This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

21648 

Vol. 79, No. 74 

Thursday, April 17, 2014 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0235; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NM–249–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company 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 

The Boeing Company Model DC–8–55, 

DC–8F–54, and DC–8F–55 airplanes, 

Model DC–8–60 series airplanes, Model 

DC–8–60F series airplanes, Model DC– 

8–70 series airplanes, and Model DC–8– 

70F series airplanes. This proposed AD 

was prompted by multiple reports of 

cracking of the upper aft skin panel of 

the fuselage. An evaluation by the 

design approval holder (DAH) indicates 

that the upper aft skin panel of the 

fuselage is subject to widespread fatigue 

damage (WFD). This proposed AD 

would require removing any previously 

installed local repairs; installing a fulllength improvement modification with 

finger doublers or a full-length repair 

with finger doublers; and repetitive 

inspections for cracking of the doublers, 

and repair if necessary. We are 

proposing this AD to detect and correct 

fatigue cracking of the upper aft skin 

panel of the fuselage, which could result 

in loss of structural integrity and 

consequent rapid decompression of the 

airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by June 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: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data 

& Services Management, 3855 

Lakewood Boulevard, MC D800–0019, 

Long Beach, CA 90846–0001; telephone 

206–544–5000, extension 2; fax 206– 

766–5683; Internet https://

www.myboeingfleet.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– 

0235; 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 Office 

(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Chandraduth Ramdoss, Aerospace 

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, 

FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification 

Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Blvd., 

Suite 100, Lakewood, CA 90712–4137, 

phone: 562–627–5239; fax: 562–627– 

5210; email: chandraduth.ramdoss@

faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposal. Send your comments to 

an address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 

2014–0235; Directorate Identifier 2013– 

NM–249–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 because of 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 

Structural fatigue damage is 

progressive. It begins as minute cracks, 

and those cracks grow under the action 

of repeated stresses. This can happen 

because of normal operational 

conditions and design attributes, or 

because of isolated situations or 

incidents such as material defects, poor 

fabrication quality, or corrosion pits, 

dings, or scratches. Fatigue damage can 

occur locally, in small areas or 

structural design details, or globally. 

Global fatigue damage is general 

degradation of large areas of structure 

with similar structural details and stress 

levels. Multiple-site damage is global 

damage that occurs in a large structural 

element such as a single rivet line of a 

lap splice joining two large skin panels. 

Global damage can also occur in 

multiple elements such as adjacent 

frames or stringers. Multiple-sitedamage and multiple-element-damage 

cracks are typically too small initially to 

be reliably detected with normal 

inspection methods. Without 

intervention, these cracks will grow, 

and eventually compromise the 

structural integrity of the airplane, in a 

condition known as WFD. As an 

airplane ages, WFD will likely occur, 

and will certainly occur if the airplane 

is operated long enough without any 

intervention. 

The FAA’s WFD final rule (75 FR 

69746, November 15, 2010) became 

effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD 

rule requires certain actions to prevent 

catastrophic failure due to WFD 

throughout the operational life of 

certain existing transport category 

airplanes and all of these airplanes that 

will be certificated in the future. For 

existing and future airplanes subject to 

the WFD rule, the rule requires that 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 74 / Thursday, April 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 21649 

DAHs establish a limit of validity (LOV) 

of the engineering data that support the 

structural maintenance program. 

Operators affected by the WFD rule may 

not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, 

unless an extended LOV is approved. 

The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, 

November 15, 2010) does not require 

identifying and developing maintenance 

actions if the DAHs can show that such 

actions are not necessary to prevent 

WFD before the airplane reaches the 

LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend 

on accomplishment of future 

maintenance actions. As stated in the 

WFD rule, any maintenance actions 

necessary to reach the LOV will be 

mandated by airworthiness directives 

through separate rulemaking actions. 

In the context of WFD, this approach 

is necessary to enable DAHs to propose 

LOVs that allow operators the longest 

operational lives for their airplanes, and 

still ensure that WFD will not occur. 

This approach allows for an 

implementation strategy that provides 

flexibility to DAHs in determining the 

timing of service information 

development (with FAA approval), 

while providing operators with certainty 

regarding the LOV applicable to their 

airplanes. 

During routine maintenance 

inspections, three operators reported 

finding cracks in the upper aft skin 

panel. The cracks were located along the 

upper row of rivets common to the 

longeron 28 skin splice, near the flat aft 

pressure bulkhead. Cracks were 

detected on airplanes that had 

accumulated between 27,072 and 46,176 

total flight cycles. This cracking, if not 

corrected, could result in fatigue 

cracking of the upper aft skin panel of 

the fuselage, which could result in loss 

of structural integrity and consequent 

rapid decompression of the airplane. 

Relevant Service Information 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin DC8–53A080, Revision 2, dated 

September 18, 2013. For information on 

the procedures and compliance times, 

see this service information at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

Docket No. FAA–2014–0235. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this AD because we 

evaluated all the relevant information 

and determined the unsafe condition 

described previously is likely to exist or 

develop in other products of the same 

type design. 

Proposed AD Requirements 

This proposed AD would require 

removing previously installed local 

repairs; installing a full-length 

improvement modification with finger 

doublers, or a full-length repair with 

finger doublers; and doing repetitive 

detailed inspections or repetitive low 

frequency eddy current inspections for 

cracking along all four edges of the 

doublers, and corrective action if 

necessary. 

Related Rulemaking 

On March 9, 2008, we issued AD 

2008–06–23, Amendment 39–15435 (73 

FR 14378, March 18, 2008). AD 2008– 

06–23 provides an option to install fulllength preventive modifications or fulllength repairs, and requires repetitive 

inspections. Accomplishing these 

actions is a method of compliance with 

the requirements of paragraphs (g) and 

(h) of this proposed AD. 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8– 

53A080, Revision 2, dated September 

18, 2013, specifies to contact the 

manufacturer for instructions on how to 

repair certain conditions, but this 

proposed AD would require repairing 

those conditions in one of the following 

ways: 

• In accordance with a method that 

we approve; or 

• Using data that meet the 

certification basis of the airplane, and 

that have been approved by the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) whom 

we have authorized to make those 

findings. 

Explanation of Compliance Time 

The compliance time for the 

modification specified in this proposed 

AD for addressing WFD was established 

to ensure that discrepant structure is 

modified before WFD develops in 

airplanes. Standard inspection 

techniques cannot be relied on to detect 

WFD before it becomes a hazard to 

flight. We will not grant any extensions 

of the compliance time to complete any 

AD-mandated service bulletin related to 

WFD without extensive new data that 

would substantiate and clearly warrant 

such an extension. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 18 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We estimate the following costs to 

comply with this proposed AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. operators 

Full-length modification or 

repair.

Up to 184 work-hours × 

$85 per hour = $15,640.

Up to $14,720 ................... Up to $30,360 ................... Up to $546,480. 

Inspection .......................... 9 work-hours × $85 per 

hour = $765 per inspection cycle.

$0 ...................................... $765 per inspection cycle $13,770 per inspection 

cycle. 

We have received no definitive data 

that would enable us to provide cost 

estimates for the on-condition actions 

specified in this proposed AD. 

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 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
21650 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 74 / Thursday, April 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

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): 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2014–0235; Directorate Identifier 2013– 

NM–249–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by June 2, 

2014. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD affects AD 2008–06–23, 

Amendment 39–15435 (73 FR 14378, March 

18, 2008). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to The Boeing Company 

airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(1) 

through (c)(6) of this AD, certificated in any 

category, as identified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin DC8–53A080, Revision 2, 

dated September 18, 2013. 

(1) The Boeing Company Model DC–8–55 

airplanes. 

(2) The Boeing Company Model DC–8F–54 

and DC–8F–55 airplanes. 

(3) The Boeing Company Model DC–8–61, 

DC–8–62, and DC–8–63 airplanes. 

(4) The Boeing Company Model DC–8–61F, 

DC–8–62F, and DC–8–63F airplanes. 

(5) The Boeing Company Model DC–8–71, 

DC–8–72, and DC–8–73 airplanes. 

(6) The Boeing Company Model DC–8–71F, 

DC–8–72F, and DC–8–73F airplanes. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by multiple reports 

of cracking of the upper aft skin panel of the 

fuselage. An evaluation by the design 

approval holder indicates that the upper aft 

skin panel of the fuselage is subject to 

widespread fatigue damage. We are issuing 

this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking 

of the upper aft skin panel of the fuselage, 

which could result in loss of structural 

integrity and consequent rapid 

decompression of the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Modification or Repair 

Before the accumulation of 45,400 total 

flight cycles, or within 72 months after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 

later: Remove any previously installed local 

repairs and install a full-length improvement 

modification with finger doublers or a fulllength repair with finger doublers, as 

applicable, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin DC8–53A080, Revision 2, 

dated September 18, 2013. Installation of the 

full-length improvement modification or fulllength repair with finger doublers, in 

accordance with paragraph (i) of AD 2008– 

06–23, Amendment 39–15435 (73 FR 14378, 

March 18, 2008), is a method of compliance 

with the requirements of paragraph (g) of this 

AD. Installation of a local repair as specified 

in paragraph (i) of AD 2008–06–23, does not 

comply with the requirements of paragraph 

(g) of this AD. 

(h) Post-Modification or Post-Repair 

Repetitive Inspections 

After accomplishing the actions required 

by paragraph (g) of this AD, at the applicable 

time and intervals specified in paragraph 

(h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD: Do an external 

visual inspection or low frequency eddy 

current (LFEC) inspection for cracking along 

all four edges of the finger doublers, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

DC8–53A080, Revision 2, dated September 

18, 2013. Repeat the inspections thereafter at 

the applicable time and interval specified in 

paragraphs (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD. 

Accomplishment of the applicable repetitive 

inspection specified in paragraph (j)(1) or 

(j)(2)(ii) of AD 2008–06–23, Amendment 39– 

15435 (73 FR 14378, March 18, 2008), is a 

method of compliance with the applicable 

inspection requirements of paragraph (h) of 

this AD. 

(1) For an external visual inspection, 

within 30,000 flight cycles after doing the 

actions specified in paragraph (g) of this AD. 

Repeat the external visual inspection 

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 5,000 

flight cycles. 

(2) For an LFEC inspection, within 15,000 

flight cycles after doing the actions specified 

in paragraph (g) of this AD. Repeat the LFEC 

inspection thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 10,000 flight cycles. 

(i) Cracking Repair 

If any cracking is found during any 

inspection required by paragraph (h) of this 

AD: Before further flight, repair using a 

method approved in accordance with the 

procedures specified in paragraph (k) of this 

AD. 

(j) Credit for Previous Actions 

This paragraph provides credit for actions 

required by paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, 

if those actions were performed before the 

effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin DC8–53A080, dated June 22, 

2004; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8– 

53A080, Revision 1, dated May 3, 2013. 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8–53A080, 

dated June 22, 2004, was previously 

incorporated by reference in AD 2008–06–23, 

Amendment 39–15435 (73 FR 14378, March 

18, 2008). Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC8– 

53A080, Revision 1, dated May 3, 2013, is 

not incorporated by reference in this AD. 

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), 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 manager of the ACO, send it to the 

attention of the person identified in 

paragraph (l)(1) of this AD. Information may 

be emailed to: 9-ANM-LAACO-AMOCREQUESTS@faa.gov. 

(2) 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. 

(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair 

required by this AD if it is approved by the 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) that has 

been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles 

ACO, to make those findings. For a repair 

method to be approved, the repair must meet 

the certification basis of the airplane and 14 

CFR 25.571, Amendment 45, and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

(l) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Chandraduth Ramdoss, Aerospace 

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, 

FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification 

Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Blvd., Suite 

100, Lakewood, CA 90712–4137, phone: 562– 

627–5239; fax: 562–627–5210; email: 

chandraduth.ramdoss@faa.gov. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 

Management, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, MC 

D800–0019, Long Beach, CA 90846–0001; 

telephone 206–544–5000, extension 2; fax 

206–766–5683; Internet https://

www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this 

service information at the FAA, Transport 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 74 / Thursday, April 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules 21651 

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 April 8, 

2014. 

John P. Piccola, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–08726 Filed 4–16–14; 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] 

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 A300 series airplanes. 

This proposed 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 proposed AD would require 

revising the maintenance or inspection 

program to include the new life limits. 

We are proposing this AD to prevent 

reduced structural integrity of the 

airplane and possible loss of 

controllability of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by June 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–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 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 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– 

0236; 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: 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: 

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–2014–0236; Directorate Identifier 

2013–NM–184–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 2013–0210, 

dated September 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: 

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 by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2014– 

0236. 

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. 

This AD requires revisions to certain 

operator maintenance documents to 

include new actions (e.g., inspections). 

Compliance with these actions is 

required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For 

airplanes that have been previously 

modified, altered, or repaired in the 

areas addressed by this proposed AD, 

the operator may not be able to 

accomplish the actions described in the 

revisions. In this situation, to comply 

with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator 

must request approval for an alternative 

method of compliance according to the 

procedures specified in paragraph (i)(1) 

of this AD. The request should include 

a description of changes to the required 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS