41658 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 137 / Thursday, July 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

stakeholder comments in response to 

the proposed determination, many of 

which are addressed in this framework 

document. DOE will address any 

remaining stakeholder comments when 

it issues a final determination of 

coverage at a later stage in the 

rulemaking process. 

If DOE issues a final determination 

that computer systems are a covered 

product, it may establish a test 

procedure and energy conservation 

standard for computer systems. DOE 

may prescribe test procedures to assess 

the energy consumption of covered 

products. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)) For the 

Secretary to prescribe an energy 

conservation standard pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. 6295(o) and (p) for covered 

products added pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

6292(b)(1), he must determine that: 

(a) The average energy use of the 

products has exceeded 150 kWh per 

household for a 12-month period; 

(b) The aggregate 12-month energy use 

of the products has exceeded 4.2 billion 

kilowatt-hours; 

(c) Substantial improvement in energy 

efficiency is technologically feasible; 

and 

(d) The application of a labeling rule 

under 42 U.S.C. 6294 is unlikely to be 

sufficient to induce manufacturers to 

produce, and consumers and other 

persons to purchase, covered products 

of such type (or class) which achieve the 

maximum energy efficiency which is 

technologically feasible and 

economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(l)(1)) 

Today’s framework document is the 

first step toward initiating this 

rulemaking process. DOE has prepared 

the framework document to explain the 

relevant issues, analyses, and processes 

it anticipates using when considering a 

new test procedure and energy 

conservation standard for computer 

systems. The focus of the public 

meeting noted above will be to discuss 

the information presented and issues 

identified in the framework document. 

At the public meeting, DOE will make 

presentations and invite discussion on 

the rulemaking process as it applies to 

computer systems. DOE will also solicit 

comments, data, and information from 

participants and other interested parties. 

DOE is planning to conduct in-depth 

technical analyses in the following 

areas: (1) Engineering; (2) energy use; (3) 

product price; (4) life-cycle cost and 

payback period; (5) national impacts; (6) 

manufacturer impacts; (7) emission 

impacts; (8) utility impacts; (9) 

employment impacts; and (10) 

regulatory impacts. DOE will also 

conduct several other analyses that 

support those previously listed, 

including the market and technology 

assessment, the screening analysis 

(which contributes to the engineering 

analysis), and the shipments analysis 

(which contributes to the national 

impact analysis). 

DOE encourages those who wish to 

participate in the public meeting to 

obtain the framework document and to 

be prepared to discuss its contents. A 

copy of the framework document is 

available at: www1.eere.energy.gov/

buildings/appliance_standards/

product.aspx/productid/81. 

Public meeting participants need not 

limit their comments to the issues 

identified in the framework document. 

DOE is also interested in comments on 

other relevant issues that participants 

believe would affect energy 

conservation standards for these 

products, applicable test procedures, or 

the preliminary determination on the 

scope of coverage. DOE invites all 

interested parties, whether or not they 

participate in the public meeting, to 

submit in writing by September 2, 2014, 

comments and information on matters 

addressed in the framework document 

and on other matters relevant to DOE’s 

consideration of coverage of and 

standards for computer systems. 

The public meeting will be conducted 

in an informal, facilitated, conference 

style. There shall be no discussion of 

proprietary information, costs or prices, 

market shares, or other commercial 

matters regulated by U.S. antitrust laws. 

A court reporter will record the 

proceedings of the public meeting, after 

which a transcript will be available for 

purchase from the court reporter and 

placed on the DOE Web site at: http:// 

www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/

appliance_standards/product.aspx/

productid/81. 

After the public meeting and the close 

of the comment period on the 

framework document, DOE will collect 

data, conduct the analyses as discussed 

in the framework document and at the 

public meeting, and review the public 

comments it receives. 

DOE considers public participation to 

be a very important part of the process 

for determining whether to establish 

energy conservation standards and, if 

so, in setting those new standards. DOE 

actively encourages the participation 

and interaction of the public during the 

omment period at each stage of the 

rulemaking process. Beginning with the 

framework document, and during each 

subsequent public meeting and 

comment period, interactions with and 

among members of the public provide a 

balanced discussion of the issues to 

assist DOE in the standards rulemaking 

process. Accordingly, anyone who 

wishes to participate in the public 

meeting, receive meeting materials, or 

be added to the DOE mailing list to 

receive future notices and information 

about this rulemaking should contact 

Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586–2945, 

or via email at Brenda.Edwards@

ee.doe.gov. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 9, 2014. 

Kathleen B. Hogan, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2014–16828 Filed 7–16–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0449; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NM–259–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for all 

Airbus Model A318 series airplanes, 

Model A319 series airplanes, Model 

A320–211, –212, –214, –231, –232, and 

–233 airplanes, and Model A321 series 

airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by a report of a 

circumferential crack at the gland 

retaining-ring groove of certain 

retraction actuators on the main landing 

gear (MLG). This proposed AD would 

require an inspection to identify the part 

numbers of MLG retraction actuators 

and replacement of certain MLG 

retraction actuators. We are proposing 

this AD to prevent MLG retraction 

actuator failure that could prevent the 

full extension and/or down-locking of 

the MLG, possibly resulting in MLG 

collapse during landing or rollout, and 

consequent damage to the airplane and 

injury to the occupants. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by September 2, 2014. 

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– 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 137 / Thursday, July 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 41659 

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 

W12–140, 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, 

Airworthiness Office—EIAS, 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. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2014– 

0449; 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 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: 

Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–1405; 

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–2014–0449; Directorate Identifier 

2013–NM–259–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. 

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 2013–0283R1, 

dated December 9, 2013 [Corrected 

December 11, 2013] (referred to after 

this as the Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the 

MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition 

for the specified products. The MCAI 

states: 

During routine pre-flight inspection of an 

Airbus A319, a hydraulic fluid leak was 

detected, coming from the retraction actuator 

of the main landing gear (MLG). The results 

of subsequent investigations revealed that a 

galvanic difference between materials 

induced an internal corrosion which was the 

crack initiator of the component. Actuators 

from 201590 series were identified as 

potentially affected, unless inspected and 

corrected during MLG overhaul. 

This condition, if not detected and corrected, 

could lead to retraction actuator failure, 

preventing the full extension and/or downlocking of the MLG, possibly resulting in 

MLG collapse during landing or rollout and 

consequent damage to the aeroplane and 

injury to occupants. 

To address this potential unsafe condition, 

Airbus published Service Bulletin (SB) 

A320–32–1408, providing instructions to 

identify and replace the affected actuators 

that have already exceeded 20,000 flight 

cycles (FC) or 10 years of operation since 

new, or since last overhaul. 

For the reason described above, EASA AD 

2013–0283 was issued to require a one-time 

identification and replacement of each 

affected MLG retraction actuator. 

* * * * * 

You may examine the MCAI in the 

AD docket on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating it in Docket No. FAA– 

2014–0449. 

Relevant Service Information 

Airbus has issued Service Bulletin 

A320–32–1408, dated July 22, 2013. 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. 

‘‘Contacting the Manufacturer’’ 

Paragraph in This Proposed 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 another NPRM, Directorate 

Identifier 2012–NM–101–AD (78 FR 

78285, December 26, 2013), 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 the 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. 

One commenter to the other NPRM, 

Directorate Identifier 2012–NM–101–AD 

(78 FR 78285, December 26, 2013), 

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 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
41660 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 137 / Thursday, July 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

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 

that paragraph and retitled it 

‘‘Contacting the Manufacturer.’’ This 

paragraph now clarifies that for any 

requirement in this proposed AD to 

obtain corrective actions from a 

manufacturer, the action must be 

accomplished using a method approved 

by the FAA, the European Aviation 

Safety Agency (EASA), or Airbus’s 

EASA DOA. Where necessary 

throughout this proposed AD, we also 

replaced any reference to approvals of 

corrective actions with a reference to the 

Contacting the Manufacturer paragraph. 

The Contacting the Manufacturer 

paragraph also clarifies that, if approved 

by the DOA, the approval must include 

the DOA-authorized signature. The DOA 

signature indicates that the data and 

information contained in the document 

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

information provided by the 

manufacturer that do not contain the 

DOA-authorized signature approval are 

not EASA-approved, unless EASA 

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. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 851 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it would take 

about 11 work-hours per product to 

comply with the basic requirements of 

this proposed AD. The average labor 

rate is $85 per work-hour. Required 

parts would cost about $36,135 per MLG 

actuator. Based on these figures, we 

estimate the cost of this proposed AD on 

U.S. operators to be $31,546,570, or 

$37,070 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); 

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. 

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 adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2014–0449; 

Directorate Identifier 2013–NM–259–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by September 

2, 2014. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes 

specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4) 

of this AD, certificated in any category, all 

manufacturer serial numbers. 

(1) Airbus Model A318–111, –112, –121, 

and –122 airplanes. 

(2) Airbus Model A319–111, –112, –113, 

–114, –115, –131, –132, and –133 airplanes. 

(3) Airbus Model A320–211, –212, –214, 

–231, –232, and –233 airplanes. 

(4) Airbus Model A321–111, –112, –131, 

–211, –212, –213, –231, and –232 airplanes. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 32, Landing Gear. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by a report of a 

circumferential crack at the gland retainingring groove of certain retraction actuators on 

the main landing gear (MLG). We are issuing 

this AD to prevent MLG retraction actuator 

failure that could prevent the full extension 

and/or down-locking of the MLG, possibly 

resulting in MLG collapse during landing or 

rollout, and consequent damage to the 

airplane and injury to the occupants. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Inspection To Determine Part Number 

(P/N) and Time-in-Service 

Within 18 months after the effective date 

of this AD: Do an inspection of each MLG 

retraction actuator to determine whether the 

actuator has P/N 201590001, 201590002, 

201590002–010, 201590002–020, 201590003; 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 137 / Thursday, July 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 41661 

and to determine the time-in-service 

accumulated on actuators having those part 

numbers. The actuator flight cycles and 

calendar time are those accumulated since 

first installation on an airplane, or since last 

actuator overhaul, or since the most recent 

accomplishment of the actions described in 

Maintenance Review Board Review (MRBR) 

Task 321147–01–1, whichever occurs latest. 

A review of airplane delivery or maintenance 

records is acceptable, provided that the 

actuator part number and time-in-service can 

be conclusively identified from that review. 

(h) MLG Actuator Replacement 

At the applicable time specified in 

paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD: 

Replace each MLG actuator having a part 

number identified in paragraph (g) of this AD 

with a new or serviceable actuator, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320– 

32–1408, dated July 22, 2013. The actuator 

flight cycles and calendar time specified in 

paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD are 

those accumulated since first installation on 

an airplane, or since last actuator overhaul, 

or since doing the actions described in MRBR 

Task 321147–01–1; whichever occurs later. 

(1) For actuators with accumulated time-inservice equal to or more than 20,000 flight 

cycles or 10 years as of the effective date of 

this AD: Within 18 months after the effective 

date of this AD. 

(2) For actuators with accumulated time-inservice less than 20,000 flight cycles and 10 

years as of the effective date of this AD: 

Before the accumulation of 10 years since 

first installation on an airplane. 

(i) MLG Actuator Replacement With 

Unknown Time-in-Service 

Within 18 months after the effective date 

of this AD: Replace each MLG retraction 

actuator having a part number specified in 

paragraph (g) of this AD, and for which the 

in-service history is unknown, with a new or 

serviceable actuator, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Service Bulletin A320–32–1408, dated July 

22, 2013. 

(j) Exception to Paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) 

of This AD 

An airplane that does not have Airbus 

Modification 26644 or Modification 150820 

(for all airplane models), or Modification 

27151 (for Model A321 series airplanes), 

applied in production, as applicable, is not 

affected by the requirements of paragraphs 

(g), (h), and (i) of this AD, provided that it 

can be conclusively determined that no MLG 

retraction actuator having a part number 

identified in paragraph (g) of this AD has 

been installed on that airplane since first 

flight. 

(k) Parts Installation Limitation 

As of the effective date of this AD, 

installation of an MLG retraction actuator 

having a part number identified in paragraph 

(g) of this AD is allowed, provided that the 

MLG retraction actuator has not accumulated 

or exceeded 20,000 flight cycles or 10 years 

since new; or 20,000 flight cycles or 10 years 

since last actuator overhaul. 

(l) Other FAA AD Provisions 

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. 

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 International Branch, send it to ATTN: 

Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; 

telephone (425) 227 1405; fax (425) 227– 

1149. Information may be emailed to: 9- 

ANM-116-AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. 

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, International Branch, ANM– 

116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or 

the European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA); or Airbus’s EASA Design 

Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by 

the DOA, the approval must include the 

DOA-authorized signature. 

(m) Special Flight Permits 

Special flight permits may be issued in 

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to 

a location where the airplane can be 

modified (if the operator elects to do so), 

provided the MLG remains extended. 

(n) Related Information 

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information (MCAI) European 

Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness 

Directive Airworthiness Directive 2013– 

0283R1, dated December 9, 2013, [Corrected 

December 11, 2013] for related information. 

This MCAI may be found in the AD docket 

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

by searching for and locating it in Docket No. 

FAA–2014–0449. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Airbus, Airworthiness 

Office—EIAS, 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 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. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 3, 

2014. 

Dionne Palermo, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–16815 Filed 7–16–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0447; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–NM–019–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, 

Inc. Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

Bombardier Model DHC–8–400 series 

airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by a report of several cracks 

found on the forward passenger airstair 

door step assembly. This proposed AD 

would require an inspection to 

determine the serial number of the 

airstair step assembly, and if necessary, 

an electronic tap test, re-identification 

of the airstair step assembly, and 

replacement of the airstair step 

assembly. We are proposing this AD to 

detect and correct cracks in the forward 

passenger airstair door step assembly, 

which could propagate and result in the 

structural failure of the steps and 

impede the evacuation of passengers in 

the event of an emergency egress 

situation. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by September 2, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, 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 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS