Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A300, A310, and A300-600 Series Airplanes

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96-NM-155-AD; Amendment 39-10177; AD 97-22-06]

RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A300, A310, and A300-600

Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to all Airbus Model A300, A310, and A300-600 series

airplanes, that requires performing a ram air turbine (RAT) extension

test; removing and disassembling the RAT uplock mechanism; performing

an inspection to detect corrosion of the RAT uplock mechanism, and

replacement with a new assembly, if necessary; and cleaning all the

parts of the RAT control shaft and its bearing component parts. This

amendment is prompted by reports indicating that the RAT did not extend

during ground testing, due to corrosion in the uplock pin/shaft and the

needle bearing of the RAT. The actions specified by this AD are

intended to detect and correct such corrosion of the RAT, which could

result in failure of the RAT to deploy and subsequent loss of emergency

hydraulic power to the flight controls in the event that power is lost

in both engines.

DATES: Effective December 2, 1997.

The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in

the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as

of December 2, 1997.

ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be

obtained from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707

Blagnac Cedex, France. This information may be examined at the Federal

Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules

Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of

the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Manager, International Office, ANM-

113, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 227-2110; fax (425) 227-

1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness

directive (AD) that is applicable to all Airbus Model A300, A310, and

A300-600 series airplanes was published in the Federal Register on

February 19, 1997 (62 FR 7380). That action proposed to require a RAT

extension test during ground testing; removal and disassembly of the

RAT uplock mechanism; a visual inspection to detect corrosion of the

RAT uplock mechanism, and replacement of the assembly with new parts,

if necessary; and cleaning of the lever assembly and its associated

parts.

Comments

Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate

in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to

the comments received.

Revision of Descriptive Language

One commenter points out that throughout the proposed AD it

references ram air turbine (RAT) uplock assembly and lever assembly as

if these assemblies are the same unit. However, Airbus Service Bulletin

A310-29-2076, dated April 1, 1996 (which is referenced in the proposal

as an appropriate source of service information) refers to these

assemblies as separate units. The FAA finds that clarification of this

point is necessary.

The FAA finds that ``RAT uplock assembly'' does not appear in the

proposed AD, but ``RAT lever assembly'' does. The FAA has determined

that the phrase ``RAT uplock mechanism,'' which includes both the lever

assembly and uplock unit, provides a more complete description, than

the phrase, ``RAT lever assembly.'' The FAA has revised the final rule

to include reference to ``RAT uplock mechanism'' and added a new NOTE 2

to provide a definition of that phrase.

Clarification of Requirements

One commenter points out that paragraph (a) of the proposed AD

references accomplishment of paragraph (a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), and

(a)(4) of the AD; however, paragraph (a)(3) and (a)(4) of the proposed

AD are missing. The FAA acknowledges that it inadvertently included a

reference to paragraphs (a)(3) and (a)(4) in paragraph (a) of the

proposed AD. The FAA has revised paragraph (a) of the final rule to

delete these references.

Request To Defer Replacement of Corroded Parts

One commenter requests that paragraph (a)(2)(ii) be revised to

allow reinstallation of the corroded part and require its replacement

within 30 days. The commenter points out that operators would have to

stock every part of the subject assembly at the inspection stations

(which is not very practical), or its airplanes would have unnecessary

time out-of-service while waiting for parts. The FAA has reconsidered

replacing corroded parts prior to further flight. The FAA finds that

the cleaning and lubrication procedures of the RAT uplock mechanism can

be accomplished on a temporary basis, in lieu of replacement of

corroded parts. However, unlike the 12-month compliance time

recommended in the Airbus service bulletins specified as the

appropriate service information for this AD, the FAA has determined

that the corroded parts must be replaced within 30 days following

accomplishment of the cleaning and lubrication. The FAA finds that this

compliance time represents the maximum interval of time allowable

wherein the subject replacement could reasonably be accomplished,

uncorroded parts could be obtained, and an acceptable level of safety

could be maintained. Therefore, the FAA has revised paragraph

(a)(2)(ii) of the final rule accordingly.

Revision of Compliance Time in Paragraph (a) of this AD

In addition, the compliance time specified in paragraph (a) of this

AD has been revised to state, ``30 months since date of manufacture,''

rather than ``30 months total time-in-service,'' as stated in the

proposed rule. This change clarifies that the compliance is to be

determined based on calendar time, without regard to the amount of time

for which the airplane is operated.

Conclusion

After careful review of the available data, including the comments

noted above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public

interest require the adoption of the rule with the changes previously

described. The FAA has determined that these changes will neither

increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of

the AD.

[[Page 55727]]

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 80 Airbus Model A300, A310, and A300-600

series airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected by this AD, that it

will take approximately 10 work hours per airplane to accomplish the

required actions, and that the average labor rate is $60 per work hour.

Required parts would be provided by the manufacturer at no cost to the

operator. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $48,000, or $600 per airplane.

The cost impact figure discussed above is based on assumptions that

no operator has yet accomplished any of the requirements of this AD

action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in the

future if this AD were not adopted.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct

effects 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.

Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is

determined that this final rule does not have sufficient federalism

implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (1) is

not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866;

(2) is not a ``significant rule'' under 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. A final evaluation has been prepared for this action

and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained

from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by

reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of

the Federal Aviation Regulations (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.

Sec. 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new

airworthiness directive:

97-22-06 Airbus Industrie: Amendment 39-10177. Docket 96-NM-

155-AD.

Applicability: All Model Airbus Model A300, A310, and A300-600

series airplanes, certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the

preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the

requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,

altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of

this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (c) of

this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of

the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition

addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been

eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to

address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished

previously.

To detect and correct corrosion of the ram air turbine (RAT)

uplock pin/shaft and needle that could result in failure of the RAT

to deploy and subsequent loss of emergency hydraulic power to the

flight controls in the event that power is lost in both engines,

accomplish the following:

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 30 months since the date of

manufacture, or within 3 months after the effective date of this AD,

whichever occurs later: Accomplish the requirements of paragraphs

(a)(1) and (a)(2) of this AD in accordance with Airbus Service

Bulletin A300-29-0108, dated April 1, 1996 (for Model A300 series

airplanes); A310-29-2076, dated April 1, 1996 (for Model A310 series

airplanes); or A300-29-6037, dated April 1, 1996 (for Model A300-600

series airplanes); as applicable. Thereafter, repeat these actions

at intervals not to exceed 30 months.

(1) Perform a RAT extension test on the ground, in accordance

with the procedures specified in the Maintenance Manual.

(2) Disassemble and remove the uplock mechanism of the RAT and

perform a visual inspection of the uplock mechanism to detect

corrosion, in accordance with the applicable service bulletin.

Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, the RAT uplock mechanism

includes both the lever assembly and uplock unit.

(i) If no corrosion is detected: Prior to further flight, clean

and lubricate the uplock mechanism and its associated parts,

reinstall the assembly, and perform a retraction/extension/

retraction of the RAT, in accordance with the applicable service

bulletin.

(ii) If any corrosion is detected in any part of the uplock

mechanism, prior to further flight, accomplish either paragraph

(a)(2)(ii)(A) or (a)(2)(ii)(B) of this AD in accordance with the

applicable service bulletin.

(A) Replace the uplock mechanism with a new part and perform a

retraction/extension/retraction of the RAT, in accordance with the

applicable service bulletin. Or

(B) Clean and lubricate the uplock mechanism and its associated

parts. Within 30 days following accomplishment of this cleaning and

lubrication, replace the uplock mechanism with a new part and

perform a retraction/extension/retraction of the RAT.

(b) Initial accomplishment of the actions required by paragraph

(a) of this AD that have been performed in accordance with Airbus

All Operator Telex (AOT) 29-16, Revision 01, dated January 10, 1996,

is considered acceptable for compliance with the initial RAT

extension test and an initial visual inspection as required by

paragraph (a) of this AD. However, the first repetitive inspection,

as required by paragraph (a) of this AD, must be performed within 30

months after that RAT extension test and visual inspection were

conducted, and repeated thereafter at intervals not to exceed 30

months.

(c) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the

compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager, Standardization Branch, ANM-113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators shall submit their

requests through an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector,

who may add comments and then send it to the Manager,

Standardization Branch, ANM-113.

Note 3: Information concerning the existence of approved

alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Standardization Branch, ANM-113.

(d) 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 requirements of this AD can be accomplished.

(e) The actions shall be done in accordance with Airbus Service

Bulletin A300-29-0108, dated April 1, 1996; Airbus Service Bulletin

A310-29-2076, dated April 1, 1996; or Airbus Service Bulletin A300-

29-6037, dated April 1, 1996; as applicable. This incorporation by

reference was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be

obtained from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707

Blagnac Cedex, France. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or

at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street,

NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

Note 4: The subject of this AD is addressed in French

airworthiness directive 95-163-182 (B) R2, dated June 5, 1996.

(f) This amendment becomes effective on December 2, 1997.

[[Page 55728]]

Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 20, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification

Service.

[FR Doc. 97-28320 Filed 10-27-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P