Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 2281 

ERJ 190 airplanes), on which 18 months or 

more has elapsed from the slide date of 

manufacture (for slides that have not been 

repacked) or the date of last slide repack (for 

slides that have been repacked). 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: 

No differences. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(j) 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. 

Send information to ATTN: Kenny Kaulia, 

Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, 

ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 

227–2848; fax (425) 227–1149. Before using 

any approved AMOC on any airplane to 

which the AMOC applies, 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) 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 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(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. 

Related Information 

(k) Refer to MCAI Brazilian Airworthiness 

Directive 2009–11–01, dated November 30, 

2009; MCAI Brazilian Airworthiness 

Directive 2009–08–02, dated August 18, 

2009; Goodrich Service Bulletin 4A4030– 

25A379, dated August 10, 2009; and 

Goodrich Service Bulletin 104003–25A380, 

Revision 2, dated July 7, 2009; for related 

information. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 

6, 2011. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–584 Filed 1–12–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–1308; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–NM–069–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; BAE 

SYSTEMS (OPERATIONS) LIMITED 

Model BAe 146 Airplanes, and Model 

Avro 146–RJ 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: 

During the period 2001/2002, skin cracking 

was found adjacent to the butt joint forward 

of frame 19 * * *. The cracks emanated from 

chemically-etched pockets on the internal 

surface of the skin. * * * [C]racking in 

multiple adjacent bays * * * could 

compromise the structural integrity of the 

fuselage in the event that the multiple cracks 

joined into a single crack. * * * 

During 2008, a further report was received 

at BAE Systems of a 13.78 inch crack in an 

AVRO 146–RJ that occurred 514 flight cycles 

(FC) short of the next 4 000–FC repetitive 

inspection interval. * * * 

* * * * ** * 

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 February 28, 2011. 

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 BAE 

SYSTEMS (OPERATIONS) LIMITED, 

Customer Information Department, 

Prestwick International Airport, 

Ayrshire, KA9 2RW, Scotland, United 

Kingdom; telephone +44 1292 675207; 

fax +44 1292 675704; e-mail 

RApublications@baesystems.com; 

Internet http://www.baesystems.com/ 

Businesses/RegionalAircraft/index.htm. 

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. 

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: 

Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 227–1175; 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–2010–1308; Directorate Identifier 

2009–NM–069–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 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
2282 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

On June 14, 2005, we issued AD 

2005–13–19, Amendment 39–14156 (70 

FR 37022, June 28, 2005). That AD 

required actions intended to address an 

unsafe condition on the products listed 

above. 

Since we issued AD 2005–13–19, a 

further report of cracking has been 

received at an interval shorter than the 

repetitive inspection interval required 

by AD 2005–13–19. The European 

Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which 

is the Technical Agent for the Member 

States of the European Community, has 

issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 

2009–0070R1, dated July 2, 2010 

(referred to after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to 

correct an unsafe condition for the 

specified products. The MCAI states: 

During the period 2001/2002, skin cracking 

was found adjacent to the butt joint forward 

of frame 19 when unrelated in-service 

maintenance inspections of the forward 

fuselage structure were being completed. The 

cracks emanated from chemically-etched 

pockets on the internal surface of the skin. 

The then current MRB [maintenance review 

board] inspection requirements were not 

adequate to address cracking in multiple 

adjacent bays, which could compromise the 

structural integrity of the fuselage in the 

event that the multiple cracks joined into a 

single crack. Investigations resulted in the 

publication of BAE Systems (Operations) 

Limited Inspection Service Bulletin (ISB).53– 

167 in June [27,] 2003, which was made 

mandatory by CAA UK AD 007–06–2003. 

The ISB was subsequently re-issued at 

Revision 1 during 2004 [May 18, 2004] to 

clarify the inspection requirements and 

provide an improved inspection procedure. 

CAA UK AD G–2005–0002 [which 

corresponds to FAA AD 2005–13–19] (EASA 

approval number 2005–313) was issued to 

require accomplishment of the improved 

inspections. 

