Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 162 / Thursday, August 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 49431 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25 

Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

The authority citation for these 

special conditions is as follows: 

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

44702 and 44704. 

The Special Conditions 

■ Accordingly, pursuant to the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the following special conditions are 

issued as part of the type-certification 

basis for Airbus Model A350–900 series 

airplanes. 

In addition to complying with 14 CFR 

part 25 regulations governing the firesafety performance of the fuel tanks, 

wings, and nacelle, the Airbus Model 

A350–900 series airplane must 

demonstrate acceptable post-crash 

survivability in the event the wings are 

exposed to a large fuel-fed ground fire. 

Airbus must demonstrate that the wing 

and fuel-tank design can endure an 

external fuel-fed pool fire for at least 

five minutes. This must be 

demonstrated for minimum fuel loads 

(not less than reserve fuel levels) and 

maximum fuel loads (maximum-range 

fuel quantities), and other identified 

critical fuel loads. Considerations must 

include fuel-tank flammability, burnthrough resistance, wing structuralstrength retention properties, and autoignition threats during a ground-fire 

event for the required time duration. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

1, 2014. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–19823 Filed 8–20–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0124; Directorate 

Identifier 2012–NM–197–AD; Amendment 

39–17944; AD 2014–16–20] 

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 an analysis 

of the impacts of extended service goal 

activities on Airbus Model A300 series 

airplanes. This AD requires revising the 

maintenance or inspection program. We 

are issuing this AD to prevent failure of 

flight critical systems. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

September 25, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov/ 

#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0124; 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 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 February 28, 2014 

(79 FR 11358). The NPRM was 

prompted by an analysis of the impacts 

of extended service goal activities on 

Airbus Model A300 series airplanes. 

The NPRM proposed to require revising 

the maintenance program. We are 

issuing this AD to prevent failure of 

flight critical systems. 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2012–0233, 

dated November 7, 2012 (referred to 

after this as the Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the 

MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition 

on all Airbus Model A300 series 

airplanes. The MCAI states: 

The results of the Extended Service Goal 

(ESG) exercise for A300 series aeroplanes 

(75,000 flight hours (FH) or 48,000 flight 

cycles (FC), whichever occurs first) identified 

certain operational tests as Airworthiness 

Limitation Items (ALI), necessary to ensure 

the safety objectives for aeroplanes which 

have accumulated or exceeded 60,000 FH. 

These ALI are not fully new, since all nine 

tasks derive from existing Maintenance 

Planning Document (MPD) tasks. 

Consequently, the intervals of those nine 

tasks can no longer be escalated or retained 

at an interval higher than that specified in 

this [EASA] AD for each task. 

Failure to comply with these tasks within 

the established maximum intervals could be 

detrimental to the safety of the affected 

aeroplanes. 

For the reasons described above, this 

[EASA] AD requires the implementation of 

nine specific operational ALI test for 

aeroplanes which have accumulated or 

exceeded 60,000 FH. 

In addition, Airbus performed an analysis 

of the impacts of ESG activities on A300 

series aeroplanes and, based on the results, 

this [EASA] AD publishes an operational life 

of 75,000 FH or 48,000 FC, whichever occurs 

first, applicable to A300 system installations. 

You may examine the MCAI in the 

AD docket on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov/ 

#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-0124- 

0002. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

received no comments on the NPRM (79 

FR 11358, February 28, 2014) or on the 

determination of the cost to the public. 

‘‘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 11358, February 

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. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
49432 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 162 / Thursday, August 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

No comments were provided to the 

NPRM (79 FR 11358, February 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, the European Aviation 

Safety Agency (EASA), or Airbus’s 

EASA Design Organization Approval 

(DOA). 

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. 

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 

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 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 

11358, February 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 11358, 

February 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 7 

airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it will take 

about 1 work-hour 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 $0 per product. Based on these 

figures, we estimate the cost of this AD 

on U.S. operators to be $595, or $85 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, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 162 / Thursday, August 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 49433 

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-2014-0124; 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): 

2014–16–20 Airbus: Amendment 39–17944. 

Docket No. FAA–2014–0124; Directorate 

Identifier 2012–NM–197–AD. 

(a) Effective Date 

This AD becomes effective September 25, 

2014. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Airbus Model A300 B2– 

1A, B2–1C, B2K–3C, B2–203, B4–2C, B4–103, 

and B4–203 airplanes, certificated in any 

category, all serial numbers. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 05 Periodic Inspections; Code 

22, Auto Flight; Code 27, Flight Controls. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by an analysis of 

the impacts of extended service goal 

activities on Airbus Model A300 series 

airplanes. We are issuing this AD to prevent 

failure of flight critical systems. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Revision of Maintenance or Inspection 

Program 

Within 90 days after the effective date of 

this AD, revise the maintenance or inspection 

program, as applicable, to incorporate the 

information specified in Table 1 to paragraph 

(g) of this AD. The compliance time for doing 

the initial actions specified in Table 1 to 

paragraph (g) of this AD is before 60,000 total 

flight hours accumulated on the airplane, or 

within 90 days after the effective date of this 

AD, whichever occurs later. 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (g) OF THIS AD: INTERVALS FOR NEW AIRWORTHINESS LIMITATION ITEMS

Maintenance 

planning document task No. Task description Interval 

(not to exceed) 

Aircraft maintenance manual 

reference 

273311 0503 1 ARTIFICIAL FEEL-ELEVATOR—Operational test of pitch artificial feel by comparing qualitatively operating loads in high-speed and low-speed configurations 

(with each individual hydraulic system).

2,500 flight hours ...... 273300/501 

273313 0503 1 COMPUTER-ARTIFICIAL FEEL—Operational test of artificial feel ‘‘pitch feel’’ and 

‘‘rudder travel’’ monitoring circuits (warning light test and indicating system test).

3,500 flight hours ...... 272300/501 

and 

273300/501 

222100 0503 1 YAW DAMPER—Operational test to verify correct operation of mechanical control 

between yaw damper system 2 and the rudder.

80 flight hours ........... 222100/501 

222600 0503 1 YAW DAMPER—Operational test to verify correct operation of mechanical control 

between yaw damper system 2 and the rudder.

80 flight hours ........... 222600/501 

272411 0503 1 SERVO CONTROL-RUDDER—Operational test of rudder servo controls (with individual hydraulic system) by moving right-hand (RH) rudder pedal full forward and 

visually observe that rudder moves to the right. Check that rudder travel is confirmed on the flight control position indicator. Release RH pedal. Repeat above 

test by moving left-hand rudder pedal. 

250 flight hours ......... 271400/501 

275400 0503 1 FLAP ASYMMETRY—Operational test of flap asymmetry monitoring circuit (include solenoid operation).500 flight hours .......... 275400/501 

275400 0503 2 FLAP PRESSURE-OFF BRAKE—Operational test of pressure-off brake ................. 1,000 flight hours ...... 275400/501 

278300 0503 1 SLAT ASYMMETRY—Operational test of slat asymmetry monitoring circuit ............ 500 flight hours ......... 278300/501 

278300 0503 2 SLAT PRESSURE-OFF BRAKE—Operational test of pressure-off brake ................. 1,000 flight hours ...... 278300/501 

(h) Airplane Airworthiness Limitation 

As of the effective date of this AD, do not 

operate any airplane beyond 75,000 total 

flight hours or 48,000 total flight cycles, 

whichever occurs first. 

(i) No Alternative Actions and Intervals 

After accomplishing the revision required 

by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative 

actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals may be 

used unless the actions or intervals are 

approved as an alternative method of 

compliance in accordance with the 

procedures specified in paragraph (j)(1) of 

this AD. 

(j) 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: 

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. 

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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
49434 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 162 / Thursday, August 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

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. 

(k) Related Information 

Refer to Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information (MCAI) European 

Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness 

Directive 2012–0233, dated November 7, 

2012, for related information. This MCAI 

may be found in the AD docket on the 

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

#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-0124-0002. 

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference 

None. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 

4, 2014. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–19549 Filed 8–20–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–1065; Directorate 

Identifier 2011–NM–230–AD; Amendment 

39–17915; AD 2014—15–13] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, 

Inc. Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are superseding 

Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2005–15– 

04 for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model 

CL–600–1A11 (CL–600), CL–600–2A12 

(CL–601), and CL–600–2B16 (CL–601– 

3A, CL–601–3R, and CL–604 Variants) 

airplanes. AD 2005–15–04 required 

operators to assign serial numbers or 

part numbers to certain landing gear 

parts; establish the number of landings 

on the parts, if necessary; and revise the 

Airworthiness Limitations Section 

(ALS) of the Instructions for Continued 

Airworthiness (ICA) to reflect the new 

life limits of the landing gear parts. This 

new AD adds airplanes to the 

applicability, requires operators to 

assign serial numbers or part numbers to 

certain additional landing gear parts to 

establish the number of landings on the 

parts if necessary, and requires 

operators to record in all required 

airplane technical records and manuals 

the new part numbers, serial numbers, 

and landings assigned to these parts. 

This AD was prompted by reports that 

landing gear parts that have safe-life 

limits but do not have serial numbers or 

part numbers can be removed from one 

landing gear and re-installed on another, 

making tracking difficult. We are issuing 

this AD to prevent life-limited landing 

gear parts from being used beyond their 

safe-life limits, which could lead to 

collapse of the landing gear. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

September 25, 2014. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in this AD 

as of September 25, 2014. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain other publications listed in 

this AD as of August 30, 2005 (70 FR 

43032, July 26, 2005). 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov/ 

#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2013-1065; 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 Bombardier, Inc./Canadair 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. For 

Messier-Dowty service information 

identified in this AD, contact Messier 

Services Americas, Customer Support 

Center, 45360 Severn Way, Sterling, VA 

20166–8910; phone: 703–450–8233; fax: 

703–404–1621; Internet: https:// 

techpubs.services/messier-dowty.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: 

Andreas Rambalakos, Aerospace 

Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical 

Systems Branch, ANE–171, FAA, New 

York Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 

Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, 

NY 11590; telephone (516) 228–7345; 

fax (516) 794–5531. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to supersede AD 2005–15–04, 

Amendment 39–14193 (70 FR 43032, 

July 26, 2005). AD 2005–15–04 applied 

to certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL– 

600–1A11 (CL–600), CL–600–2A12 (CL– 

601), and CL–600–2B16 (CL–601–3A, 

CL–601–3R, and CL–604 Variants) 

airplanes. The NPRM published in the 

Federal Register on December 30, 2013 

(78 FR 79329). The NPRM was 

prompted by reports that landing gear 

parts that have safe-life limits but do not 

have serial numbers or part numbers 

can be removed from one landing gear 

and re-installed on another, making 

tracking difficult. The NPRM proposed 

to add airplanes to the applicability, 

require operators to assign serial 

numbers or part numbers to certain 

additional landing gear parts to 

establish the number of landings on the 

parts if necessary, and requires 

operators to record in all required 

airplane technical records and manuals 

the new part numbers, serial numbers, 

and landings assigned to these parts. We 

are issuing this AD to prevent lifelimited landing gear parts from being 

used beyond their safe-life limits, which 

could lead to collapse of the landing 

gear. 

Transport Canada Civil Aviation 

(TCCA), which is the airworthiness 

authority for Canada, has issued 

Canadian Airworthiness Directives CF– 

2003–18R2, dated September 28, 2011; 

CF–2003–20R1, dated September 28, 

2011; and CF–2003–21R2, dated 

September 28, 2011 (referred to after 

this as the Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the 

MCAI’’); to correct an unsafe condition 

for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL– 

600–1A11 (CL–600), CL–600–2A12 (CL– 

601), and CL–600–2B16 (CL–601–3A, 

CL–601–3R, and CL–604 Variants) 

airplanes. The MCAI states: 

Certain landing gear parts that are listed in 

the aeroplane model Airworthiness 

Limitations Section, as safe life items with 

structural life limits, could be rotable and 

may not have been serialized, making 

tracking difficult. This [Canadian 

airworthiness] directive mandates that such 

parts be serialized. This [Canadian 

airworthiness] directive also provides the 

procedure to determine the number of 

landings for those parts where the service 

history cannot be established. 

* * * * * 

[T]his [Canadian Airworthiness] directive 

* * * mandate[s] serialization of * * * 

additional landing gear parts. 

This AD also adds airplanes to the 

applicability. The unsafe condition is 

using life-limited landing gear parts 

beyond their safe-life limits, which 

could lead to collapse of the landing 

gear. You may examine the MCAI in the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES