51080 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

2000, South Hackensack, NJ 07606; 

telephone 201–440–6700; Internet http://

www.dassaultfalcon.com. 

(4) You may view this service information 

at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

(5) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

202–741–6030, or go to: http://www.archives.

gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

7, 2014. 

Victor Wicklund, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–19678 Filed 8–26–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0175; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–NM–014–AD; Amendment 

39–17957; AD 2014–17–04] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, 

Inc. Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

Bombardier, Inc. Model CL–600–2B19 

(Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) 

airplanes. This AD was prompted by 

reports that elevator power control unit 

(PCU) shear pins may fail prematurely. 

This AD requires repetitive replacement 

of the elevator PCU shear pins. We are 

issuing this AD to prevent premature 

elevator PCU shear pin failure. If all 

pins fail on one elevator, the elevator 

surface would become inoperative, 

which could reduce the controllability 

of the airplane and could result in a loss 

of redundancy for flutter prevention. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

October 1, 2014. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in this AD 

as of October 1, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http://www.

regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA2014-0175; or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility, U.S. Department 

of Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC. 

For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 

Coˆte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Que ́bec 

H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone 514–855– 

5000; fax 514–855–7401; email thd.crj@

aero.bombardier.com; Internet http://

www.bombardier.com. You may view 

this referenced service information at 

the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Renton, WA. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, 

call 425–227–1221. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Cesar Gomez, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe and Mechanical Systems 

Branch, ANE–171, FAA, New York 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1600 

Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, 

NY 11590; telephone 516–228–7318; fax 

516–794–5531. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 by adding an AD that would 

apply to certain Bombardier, Inc. Model 

CL–600–2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 

440) airplanes. The NPRM published in 

the Federal Register on March 28, 2014 

(79 FR 17453). 

Transport Canada Civil Aviation 

(TCCA), which is the aviation authority 

for Canada, has issued Canadian 

Airworthiness Directive CF–2014–04, 

dated January 13, 2014 (referred to after 

this as the Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the 

MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition 

for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL– 

600–2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 

440) airplanes. The MCAI states: 

It was found that the elevator power 

control unit (PCU) shear pins may fail 

prematurely. The failure of an elevator PCU 

shear pin is dormant. There are three PCUs 

on each elevator. If all three PCU shear pins 

failed on one elevator, the elevator surface 

would become inoperative, which could 

reduce the controllability of the aeroplane 

and could result in a loss of redundancy for 

flutter prevention. 

This [Canadian] AD mandates the 

repetitive replacement of the elevator PCU 

shear pins to prevent premature elevator PCU 

shear pin failures. 

You may examine the MCAI in the 

AD docket on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;

D=FAA-2014-0175-0002. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. The 

following presents the comments 

received on the NPRM (79 FR 17453, 

March 28, 2014) and the FAA’s response 

to each comment. 

Request To Delete the Repetitive 

Requirement 

Air Wisconsin Airlines Corporation 

(AWAC) requested that we revise the 

NPRM (79 FR 17453, March 28, 2014) to 

delete the repetitive actions required by 

paragraph (g) of the NPRM. AWAC 

pointed out that, typically, when the 

design approval holder determines that 

a repetitive action for a task is required, 

the repetitive action is normally 

published in the maintenance 

requirements manual as an 

airworthiness limitation, a certification 

maintenance requirement, or a systems 

and powerplant program task. AWAC 

notes that the design approval holder 

has no such requirement in its proposed 

or published documents, and that the 

service information identified in the 

NPRM states that it does not affect 

airworthiness limitations or damage 

tolerance inspections. 

As an alternative to removing the 

repetitive requirement specified in 

paragraph (g) of the NPRM (79 FR 

17453, March 28, 2014), AWAC 

requested that, if we do not agree to 

revise the NPRM as requested, we 

remove the compliance time of 48 

months for the repetitive replacement. 

AWAC questioned why the repetitive 

replacements should be required, if the 

airplane has not been regularly 

operated. For example, an airplane on 

which the replacement task was 

previously performed, that has 

subsequently been sitting in storage in 

the desert for 3–4 years would not have 

any stress. 

We disagree to delete the repetitive 

replacements required by paragraph (g) 

of this final rule. There are various 

contributing factors to the premature 

failure of the elevator PCU shear pins, 

and corrosion is one of those factors. 

The repetitive replacement interval was 

determined by the design approval 

holder and certifying authority. And, 

because corrosion is generally a 

function of time and exposure to the 

environment, rather than number of 

flights, we have determined that a 

specific interval of calendar time is 

required to address this failure mode. 

Bombardier indicated that it did not 

wish to state a repetitive action within 

its service bulletin, as operators prefer 

service bulletins that are not left openended. 

We also do not agree to remove the 

48-month compliance time. The 48- 

month compliance time is necessary to 

address the identified unsafe condition 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 51081 

on any airplanes with a low utilization 

rate. An airplane on which the proposed 

replacement has been done that has 

been parked in storage in the desert for 

three to four years might not have 

undergone any operational stress, but 

the airplane is still exposed to its 

environment making it susceptible to 

corrosion. We have made no changes to 

this final rule in this regard. 

Request To Provide Credit for Certain 

Previous Actions 

AWAC requested that we revise 

paragraph (i) of the NPRM (79 FR 17453, 

March 28, 2014) to allow credit for 

replacements done previously using 

maintenance Task 55–21–27–960–802 

and/or other service information 

identified in the airplane’s maintenance 

records. AWAC suggested that there 

might be other service information that 

has been used to do the replacements 

required by paragraph (g) of the NPRM. 

We partially agree. We agree to allow 

credit for the replacements performed 

before the effective date of this AD using 

Task 55–21–27–960–802 of the Canadair 

Regional Jet Model CL–600–2B19 

Aircraft Maintenance Manual, CSP A– 

001, Revision 49, dated May 10, 2014. 

We have added new paragraph (i)(3) in 

this final rule to provide credit for using 

Task 55–21–27–960–802 to accomplish 

the replacements specified in paragraph 

(g) of this final rule. We also have 

revised paragraph (i) of this final rule 

and redesignated that text as paragraphs 

(i), (i)(1), and (i)(2) of this AD; this 

change was for formatting purposes 

only. 

We do not agree to provide credit in 

this final rule for replacements done 

using unspecified service information 

that might be identified in unspecified 

service documents in the airplane 

maintenance records. However, affected 

operators may request approval to use 

other, specific service information as an 

alternative method of compliance under 

the provisions of paragraph (j)(1) of this 

AD. 

‘‘Contacting the Manufacturer’’ 

Paragraph in This AD 

Since late 2006, we have included a 

standard paragraph titled ‘‘Airworthy 

Product’’ in all MCAI ADs in which the 

FAA develops an AD based on a foreign 

authority’s AD. 

The MCAI or referenced service 

information in an FAA AD often directs 

the owner/operator to contact the 

manufacturer for corrective actions, 

such as a repair. Briefly, the Airworthy 

Product paragraph allowed owners/

operators to use corrective actions 

provided by the manufacturer if those 

actions were FAA-approved. In 

addition, the paragraph stated that any 

actions approved by the State of Design 

Authority (or its delegated agent) are 

considered to be FAA-approved. 

In the NPRM (79 FR 17453, March 28, 

2014), we proposed to prevent the use 

of repairs that were not specifically 

developed to correct the unsafe 

condition, by requiring that the repair 

approval provided by the State of 

Design Authority or its delegated agent 

specifically refer to this FAA AD. This 

change was intended to clarify the 

method of compliance and to provide 

operators with better visibility of repairs 

that are specifically developed and 

approved to correct the unsafe 

condition. In addition, we proposed to 

change the phrase ‘‘its delegated agent’’ 

to include a design approval holder 

(DAH) with State of Design Authority 

design organization approval (DOA), as 

applicable, to refer to a DAH authorized 

to approve required repairs for the 

proposed AD. 

No comments were provided to the 

NPRM (79 FR 17453, March 28, 2014) 

about these proposed changes. However, 

a comment was provided for an NPRM 

having Directorate Identifier 2012–NM– 

101–AD (78 FR 78285, December 26, 

2013). The commenter stated the 

following: ‘‘The proposed wording, 

being specific to repairs, eliminates the 

interpretation that Airbus messages are 

acceptable for approving minor 

deviations (corrective actions) needed 

during accomplishment of an AD 

mandated Airbus service bulletin.’’ 

This comment has made the FAA 

aware that some operators have 

misunderstood or misinterpreted the 

Airworthy Product paragraph to allow 

the owner/operator to use messages 

provided by the manufacturer as 

approval of deviations during the 

accomplishment of an AD-mandated 

action. The Airworthy Product 

paragraph does not approve messages or 

other information provided by the 

manufacturer for deviations to the 

requirements of the AD-mandated 

actions. The Airworthy Product 

paragraph only addresses the 

requirement to contact the manufacturer 

for corrective actions for the identified 

unsafe condition and does not cover 

deviations from other AD requirements. 

However, deviations to AD-required 

actions are addressed in 14 CFR 39.17, 

and anyone may request the approval 

for an alternative method of compliance 

to the AD-required actions using the 

procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

To address this misunderstanding and 

misinterpretation of the Airworthy 

Product paragraph, we have changed the 

paragraph and retitled it ‘‘Contacting the 

Manufacturer.’’ This paragraph now 

clarifies that for any requirement in this 

AD to obtain corrective actions from a 

manufacturer, the actions must be 

accomplished using a method approved 

by the FAA, TCCA, or Bombardier, 

Inc.’s TCCA Design Approval 

Organization (DAO). 

The Contacting the Manufacturer 

paragraph also clarifies that, if approved 

by the DAO, the approval must include 

the DAO-authorized signature. The DAO 

signature indicates that the data and 

information contained in the document 

are TCCA-approved, which is also FAAapproved. Messages and other 

information provided by the 

manufacturer that do not contain the 

DAO-authorized signature approval are 

not TCCA-approved, unless TCCA 

directly approves the manufacturer’s 

message or other information. 

This clarification does not remove 

flexibility previously afforded by the 

Airworthy Product paragraph. 

Consistent with long-standing FAA 

policy, such flexibility was never 

intended for required actions. This is 

also consistent with the 

recommendation of the Airworthiness 

Directive Implementation Aviation 

Rulemaking Committee to increase 

flexibility in complying with ADs by 

identifying those actions in 

manufacturers’ service instructions that 

are ‘‘Required for Compliance’’ with 

ADs. We continue to work with 

manufacturers to implement this 

recommendation. But once we 

determine that an action is required, any 

deviation from the requirement must be 

approved as an alternative method of 

compliance. 

Other commenters to the NPRM 

having Directorate Identifier 2012–NM– 

101–AD (78 FR 78285, December 26, 

2013) pointed out that in many cases the 

foreign manufacturer’s service bulletin 

and the foreign authority’s MCAI might 

have been issued some time before the 

FAA AD. Therefore, the DOA might 

have provided U.S. operators with an 

approved repair, developed with full 

awareness of the unsafe condition, 

before the FAA AD is issued. Under 

these circumstances, to comply with the 

FAA AD, the operator would be 

required to go back to the 

manufacturer’s DOA and obtain a new 

approval document, adding time and 

expense to the compliance process with 

no safety benefit. 

Based on these comments, we 

removed the requirement that the DAHprovided repair specifically refer to this 

AD. Before adopting such a 

requirement, the FAA will coordinate 

with affected DAHs and verify they are 

prepared to implement means to ensure 

that their repair approvals consider the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

51082 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

unsafe condition addressed in this AD. 

Any such requirements will be adopted 

through the normal AD rulemaking 

process, including notice-and-comment 

procedures, when appropriate. 

We also have decided not to include 

a generic reference to either the 

‘‘delegated agent’’ or ‘‘DAH with State of 

Design Authority design organization 

approval,’’ but instead we have 

provided the specific delegation 

approval granted by the State of Design 

Authority for the DAH throughout this 

AD. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the relevant data, 

considered the comments received, and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting this AD 

with the changes described previously 

and minor editorial changes. We have 

determined that these minor changes: 

• Are consistent with the intent that 

was proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 

17453, March 28, 2014) for correcting 

the unsafe condition; and 

• Do not add any additional burden 

upon the public than was already 

proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 17453, 

March 28, 2014). 

We also determined that these 

changes will not increase the economic 

burden on any operator or increase the 

scope of this AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD affects 575 

airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it will take 

about 4 work-hours per product to 

comply with the basic requirements of 

this AD. The average labor rate is $85 

per work-hour. Required parts will cost 

about $41 per product. Based on these 

figures, we estimate the cost of this AD 

on U.S. operators to be $219,075, or 

$381 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 AD will not 

have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD 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. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that this AD: 

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); 

3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in 

Alaska; and 

4. 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. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://www.regulations.

gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0175; 

or in person at the Docket Management 

Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. The AD docket contains this 

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. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 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 adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

2014–17–04 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 

39–17957. Docket No. FAA–2014–0175; 

Directorate Identifier 2014–NM–014–AD. 

(a) Effective Date 

This AD becomes effective October 1, 2014. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. Model 

CL–600–2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) 

airplanes, certificated in any category, serial 

numbers 7003 and subsequent. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 55, Stabilizers. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by reports that 

elevator power control unit (PCU) shear pins 

may fail prematurely. We are issuing this AD 

to prevent premature elevator PCU shear pin 

failure. If all pins fail on one elevator, the 

elevator surface would become inoperative, 

which could reduce the controllability of the 

airplane and could result in a loss of 

redundancy for flutter prevention. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Repetitive Replacements 

Within 6,600 flight hours or 48 months 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs first: Replace the elevator PCU shear 

pins, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier 

Service Bulletin 601R–55–008, Revision B, 

dated March 12, 2014. Repeat the 

replacement thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 6,600 flight hours or 48 months from 

the most recent replacement, whichever 

occurs first. 

(h) Optional Method for Replacement 

Replacing the elevator PCU shear pins, 

using a method approved by the Manager, 

New York ACO, ANE–170, Engine and 

Propeller Directorate, FAA; or Transport 

Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or 

Bombardier, Inc.’s TCCA Design Approval 

Organization (DAO); is a method of 

compliance for any replacement required by 

paragraph (g) of this AD. If approved by the 

DAO, the approval must include the DAOauthorized signature. 

Note 1 to paragraph (h) of this AD: 

Guidance for doing replacements specified in 

paragraph (h) of this AD may be found in 

Task 5–21–27–960–802 of the Canadair 

Regional Jet Model CL–600–2B19 Aircraft 

Maintenance Manual, CSP A–001, Revision 

49, dated May 10, 2014. 

(i) Credit for Previous Actions 

This paragraph provides credit for actions 

required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those 

actions were performed before the effective 

date of this AD using the service information 

identified in paragraph (i)(1), (i)(2), or (i)(3) 

of this AD, which are not incorporated by 

reference in this AD. 

(1) Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R–55– 

008, dated July 12, 2013. 

(2) Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R–55– 

008, Revision A, dated January 8, 2014. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 51083 

(3) Task 55–21–27–960–802 of the 

Canadair Regional Jet Model CL–600–2B19 

Aircraft Maintenance Manual, CSP A–001, 

Revision 49, dated May 10, 2014. 

(j) Other FAA AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, New York Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), ANE–170, FAA, 

has the authority to approve AMOCs for this 

AD, if requested using the procedures found 

in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 

39.19, send your request to your principal 

inspector or local Flight Standards District 

Office, as appropriate. If sending information 

directly to the ACO, send it to ATTN: 

Program Manager, Continuing Operational 

Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart 

Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; 

telephone 516–228–7300; fax 516–794–5531. 

Before using any approved AMOC, 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) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any 

requirement in this AD to obtain corrective 

actions from a manufacturer, the action must 

be accomplished using a method approved 

by the Manager, New York ACO, ANE–170, 

Engine and Propeller Directorate, FAA; or 

Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or 

Bombardier, Inc.’s TCCA Design Approval 

Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO, 

the approval must include the DAOauthorized signature. 

(k) Related Information 

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian 

Airworthiness Directive CF–2014–04, dated 

January 13, 2014, for related information. 

This MCAI may be found in the AD docket 

on the Internet at http://www.regulations.

gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-0175- 

0002. 

(2) Service information identified in this 

AD that is not incorporated by reference may 

be viewed at the addresses specified in 

paragraphs (l)(3) and (l)(4) of this AD. 

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

(IBR) of the service information listed in this 

paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. 

(2) You must use this service information 

as applicable to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R–55– 

008, Revision B, dated March 12, 2014. 

(ii) Reserved. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 CoˆteVertu Road West, Dorval, Que ́bec H4S 1Y9, 

Canada; telephone 514–855–5000; fax 514– 

855–7401; email thd.crj@

aero.bombardier.com; Internet http://

www.bombardier.com. 

(4) You may view this service information 

at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

(5) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

202–741–6030, or go to: http://www.archives.

gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

15, 2014. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–19976 Filed 8–26–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0236; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NM–184–AD; Amendment 

39–17937; AD 2014–16–13] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for all 

Airbus Model A300 series airplanes. 

This AD was prompted by our 

determination of the need to incorporate 

new life limits for the main landing gear 

(MLG) barrel assembly, retraction 

actuator assembly linkage, and flange 

duct. This AD requires revising the 

maintenance or inspection program, as 

applicable, to include the new life 

limits. We are issuing this AD to prevent 

reduced structural integrity of the 

airplane and possible loss of 

controllability of the airplane. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

October 1, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http://www.

regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA2014-0236 or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility, U.S. Department 

of Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC. 

For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Airbus SAS, 

Airworthiness Office—EAW, 1 Rond 

Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac 

Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 

96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email 

account.airworth-eas@airbus.com; 

Internet http://www.airbus.com. You 

may view this referenced service 

information at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, WA. For information on 

the availability of this material at the 

FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan 

Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM 116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; telephone 425–227–2125; 

fax 425–227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 by adding an AD that would 

apply to all Airbus Model A300 series 

airplanes. The NPRM published in the 

Federal Register on April 17, 2014 (79 

FR 21651). 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2013–0210, 

dated September 11, 2013 (referred to 

after this as the Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the 

MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition 

all Airbus Model A300 series airplanes. 

The MCAI states: 

Some life limits previously defined in 

Revision 00 of A300 ALS [airworthiness 

limitations section] Part 1 have been removed 

[from] that document at Revision 01 and 

should normally be included in an ALS Part 

4. 

At this time, there are no plans to issue an 

ALS Part 4 for A300 aeroplanes. 

Nevertheless, failure to comply with these 

life limits could result in an unsafe 

condition. 

For the reasons described above, it has 

been decided to require the application of 

these life limits through a separate [EASA] 

AD. Consequently, this [EASA] AD requires 

application of life limits applicable to Main 

Landing Gear (MLG) barrel assembly, 

retraction actuator assembly linkage 

assembly and flanged duct which were 

previously contained in Airbus ALS Part 1 

Revision 00. 

EASA AD 2007–0293 [which corresponds 

with FAA AD 2009–18–15, Amendment 39– 

16011 (74 FR 48143, September 22, 2009)], 

which required compliance with the actions 

specified in ALS Part 1, will be superseded 

by a new [EASA] AD, requiring compliance 

with ALS Part 1 at Revision 1. 

You may examine the MCAI in the 

AD docket on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;

D=FAA-2014-0236-0002. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES