[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 104 (Tuesday, June 2, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26312-26315]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-12740]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0465; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-244-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310-203, -204, -221, -
222, -304, -322, -324, and -325 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the 
products listed above that would supersede an existing AD. This 
proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information 
(MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to 
identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The 
MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    DGAC [Direction G[eacute]n[eacute]rale de l'Aviation Civile] 
France issued AD F-2005-078 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2006-02-06] 
to require the modification (Airbus modification 13023), defined in 
Airbus SB [service bulletin] A310-53-2124, to increase the service 
life of junctions of center box upper frame bases to upper fuselage 
arches. This structural modification falls within the scope of the 
work related to the extension of the service life of A310 aircraft 
and widespread fatigue damage evaluations.
    The threshold timescales for accomplishment of the tasks as 
defined in SB A310-53-2124 were refined and reduced. * * *
* * * * *
    The unsafe condition is fatigue cracking of the frame foot run-
outs, which could lead to rupture of the frame foot and cracking in 
adjacent frames and skin, and which could result in reduced structural 
integrity of the fuselage. The proposed AD would require actions that 
are intended to address the unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 2, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax: (202) 493-2251.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact 
Airbus SAS--EAW (Airworthiness Office), 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 
31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 
93 44 51; e-mail: [email protected]; Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may review copies of the referenced service 
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind 
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the availability of 
this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221 or 425-227-1152.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office 
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed 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. Comments will be available in the AD docket 
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Stafford, Aerospace Engineer, 
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 
227-1622; fax (425) 227-1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or 
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address 
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2009-0465; 
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-244-AD'' at the beginning of your 
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We 
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend 
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We 
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we 
receive about this proposed AD.

[[Page 26313]]

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical 
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA 
Airworthiness Directive 2008-0212, dated December 4, 2008 (referred to 
after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the 
specified products. The MCAI states:

    DGAC [Direction G[eacute]n[eacute]rale de l'Aviation Civile] 
France issued AD F-2005-078 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2006-02-06, 
Amendment 39-14458, 71 FR 3214, January 20, 2006] to require the 
modification (Airbus modification 13023), defined in Airbus SB 
[service bulletin] A310-53-2124, to increase the service life of 
junctions of center box upper frame bases to upper fuselage arches. 
This structural modification falls within the scope of the work 
related to the extension of the service life of A310 aircraft and 
widespread fatigue damage evaluations.
    The threshold timescales for accomplishment of the tasks as 
defined in SB A310-53-2124 were refined and reduced. Consequently, 
EASA issued AD 2007-0238 to require compliance with Revision 1 of SB 
A310-53-2124 at the reduced compliance times, superseding (the 
requirements of) DGAC France AD F-2005-078. Subsequently, Airbus 
identified reference material that was erroneously introduced into 
Airbus SB A310-53-2124 Revision 1. As a result, the SB instructions 
could not be accomplished properly. Operators that tried to apply SB 
A310-53-2124 at Revision 1 had to contact Airbus; see also Airbus 
SBIT [service bulletin information telex] ref. 914.0135/08, dated 03 
March 2008.
    Consequently, AD 2007-0238 was revised to exclude reference to 
Airbus SB A310-53-2124 Revision 1 and to require accomplishment of 
the task(s) as described in the original SB A310-53-2124 instead, 
although retaining the reduced compliance times introduced by AD 
2007-0238 at original issue. This new [EASA] AD is published to 
refer to Airbus SB A310-53-2124 Revision 02, the corrected version 
that is to be used to meet the requirements of this AD.

    The unsafe condition is fatigue cracking of the frame foot run-
outs, which could lead to rupture of the frame foot and cracking in 
adjacent frames and skin, and which could result in reduced structural 
integrity of the fuselage. You may obtain further information by 
examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Airbus has issued Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-53-2124, Revision 
02, dated May 22, 2008. The actions described in this service 
information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in 
the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another 
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant 
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have 
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service 
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we 
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition 
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same 
type design.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in 
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it 
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the 
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these 
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information 
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those 
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are 
highlighted in Note within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD 
would affect about 68 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that 
it would take about 41 work-hours per product to comply with the basic 
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per 
work-hour. Required parts would cost about $4,400 per product. Where 
the service information lists required parts costs that are covered 
under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these 
costs. As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties, 
some parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these 
figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to 
be $522,240, or $7,680 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to 
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the 
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation 
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's 
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in 
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General 
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with 
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing 
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator 
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within 
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition 
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this 
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify 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. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or 
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria 
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to 
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by 
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.


Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Amendment 39-14458 (71 FR 
3214, January 20, 2006) and adding the following new AD:

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2009-0465; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-
244-AD.

[[Page 26314]]

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by July 2, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) The proposed AD supersedes AD 2006-02-06, Amendment 39-
14458.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Airbus Models A310-203, -204, -221, -222, 
-304, -322, -324 and -325 airplanes; all serial numbers; 
certificated in any category; except those airplanes on which Airbus 
Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-53-2124, dated April 4, 2005, has 
been accomplished, or Airbus Modification 13023 has been 
accomplished in production.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53: 
Fuselage.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) 
states:
    DGAC [Direction G[eacute]n[eacute]rale de l'Aviation Civile] 
France issued AD F-2005-078 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2006-02-06, 
Amendment 39-14458, 71 FR 3214, January 20, 2006] to require the 
modification (Airbus modification 13023), defined in Airbus SB 
[service bulletin] A310-53-2124, to increase the service life of 
junctions of center box upper frame bases to upper fuselage arches. 
This structural modification falls within the scope of the work 
related to the extension of the service life of A310 aircraft and 
widespread fatigue damage evaluations.
    The threshold timescales for accomplishment of the tasks as 
defined in SB A310-53-2124 were refined and reduced. Consequently, 
EASA issued AD 2007-0238 to require compliance with Revision 1 of SB 
A310-53-2124 at the reduced compliance times, superseding (the 
requirements of) DGAC France AD F-2005-078. Subsequently, Airbus 
identified reference material that was erroneously introduced into 
Airbus SB A310-53-2124 Revision 1. As a result, the SB instructions 
could not be accomplished properly. Operators that tried to apply SB 
A310-53-2124 at Revision 1 had to contact Airbus; see also Airbus 
SBIT [service bulletin information telex] ref. 914.0135/08, dated 03 
March 2008.
    Consequently, AD 2007-0238 was revised to exclude reference to 
Airbus SB A310-53-2124 Revision 1 and to require accomplishment of 
the task(s) as described in the original SB A310-53-2124 instead, 
although retaining the reduced compliance times introduced by AD 
2007-0238 at original issue. This new [EASA] AD is published to 
refer to Airbus SB A310-53-2124 Revision 02, the corrected version 
that is to be used to meet the requirements of this AD.
    The unsafe condition is fatigue cracking of the frame foot run-
outs, which could lead to rupture of the frame foot and cracking in 
adjacent frames and skin, and which could result in reduced 
structural integrity of the fuselage.

New Requirements of This AD: Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) Except for airplanes identified in paragraph (f)(2) of this 
AD, at the later of the times specified in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and 
(f)(1)(ii) of this AD, accomplish inspections by rotating probe for 
cracking of holes H1 through H29 on FR 43 through 46 inclusive, and 
inspections of holes H1 through H29 on FR 43 through 46 inclusive to 
determine the edge distance of the hole, in accordance with the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 
A310-53-2124, Revision 02, dated May 22, 2008 (``the service 
bulletin''). If no cracking is found and the edge distance is equal 
to or greater than the distance specified in the Accomplishment 
Instructions of the service bulletin, before further flight, do the 
cold expansion of the most fatigue sensitive fastener holes, as 
identified in the service bulletin.
    (i) Inspect at the applicable time indicated in Table 1 of this 
AD. Airbus Model A310-304, -322, -324, and -325 airplanes with an 
average flight time (AFT) equal to or less than 3.17 flight hours 
are short range airplanes. Airbus Model A310-304, -322, -324, and -
325 with an AFT exceeding 3.17 flight hours are long range 
airplanes.
    (ii) Within 500 flight cycles or 800 flight hours after the 
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.

                        Table 1--Compliance Times
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Affected airplanes           Inspection modification threshold,
                                         whichever occurs later
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model A310-304, -322, -324    Prior to              Within 3,000 flight
 and -325 short range          accumulation of       cycles after the
 airplanes.                    26,500 flight         effective date of
                               cycles or 74,300      this AD, without
                               flight hours since    exceeding 29,200
                               first flight of the   flight cycles or
                               airplane, whichever   81,800 flight hours
                               occurs first.         since first flight,
                                                     whichever occurs
                                                     first.
Model A310-304, -322, -324    Prior to              Within 3,000 flight
 and -325 long range           accumulation of       cycles after the
 airplanes.                    23,400 flight         effective date of
                               cycles or 117,100     this AD, without
                               flight hours since    exceeding 25,800
                               first flight of the   flight cycles or
                               airplane, whichever   129,000 flight
                               occurs first.         hours since first
                                                     flight, whichever
                                                     occurs first.
Model A310-203, -204, -221,   Prior to              Within 3,000 flight
 and A310-222.                 accumulation of       cycles after the
                               23,400 flight         effective date of
                               cycles or 46,800      this AD, without
                               flight hours since    exceeding 28,800
                               first flight of the   flight cycles or
                               airplane, whichever   57,700 flight hours
                               occurs first.         since first flight,
                                                     whichever occurs
                                                     first.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Note 1:  To establish the average flight time, take the 
accumulated flight time (counted from the take-off up to the 
landing) and divide by the number of accumulated flight cycles. This 
gives the average flight time per flight cycle.

    (2) For airplanes that have been modified before the effective 
date of this AD in accordance with Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 
A310-53-2124, Revision 01, dated May 3, 2007: Within 500 flight 
cycles or 800 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, 
whichever occurs first, contact Airbus and follow their corrective 
actions.
    (3) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of 
this AD, any cracking is found or if the edge distance is less than 
the distance specified in Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-53-
2124, Revision 02, dated May 22, 2008, before further flight, 
contact Airbus and follow their corrective actions.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 2:  This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service 
information as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, 
International Branch, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the 
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the 
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Tom 
Stafford, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, 
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 
Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 227-1622; fax (425) 227-1149. 
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC 
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or 
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a 
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office. 
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain 
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these 
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered 
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority 
(or their delegated agent). You are required

[[Page 26315]]

to assure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in 
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information 
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI European Union Airworthiness Directive 2008-
0212, dated December 4, 2008; and Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 
A310-53-2124, Revision 02, dated May 22, 2008; for related 
information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 15, 2009.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-12740 Filed 6-1-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P