During 2008, a further report was received 

at BAE Systems of a 13.78 inch crack in an 

AVRO 146–RJ that occurred 514 flight cycles 

(FC) short of the next 4 000–FC repetitive 

inspection interval. A reassessment of ISB 

instructions and its supporting data 

concluded that these original inspection 

periods were too long, and the method for 

defining the areas requiring inspection could 

be open to misinterpretation. In response, 

BAE Systems has updated the ISB to 

Revision 2 [dated December 12, 2008] to 

reduce the inspection intervals, introducing 

different inspection intervals associated with 

specific areas of the forward fuselage skins 

and instructions to inspect additional areas 

of the forward fuselage skin. 

For the reasons described above, this AD 

retains the requirements of CAA UK AD G– 

2005–0002, which is superseded, and 

requires the implementation of revised 

repetitive inspections, including inspection 

of additional areas of the forward fuselage 

skin panels for cracking and follow-on repair 

action(s), depending on findings. 

This AD is [further] revised to 

acknowledge the issuance of BAE Systems 

(Operations) Limited ISB.53–167 Revision 3, 

[dated June 17, 2009] which allows the 

repetitive inspection intervals to be extended 

and introduces grace periods to carry out the 

initial inspections. In addition, this AD at 

Revision 1 [EASA AD 2009–0070R1, dated 

July 2, 2010] acknowledges the issuance of 

BAE Systems ISB.53–167 Revision 4 [dated 

June 10, 2010] which corrects the grace 

period for the initial inspections on BAe 146 

aeroplane types. 

You may obtain further information 

by examining the MCAI in the AD 

docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

BAE SYSTEMS (OPERATIONS) 

LIMITED has issued Inspection Service 

Bulletin ISB.53–167, Revision 4, dated 

June 10, 2010. 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 a NOTE within the 

proposed AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

Based on the service information, we 

estimate that this proposed AD would 

affect about 1 product of U.S. registry. 

The actions that are required by AD 

2005–13–19 and retained in this 

proposed AD take about 40 work-hours 

per product, at an average labor rate of 

$85 per work hour. Based on these 

figures, the estimated cost of the 

currently required actions is $3,400 per 

product. 

We estimate that it would take about 

32 work-hours per product to comply 

with the new basic requirements of this 

proposed AD. The average labor rate is 

$85 per work-hour. Based on these 

figures, we estimate the cost of the 

proposed AD on U.S. operators to be 

$2,720, or $2,720 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. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 2283 

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. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing Amendment 39–14156 (70 FR 

37022, June 28, 2005) and adding the 

following new AD: 

BAE SYSTEMS (OPERATIONS) LIMITED: 

Docket No. FAA–2010–1308; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–NM–069–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by February 

28, 2011. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This AD supersedes AD 2005–13–19, 

Amendment 39–14156. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to all BAE SYSTEMS 

(OPERATIONS) LIMITED Model BAe 146– 

100A, –200A, and –300A airplanes; and 

Model Avro 146–RJ70A, 146–RJ85A, and 

146–RJ100A airplanes; certificated in any 

category. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53: Fuselage. 

Reason 

(e) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states: 

During the period 2001/2002, skin cracking 

was found adjacent to the butt joint forward 

of frame 19 * * *. The cracks emanated from 

chemically-etched pockets on the internal 

surface of the skin. * * * [C]racking in 

multiple adjacent bays * * * could 

compromise the structural integrity of the 

fuselage in the event that the multiple cracks 

joined into a single crack. * * * 

During 2008, a further report was received 

at BAE Systems of a 13.78 inch crack in an 

AVRO 146–RJ that occurred 514 flight cycles 

(FC) short of the next 4 000–FC repetitive 

inspection interval. * * * 

* * * * * 

Compliance 

(f) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

RESTATEMENT OF REQUIREMENTS OF 

AD 2005–13–19: 

Inspections and Repair 

(g) Within the applicable compliance time 

specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this 

AD, perform an external eddy current 

inspection of the forward fuselage skin to 

detect cracking, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of BAE 

Systems (Operations) Limited Modification 

Service Bulletin ISB.53–167, including 

Appendix 2, Revision 1, dated May 18, 2004. 

Doing the inspection required by paragraph 

(j) of this AD terminates the requirements of 

this paragraph of this AD. 

(1) For Model BAe 146 series airplanes: 

Inspect before the accumulation of 16,000 

total landings, or within 4,000 landings after 

the August 2, 2005 (the effective date of AD 

2005–13–19), whichever is later. 

(i) For areas where no crack is found, 

repeat the inspection at intervals not to 

exceed 8,000 landings. 

(ii) For areas where any crack is found, 

before further flight, perform repairs in 

accordance with a method approved by the 

Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, the 

Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) (or its 

delegated agent), or EASA (or its delegated 

agent). No further inspection of any repaired 

area is required by paragraph (g) of this AD. 

(2) For Model Avro 146–RJ series airplanes: 

Inspect before the accumulation of 10,000 

total landings, or within 2,000 landings after 

August 2, 2005, whichever is later. 

(i) For areas where no crack is found, 

repeat the inspection at intervals not to 

exceed 4,000 landings. 

(ii) For areas where any crack is found, 

before further flight, perform repairs in 

accordance with a method approved by the 

Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, 

the CAA (or its delegated agent), or EASA (or 

its delegated agent). No further inspection of 

any repaired area is required by paragraph (g) 

of this AD. 

Inspections Accomplished According to 

Previous Issue of Service Bulletin 

(h) Inspections accomplished before 

August 2, 2005, in accordance with BAE 

Systems (Operations) Limited Inspection 

Service Bulletin ISB.53–167, including 

Appendices 2 and 3, all dated June 27, 2003, 

are considered acceptable for compliance 

with the corresponding action specified in 

paragraph (g) of this AD. 

No Reporting Requirement for AD 2005–13– 

19 

(i) Although BAE Systems (Operations) 

Limited Modification Service Bulletin 

ISB.53–167, including Appendix 2, Revision 

1, dated May 18, 2004, specifies to submit 

Appendix 1 of that service bulletin with 

certain information to the manufacturer, this 

AD does not include that requirement. 

New Requirements of this AD: 

Inspection and Repair—Expanded Area of 

Forward Fuselage Skin and Reduced 

Inspection Intervals 

(j) For Model BAe 146 airplanes: At the 

later of the times specified in paragraphs 

(j)(1), (j)(2), and (j)(3) of this AD, do an 

external eddy current inspection of the 

forward fuselage skin to detect cracking, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of BAE Systems (Operations) 

Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.53– 

167, including Appendix 2, Revision 4, dated 

June 10, 2010. Repeat the inspection 

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,600 

flight cycles for areas specified in Drawings 

2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 of BAE Systems (Operations) 

Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.53– 

167, including Appendix 2, Revision 4, dated 

June 10, 2010, and at intervals not to exceed 

4,600 flight cycles for areas specified in 

Drawings 1, 6, 8, and 9 of BAE Systems 

(Operations) Limited Inspection Service 

Bulletin ISB.53–167, including Appendix 2, 

Revision 4, dated June 10, 2010. Doing the 

inspection required by this paragraph 

terminates the requirements of paragraph (g) 

of this AD for that airplane. 

(1) Before the accumulation of 16,000 total 

flight cycles. 

(2) Within 2,000 flight cycles after the 

effective date of this AD. 

(3) Within the applicable times specified in 

paragraphs (j)(3)(i) and (j)(3)(ii) of this AD. 

(i) For areas specified in Drawings 2, 3, 4, 

5, and 7 of BAE Systems (Operations) 

Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.53– 

167, including Appendix 2, Revision 4, dated 

June 10, 2010: Within 3,600 flight cycles after 

the last inspection done in accordance with 

paragraph (g) of this AD. 

(ii) For areas specified in Drawings 1, 6, 8, 

and 9 of BAE Systems (Operations) Limited 

Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.53–167, 

including Appendix 2, Revision 4, dated June 

10, 2010: Within 4,600 flight cycles after the 

last inspection done in accordance with 

paragraph (g) of this AD. 

(k) For Model Avro 146–RJ airplanes: At 

the later of the times specified in paragraph 

(k)(1), (k)(2), and (k)(3) of this AD, do an 

external eddy current inspection of the 

forward fuselage skin to detect cracking, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of BAE Systems (Operations) 

Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.53– 

167, including Appendix 2, Revision 4, dated 

June 10, 2010. Repeat the inspection 

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 2,400 

flight cycles for areas specified in Drawings 

2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 of BAE Systems (Operations) 

Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.53– 

167, including Appendix 2, Revision 4, dated 

June 10, 2010, and 3,000 flight cycles for 

areas specified in Drawings 1, 6, 8, and 9 of 

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited 

Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.53–167, 

including Appendix 2, Revision 4, dated June 

10, 2010. Doing the inspection required by 

this paragraph terminates the requirements of 

paragraph (g) of this AD for that airplane. 

(1) Before the accumulation of 10,000 total 

flight cycles. 

(2) Within 1,000 flight cycles after the 

effective date of this AD. 

(3) Within the applicable times specified in 

paragraphs (k)(3)(i) and (k)(3)(ii) of this AD. 

(i) For areas specified in Drawings 2, 3, 4, 

5, and 7 of BAE Systems (Operations) 

Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.53– 

167, including Appendix 2, Revision 4, dated 

June 10, 2010: Within 3,600 flight cycles after 

the last inspection done in accordance with 

paragraph (g) of this AD. 

(ii) For areas specified in Drawings 1, 6, 8, 

and 9 of BAE Systems (Operations) Limited 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
2284 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 9 / Thursday, January 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.53–167, 

including Appendix 2, Revision 4, dated June 

10, 2010: Within 4,600 flight cycles after the 

last inspection done in accordance with 

paragraph (g) of this AD. 

(l) If any cracking is found during any 

inspection required by paragraph (j) or (k) of 

this AD, before further flight, accomplish the 

repair in accordance with a method approved 

by the FAA or EASA (or its delegated agent). 

Repair of an airplane in accordance with the 

requirements of this paragraph of this AD 

does not constitute terminating action for the 

inspection requirements of this AD. 

Credit for Actions Accomplished in 

Accordance With Previous Service 

Information 

(m) Inspections done before the effective 

date of this AD in accordance with BAE 

Systems (Operations) Limited Inspection 

Service Bulletin ISB.53–167, including 

Appendix 2, Revision 2, dated November 17, 

2008; or Revision 3, dated June 17, 2009; are 

acceptable for compliance with the 

corresponding requirements of paragraphs (j) 

and (k) of this AD. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: No 

differences. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(n) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, International 

Branch, ANM–116, 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: Todd Thompson, 

Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, 

ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 

227–1175; 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 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(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. 

Related Information 

(o) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness 

Directive 2009–0070R1, dated July 2, 2010; 

and BAE Systems (Operations) Limited 

Modification Service Bulletin ISB.53–167, 

including Appendix 2, Revision 1, dated May 

18, 2004; and BAE Systems (Operations) 

Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.53– 

167, including Appendix 2, Revision 4, dated 

June 10, 2010; for related information. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 

5, 2011. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–585 Filed 1–12–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–1309; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NM–060–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model 

A330–300, A340–200, and A340–300 

Series 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. 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: 

Surface defects were visually detected on 

the rudder of one Airbus A319 and one A321 

in-service aeroplane. Investigation has 

determined that the defects reported on both 

rudders corresponded to areas that had been 

reworked in production. The investigation 

confirmed that the defects were the result of 

de-bonding between the skin and honeycomb 

core. Such reworks were also performed on 

some rudders fitted on A330–300 and A340– 

200/–300 aeroplanes. 

An extended de-bonding, if not detected 

and corrected, may degrade the structural 

integrity of the rudder. The loss of the rudder 

leads to degradation of the handling qualities 

and reduces the controllability of the 

aeroplane. 

* * * * ** * 

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 February 28, 2011. 

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— 

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, e-mail 

airworthiness.A330–A340@airbus.com; 

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. 

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: 

Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 227–1138; fax (425) 227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS