34516 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 135 / Thursday, July 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

original issue date on this service bulletin,’’ 

this AD requires compliance within the 

specified compliance time after the effective 

date of this AD. 

(i) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

767–53A0193, Revision 1, dated April 9, 

2009, specifies to contact Boeing for 

appropriate action, accomplish applicable 

actions before further flight using a method 

approved in accordance with the procedures 

specified in paragraph (l) of this AD. 

Report 

(j) At the applicable time specified in 

paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD: Submit 

a report of the findings (both positive and 

negative) of the inspections required by 

paragraph (g) of this AD. Operators may use 

the reporting form contained in Appendixes 

B and C, as applicable, of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 767–53A0193, Revision 1, 

dated April 9, 2009. Send the report to 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 

3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–2207. The 

report must contain, at a minimum, the 

inspection results, a description of any 

discrepancies found, the airplane serial 

number, and the number of flight cycles and 

flight hours on the airplane. Under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved the information collection 

requirements contained in this AD and has 

assigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056. 

(1) If the inspection was done on or after 

the effective date of this AD: Submit the 

report within 30 days after the inspection. 

(2) If the inspection was done before the 

effective date of this AD: Submit the report 

within 30 days after the effective date of this 

AD. 

Credit for Actions Accomplished Previously 

(k) Actions accomplished previously in 

accordance with Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 767–53A0193, dated November 25, 

2008, are considered acceptable for 

compliance with the applicable actions 

specified in this AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(l)(1) The Manager, Seattle 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. Send information to ATTN: 

Berhane Alazar, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind 

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057– 

3356; telephone (425) 917–6577; fax (425) 

917–6590. Or, e-mail information to 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov. 

(2) To request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 

39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your principal maintenance inspector 

(PMI) or principal avionics inspector (PAI), 

as appropriate, or lacking a principal 

inspector, your local Flight Standards District 

Office. The AMOC approval letter must 

specifically reference this AD. 

(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 an 

Authorized Representative for the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option 

Authorization Organization who has been 

authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to 

make those findings. For a repair method to 

be approved, the repair must meet the 

certification basis of the airplane and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 2, 

2009. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–16872 Filed 7–15–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–0613; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–NM–013–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model 

A310–221, –222, –322, –324, and –325 

Airplanes, and Model A300B4–620, B4– 

622, B4–622R, F4–605R, and F4–622R 

Airplanes, Equipped With Pratt & 

Whitney PW4000 or JT9D–7R4 Series 

Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. This proposed 

AD results from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

originated by an aviation authority of 

another country to identify and correct 

an unsafe condition on an aviation 

product. The MCAI describes the unsafe 

condition as: 

During the year 2000, life extension 

exercise programs were launched for Airbus 

A310 and A300–600 aircraft. Certification of 

Extended Service Goal (ESG) is based on 

analysis, except for fan cowl and thrust 

reverser (T/R) latches, which are always 

certified by tests. 

* * * testing of the T/R door centre latch has 

shown that this does not meet the 

requirements for ESG. 

* * * * * 

The unsafe condition is possible failure 

of the T/R latch and detachment of the 

T/R from the airplane, which could 

result in structural damage and 

consequent reduced controllability of 

the airplane. The proposed AD would 

require actions that are intended to 

address the unsafe condition described 

in the MCAI. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by August 17, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–40, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

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

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Airbus SAS– 

EAW (Airworthiness Office), 1 Rond 

Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac 

Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 

96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; e-mail: 

account.airworth-eas@airbus.com; 

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

may review copies of the referenced 

service information at the FAA, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. 

For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call 425–227– 

1221 or 425–227–1152. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Operations 

office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is in 

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan 

Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 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 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 135 / Thursday, July 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules 34517 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2009–0613; Directorate Identifier 

2009–NM–013–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 2008–0226, 

dated December 19, 2008 (referred to 

after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an 

unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The MCAI states: 

During the year 2000, life extension 

exercise programs were launched for Airbus 

A310 and A300–600 aircraft. Certification of 

Extended Service Goal (ESG) is based on 

analysis, except for fan cowl and thrust 

reverser (T/R) latches, which are always 

certified by tests. 

Currently, the Airworthiness Limitation 

Item (ALI) task 54–50–28 for engine pylon T/ 

R hinges requires inspection every 1,200 

Flight Cycles (FC). An analysis performed by 

Airbus shows that forward and aft T/R door 

latches have been demonstrated successful 

for ESG, with inspection task every 1,200 FC. 

However, testing of the T/R door centre latch 

has shown that this does not meet the 

requirements for ESG. 

For the reason described above, this EASA 

AD requires the replacement of the T/R 

centre latches with serialized latches on LH 

[left hand] and RH [right hand] engines and 

repetitive inspections [for cracking] of the 

serialized latches. In addition, this AD 

introduces a life limit of 18,000 FC for the 

serialized centre latches. 

The unsafe condition is possible failure 

of the T/R latch and detachment of the 

T/R from the airplane, which could 

result in structural damage and 

consequent reduced controllability of 

the airplane. The corrective action 

includes replacing the T/R latch if any 

surface crack is found during any 

inspection. You may obtain further 

information by examining the MCAI in 

the AD docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

Airbus has issued Mandatory Service 

Bulletins A300–78–6029 and A310–78– 

2030, both including Appendix 1, both 

dated October 3, 2008. The actions 

described in this service information are 

intended to correct the unsafe condition 

identified in the MCAI. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This Proposed AD 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of another 

country, and is approved for operation 

in the United States. Pursuant to our 

bilateral agreement with the State of 

Design Authority, we have been notified 

of the unsafe condition described in the 

MCAI and service information 

referenced above. We are proposing this 

AD because we evaluated all pertinent 

information and determined an unsafe 

condition exists and is likely to exist or 

develop on other products of the same 

type design. 

Differences Between This AD and the 

MCAI or Service Information 

We have reviewed the MCAI and 

related service information and, in 

general, agree with their substance. But 

we might have found it necessary to use 

different words from those in the MCAI 

to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. 

operators and is enforceable. In making 

these changes, we do not intend to differ 

substantively from the information 

provided in the MCAI and related 

service information. 

We might also have proposed 

different actions in this AD from those 

in the MCAI in order to follow FAA 

policies. Any such differences are 

highlighted in a NOTE within the 

proposed AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

Based on the service information, we 

estimate that this proposed AD would 

affect about 207 products of U.S. 

registry. We also estimate that it would 

take about 30 work-hours per product to 

comply with the basic requirements of 

this proposed AD. The average labor 

rate is $80 per work-hour. Required 

parts would cost about $6,442 per 

product. Where the service information 

lists required parts costs that are 

covered under warranty, we have 

assumed that there will be no charge for 

these costs. As we do not control 

warranty coverage for affected parties, 

some parties may incur costs higher 

than estimated here. Based on these 

figures, we estimate the cost of the 

proposed AD on U.S. operators to be 

$1,830,294, or $8,842 per product. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this proposed regulation: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 

3. Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD and placed it in the 

AD docket. 

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 AD: 

Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2009–0613; 

Directorate Identifier 2009–NM–013–AD. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
34518 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 135 / Thursday, July 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by August 

17, 2009. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A310– 

221, –222, –322, –324, and –325 airplanes, 

and Model A300B4–620, B4–622, B4–622R, 

F4–605R, and F4–622R airplanes, all serial 

numbers; certificated in any category; 

equipped with Pratt & Whitney PW4000 or 

JT9D–7R4 series engines. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 78: Engine exhaust. 

Reason 

(e) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states: 

During the year 2000, life extension 

exercise programs were launched for Airbus 

A310 and A300–600 aircraft. Certification of 

Extended Service Goal (ESG) is based on 

analysis, except for fan cowl and thrust 

reverser (T/R) latches, which are always 

certified by tests. 

Currently, the Airworthiness Limitation 

Item (ALI) task 54–50–28 for engine pylon T/ 

R hinges requires inspection every [1,200] 

Flight Cycles (FC). An analysis performed by 

Airbus shows that forward and aft T/R door 

latches have been demonstrated successful 

for ESG, with inspection task every 1200 FC. 

However, testing of the T/R door centre latch 

has shown that this does not meet the 

requirements for ESG. 

For the reason described above, this EASA 

AD requires the replacement of the T/R 

centre latches with serialized latches on LH 

[left hand] and RH [right hand] engines and 

repetitive inspections [for cracking] of the 

serialized latches. In addition, this AD 

introduces a life limit of 18000 FC for the 

serialized centre latches. 

The unsafe condition is possible failure of 

the T/R latch and detachment of the T/R from 

the airplane, which could result in structural 

damage and consequent reduced 

controllability of the airplane. The corrective 

action includes replacing the T/R latch if any 

surface crack is found during any inspection. 

Actions and Compliance 

(f) Unless already done, do the following 

actions. 

(1) Before the accumulation of 30,000 total 

flight cycles since first flight of the airplane, 

or within 1,200 flight cycles after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 

later: Replace the non-serialized T/R center 

latch LH (left hand) and RH (right hand) 

sides, having part number (P/N) 221D0029– 

11 and P/N 221D0029–13, with a serialized 

T/R center latch having P/N 221D0029–15 in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Mandatory Service 

Bulletin A300–78–6029 or A310–78–2030, 

both including Appendix 1, both dated 

October 3, 2008; as applicable. 

(2) Within 1,200 flight cycles after 

accomplishing the replacement required by 

paragraph (f)(1) of this AD: Perform an 

inspection for surface cracking of the T/R 

center serialized latches having P/N 

221D0029–15, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Mandatory Service Bulletin A300–78–6029 

or A310–78–2030, both including Appendix 

1, both dated October 3, 2008; as applicable. 

If any crack is found, before further flight, 

replace the serialized T/R center latch with 

a new serialized T/R center latch in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Mandatory Service 

Bulletin A300–78–6029 or A310–78–2030, 

both including Appendix 1, both dated 

October 3, 2008; as applicable. Repeat the 

inspection thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 1,200 flight cycles. 

(3) Before the accumulation of 18,000 total 

flight cycles since accomplishing the most 

recent replacement required by paragraph 

(f)(1) or (f)(2) of this AD: Replace the 

serialized T/R center latch having P/N 

221D0029–15 with a new serialized T/R 

center latch having P/N 221D0029–15 in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Mandatory Service 

Bulletin A300–78–6029 or A310–78–2030, 

both including Appendix 1, both dated 

October 3, 2008; as applicable. Replacement 

of the center latches does not constitute 

terminating action for the repetitive 

inspections required by paragraph (f)(2) of 

this AD. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: No 

differences. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(g) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, International 

Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, FAA, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

Send information to ATTN: Dan Rodina, 

Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, 

ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 

227–2125; fax (425) 227–1149. Before using 

any approved AMOC on any airplane to 

which the AMOC applies, notify your 

principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or 

principal avionics inspector (PAI), as 

appropriate, or lacking a principal inspector, 

your local Flight Standards District Office. 

The AMOC approval letter must specifically 

reference this AD. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(3) Reporting Requirements: For any 

reporting requirement in this AD, under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 

the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

has approved the information collection 

requirements and has assigned OMB Control 

Number 2120–0056. 

Related Information 

(h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation 

Safety Agency Airworthiness Directive 2008– 

0226, dated December 19, 2008; and Airbus 

Mandatory Service Bulletins A300–78–6029 

and A310–78–2030, both including 

Appendix 1, both dated October 3, 2008; for 

related information. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 2, 

2009. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–16942 Filed 7–15–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2006–25001; Directorate 

Identifier 2006–NM–079–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 737–600, –700, –700C, –800, 

–900 and –900ER Series Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM); 

reopening of comment period. 

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier 

proposed airworthiness directive (AD) 

for all Boeing Model 737–600, –700, 

–700C, –800, –900 and –900ER series 

airplanes. That supplemental NPRM 

would have required a one-time 

inspection to determine the part 

numbers of the aero/fire seals of the 

blocker doors on the thrust reverser 

torque boxes on the engines, and 

replacing affected aero/fire seals with 

new improved aero/fire seals. This 

action resulted from a report that the top 

3 inches of the aero/fire seals of the 

blocker doors on the thrust reverser 

torque boxes are not fireproof. This 

second supplemental NPRM revises the 

first supplemental NPRM by changing 

the compliance time for the 

replacement. We are proposing this 

second supplemental NPRM to prevent 

a fire in the fan compartment (a fire 

zone) from migrating through the seal to 

a flammable fluid in the thrust reverser 

actuator compartment (a flammable 

fluid leakage zone), which could result 

in an uncontrolled fire. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this supplemental NPRM by August 10, 

2009. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1