbus Model A330, A340-200, and A340-300 series airplanes, was 
published as a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal 
Register on March 25, 2004 (69 FR 15268). That NPRM would have required 
repetitive inspections for evidence of corrosion and sheared attachment 
bolts of the sensor struts at flap track 4 on the left and right sides 
of the airplane; related investigative and corrective actions as 
necessary; and a terminating action for the repetitive inspections, by 
requiring the eventual replacement of all sensor struts with new, 
improved sensor struts that are less sensitive to corrosion. That NPRM 
was prompted by reports of corroded sensor struts and sheared 
attachment bolts at flap track 4 on Model A330 series airplanes. That 
condition, if not corrected, could result in loss of the sensor strut 
function, resulting in the inability to detect flap drive disconnection 
at flap track stations 4 and 5, which could lead to separation of the 
outboard flap from the airplane, and consequent reduced controllability 
of the airplane.

Comments

    Due consideration has been given to the comments received from a 
single commenter in response to the original NPRM.

Request To Change Compliance Time for Inspection

    The commenter notes that the French airworthiness directives 
mandate a compliance time prior to the accumulation of 18 months after 
the airplane's entry into service, or within 2,800 flight hours after 
the effective date of the French airworthiness directive, whichever is 
later. The original NPRM

[[Page 53659]]

has a compliance time of within 2,800 flight hours or 18 months after 
the effective date of the AD, whichever is later. The commenter states 
that the compliance time in the original NPRM should be changed to 
match that of the French airworthiness directives.
    We partially agree with the commenter's request to change the 
compliance time. Although the original NPRM referenced ``18 months 
after the effective date of the AD'' instead of ``18 months in 
service,'' this difference does not affect airplanes on the current 
U.S. Registry because all affected N-registered airplanes have already 
been in service for more than 18 months. However, this difference may 
affect airplanes imported into the United States, so the compliance 
time in paragraph (a) of this supplemental NPRM has been changed. 
Because ``18 months after entry into service'' may be interpreted 
differently by each operator, we use the following terminology: 
``Within 18 months since the date of issuance of the original 
Airworthiness Certificate or the date of issuance of the original 
Export Certificate of Airworthiness, whichever occurs first.'' We find 
that this terminology is generally understood within the industry and 
records will always exist that establish these dates with certainty. We 
also added a new grace period of within 6 months after the effective 
date of the AD. As a result of these changes we have moved the 
compliance threshold and grace period for the actions required by 
paragraph (a) to subparagraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), and (a)(3) of this 
supplemental NPRM.

Request To Change Compliance Time for Terminating Action

    The commenter notes that the French airworthiness directives 
specify that the terminating action must be completed before June 30, 
2006. This date is 30 months after the effective dates of the parallel 
French airworthiness directives. The original NPRM has a compliance 
time of 42 months after the effective date of the AD, which will be in 
the year 2007. We infer that the commenter is requesting that the 
compliance time of the original NPRM be changed so it is the same as 
the parallel French airworthiness directives.
    We partially agree with the commenter's request to revise the 
compliance time of the terminating action. The compliance time for this 
supplemental NPRM will be changed to 30 months after the effective date 
of this AD; however, this compliance time will still exceed the June 
30, 2006, date specified in the French airworthiness directives.

Request To Change Applicability Statement

    The commenter, the manufacturer, notes that the appearance of the 
applicability of the original NPRM is different from the parallel 
French airworthiness directives. The French airworthiness directives 
list the affected airplanes by specific model dash numbers (i.e., A330 
aircraft, model -202, -223, -243, -301, etc.) and the original NPRM 
lists the affected airplanes as Airbus Model A330, A340-200, and A340-
300 series airplanes. We infer that the commenter is requesting to 
change the applicability of the original NPRM so it is in the same 
format as the French airworthiness directives.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request to change the 
applicability statement so it is in the same format as the French 
airworthiness directives. To avoid accidentally omitting airplane 
models that are listed on the U.S. type certificate data sheet (TCDS), 
we usually identify airplane series instead of individual model dash 
numbers in the applicability statement of our AD. The U.S. TCDS for the 
Model A330 includes Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, -243, -301, -321, 
-322, -323, -341, -342, and -343 airplanes. The U.S. TCDS for the Model 
A340 includes Model A340-200 series, comprising A340-211, -212, and -
213 airplanes; and Model A340-300 series, comprising A340-311, -312, 
and -313 airplanes. Although the applicability statement of this 
supplemental NPRM does not look the same as the applicability of the 
French airworthiness directives, the applicability of this supplemental 
NPRM includes the same specific model dash numbers and the same 
exceptions as the French airworthiness directives. No change to the 
supplemental NPRM is necessary in this regard.

Request To Include Reporting Information to the Manufacturer

    The commenter states that the original NPRM does not require 
operators to report inspection results to the manufacturer. The 
commenter also states that if an operator reports a structural finding, 
the manufacturer will provide repair information based upon analysis 
performed on data collected from other reports, or will make a specific 
recommendation for that particular finding. This would avoid situations 
where repairs are made outside of the technical responsibility of the 
manufacturer. We infer that the commenter requests that the original 
NPRM include a requirement for operators to report inspection findings 
to the manufacturer.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request to include a reporting 
requirement. The supplemental NPRM requires any cracking or deformation 
to be repaired prior to further flight in a manner approved by the FAA 
or the Direction G[eacute]n[eacute]rale de l'Aviation Civile, the 
airworthiness authority for France (or its delegated agent). Operators 
do not need to report findings to the manufacturer in order to obtain 
repair information. No change to the supplemental NPRM is necessary.

Change to Supplemental NPRM

    The applicability statement of this supplemental NPRM has been 
changed to delete the exclusion of airplanes that have accomplished 
certain Airbus service bulletins. The applicability of the original 
NPRM excluded airplanes that accomplished Airbus Service Bulletin A330-
27-3092, dated February 14, 2003, in-service; or Airbus Service 
Bulletin A340-27-4098, dated February 14, 2004, in-service. We have not 
excluded those airplanes in the applicability of this supplemental 
NPRM. Paragraph (d) of this supplemental NPRM would require 
accomplishment of the actions specified in those service bulletins, 
unless the actions were accomplished previously. This would ensure that 
the actions are accomplished on all affected airplanes. Operators must 
continue to operate airplanes in the configuration required by this 
supplemental NPRM unless an alternative method of compliance is 
approved.

Conclusion

    Since certain changes expand the scope of the originally proposed 
rule, the FAA has determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment 
period to provide additional opportunity for public comment.

Cost Impact

    We estimate that approximately 9 Airbus Model A330 airplanes of 
U.S. registry would be affected by this proposed AD.
    It would take approximately 1 work hour per airplane to accomplish 
the proposed repetitive inspections, at an average labor rate of $65 
per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the proposed 
inspections on U.S. operators is estimated to be $585, or $65 per 
airplane, per inspection cycle.
    If required, replacement of discrepant sensor struts and attachment 
bolts would take approximately 3 work hours, at an average labor rate 
of $65 per work hour. The cost for required parts would be nominal. 
Based on these figures, the cost impact of the proposed replacement

[[Page 53660]]

of sensor struts would be $195 per airplane.
    It would take approximately 2 work hours to accomplish the proposed 
installation of the new, improved sensor struts, at an average labor 
rate of $65 per work hour. The cost of required parts would be $8,400. 
Based on these figures, the cost impact of the proposed installation on 
U.S. operators is estimated to be $76,770, or $8,530 per airplane.
    The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions 
that no operator has yet accomplished any of the proposed 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.
    Currently, there are no Airbus Model A340 series airplanes on the 
U.S. Register. However, should an affected airplane be imported and 
placed on the U.S. Register in the future, it would take approximately 
1 work hour per airplane to accomplish the inspection, at an average 
labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost 
impact of the proposed inspections for Model A340 operators would be 
$65 per airplane, per inspection cycle.
    Should an Airbus Model A340 series airplane be imported and placed 
on the U.S. Register in the future and have affected sensor struts and 
attachment bolts replaced, it would take approximately 3 work hours, at 
an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. The cost for required parts 
would be nominal. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the 
replacement of sensor struts for Model A340 operators would be $195 per 
airplane.
    Should an Airbus Model A340 series airplane be imported and placed 
on the U.S. Register in the future and have new, improved sensor struts 
installed, it would take approximately 2 work hours, at an average 
labor rate of $65 per work hour. The cost for required parts would be 
$8,400. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the proposed 
installation for Model A340 operators would be $8,530 per airplane.

Regulatory Impact

    The regulations proposed herein would not have a substantial direct 
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national 
Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, it 
is determined that this proposal would not have federalism implications 
under Executive Order 13132.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this proposed 
regulation (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 
and (3) if promulgated, 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 copy of the draft 
regulatory evaluation prepared for this action is contained in the 
Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by contacting 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.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 
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:

    Airbus: Docket 2002-NM-246-AD.

    Applicability: Model A330 series airplanes; and Model A340-200 
and A340-300 series airplanes; certificated in any category; except 
those airplanes on which Airbus Modification 48579 was incorporated 
in production.
    Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished 
previously.
    To prevent loss of the sensor strut function, resulting in the 
inability to detect flap drive disconnection at flap track stations 
4 and 5, which could lead to separation of the outboard flap from 
the airplane, and consequent reduced controllability of the 
airplane, accomplish the following:

Inspection

    (a) At the latest of the times specified in paragraphs (a)(1), 
(a)(2), and (a)(3) of this AD: Do an inspection, by applying hand 
force to the piston of the sensor struts and moving the sensor 
struts longitudinally, for evidence of corrosion in the sensor 
struts at flap track 4, on the left and right sides of the airplane, 
by doing all the applicable actions specified in the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3091, Revision 03 
(for Model A330 series airplanes); or Service Bulletin A340-27-4097, 
Revision 03 (for Model A340-200 and -300 series airplanes); both 
dated January 16, 2004; as applicable. If the longitudinal travel 
range is 60.0mm (2.36 inches) or more: Repeat the inspection 
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 18 months, until the 
requirements of paragraph (d) of this AD are accomplished.
    (1) Within 18 months since the date of issuance of the original 
Airworthiness Certificate or the date of issuance of the original 
Export Certificate of Airworthiness, whichever occurs first.
    (2) Within 2,800 flight hours after the effective date of this 
AD.
    (3) Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD.

Related Investigative and Corrective Actions

    (b) If the result of the inspection required by paragraph (a) of 
this AD is a longitudinal travel range of less than 60.0mm (2.36 
inches): Before further flight, remove all affected sensor struts, 
and measure the axial force of any affected sensor struts, by doing 
all of the applicable actions per the Accomplishment Instructions of 
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3091, Revision 03 (for Model A330 
series airplanes); or Service Bulletin A340-27-4097, Revision 03 
(for Model A340-200 and -300 series airplanes); both dated January 
16, 2004; as applicable.
    (1) If the axial force F is less than or equal to 50 daN (112.41 
lbf.): Clean and re-install the sensor struts per the Accomplishment 
Instructions of the applicable service bulletin. Repeat the 
inspection required by paragraph (a) of this AD thereafter at 
intervals not to exceed 18 months, until the requirements of 
paragraph (d) of this AD are accomplished.
    (2) If the axial force F is more than 50 daN (112.41 lbf.): 
Before further flight, do a detailed inspection for cracking and/or 
deformation of the adjacent structure and attachment parts per the 
Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service bulletin.
    (i) If no cracking and/or deformation is found: Within 25 flight 
cycles after the inspection required by paragraph (b) of this AD, 
replace the sensor struts and attachment bolts per the 
Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service bulletin. 
Repeat the inspection required by paragraph (a) of this AD 
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 18 months, until the 
requirements of paragraph (d) of this AD are accomplished.
    (ii) If any cracking and/or deformation is found: Before further 
flight, repair any cracked or deformed structure and attachment 
parts per a method approved by either the Manager, International 
Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate; or the 
Direction G[eacute]n[eacute]rale de l'Aviation Civile (or its 
delegated agent); and replace the sensor struts and attachment bolts 
per the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service 
bulletin. Repeat the inspection required by paragraph (a) of this

[[Page 53661]]

AD thereafter at intervals not to exceed 18 months, until the 
requirements of paragraph (d) of this AD are accomplished.

    Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed 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.''

Concurrent Requirements

    (c) The actions required by paragraphs (a) and (b) of this AD 
must be done before or concurrently with the requirements of 
paragraph (d) of this AD. Replacement of any sensor strut with a 
sensor strut having part number (P/N) F5757492600000, during 
accomplishment of paragraph (b) of this AD, is acceptable for 
compliance with paragraph (d) of this AD, for that strut.

Terminating Action

    (d) Within 30 months after the effective date of this AD: 
Replace all existing sensor struts with new, improved sensor struts 
having P/N F5757492600000 per the Accomplishment Instructions of 
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3092 (for Model A330 series 
airplanes); or A340-27-4098 (for Model A340-200 and -300 series 
airplanes); both dated February 14, 2003; as applicable. 
Accomplishment of this replacement constitutes terminating action 
for the repetitive inspections required by paragraphs (a) and (b) of 
this AD.

Actions Done per Previous Issue of Service Bulletins

    (e) Accomplishment of the specified actions before the effective 
date of this AD per Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3091, dated 
February 2, 2002, Revision 01, dated May 17, 2002, or Revision 02, 
dated September 5, 2002; or A340-27-4097, dated February 6, 2002, 
Revision 01, dated May 17, 2002, or Revision 02, dated September 5, 
2002; as applicable; is considered acceptable for compliance with 
the applicable requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this AD.

Submission of Information Not Required

    (f) Although the service bulletins specify to send inspection 
results to the manufacturer, that action is not required by this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (g) In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, the Manager, International 
Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, is authorized 
to approve alternative methods of compliance for this AD.

    Note 2: The subject of this AD is addressed in French 
airworthiness directives F-2003-425 and F-2003-426, both dated 
December 10, 2003.


    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 20, 2004.
Kevin M. Mullin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 04-20016 Filed 9-1-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P