Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310-203, -221, -222 Airplanes; and Model A300 F4-605R and -622R Airplanes

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 23, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7942-7945]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-3222]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0615; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-043-AD; 
Amendment 39-16206; AD 2010-04-13]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310-203, -221, -222 
Airplanes; and Model A300 F4-605R and -622R Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the 
products listed above. This 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:

    An A300-600 operator reported two events of IPECO pilot seat 
moved in the aft position, one during take-off roll and one during 
climb out. The investigation of these events showed that a broken/
missing spring contributed to the seat not being correctly locked.
    An unwanted movement of pilot or co-pilot seat in the aft 
direction is considered as potentially dangerous, especially during 
the take-off phase when the speed of the aeroplane is greater than 
100 knots and until landing gear retraction.
* * * * *
The unsafe condition is potential loss of control of the airplane 
during take-off and landing. We are issuing this AD to require actions 
to correct the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective March 30, 2010.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of March 30, 
2010.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the 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, Washington 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 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products. 
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on July 16, 2009 (74 FR 
34509). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the 
specified products. The MCAI states:

    An A300-600 operator reported two events of IPECO pilot seat 
moved in the aft position, one during take-off roll and one during 
climb out. The investigation of these events showed that a broken/
missing spring contributed to the seat not being correctly locked.
    An unwanted movement of pilot or co-pilot seat in the aft 
direction is considered as potentially dangerous, especially during 
the take-off phase when the speed of the aeroplane is greater than 
100 knots and until landing gear retraction.
    To prevent further incidents of inadvertent flight crew seat aft 
movement, this AD requires repetitive inspections of the affected 
seat springs and replacement of missing or broken parts. In 
addition, this AD requires replacement of the affected seats with 
modified P/N 3A218-000X-01-2 seats. Installation of both pilot and 
co-pilot seats P/N 3A218-000X-01-2 on an aeroplane constitutes 
terminating action for the repetitive inspection requirements of 
this AD for that aeroplane.

The unsafe condition is potential loss of control of the airplane 
during take-off and landing. You may obtain further information by 
examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing 
this AD. We considered the comments received.

Support for the AD

    The Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA), supports the 
NPRM.

Request for Extension of Proposed Compliance Time for Modification

    FedEx and UPS request that we extend the compliance time for the 
modification specified in paragraph (f)(4) of the NPRM from 6 months to 
30 months. The commenters explain that 6 months does not provide enough 
time for large operators with many aircraft to receive the parts kits. 
UPS explains further that their proposed compliance time will enable 
adequate industry support of the modification and at the same time 
enable operators to utilize regularly scheduled maintenance 
opportunities.
    We disagree with extending the proposed compliance time for the 
modification. While we recognize that

[[Page 7943]]

the initial lead time for parts kit delivery was excessive, IPECO now 
has a large stock of complete parts kits ready to be delivered. No 
further issue regarding availability of parts kits is foreseen. 
However, if parts kits availability becomes a problem in the future, 
under the provisions of paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, we will consider 
requests for approval of an extension of the compliance time if data 
are submitted to substantiate that the extension would provide an 
acceptable level of safety, provided that the operators are performing 
the repetitive inspections specified in paragraph (f) of this AD. We 
have made no change to the AD in this regard.

Request for Permission To Replace Old Parts With New Parts

    FedEx requests that we revise the NPRM to allow for replacing the 
existing locking springs with new springs of the same design as an 
interim action to delay installation of the modification. FedEx 
explains that all of its broken locking springs were found on seats 
that had been in service at least 4 years since there was a record of 
the springs being changed. FedEx states that the springs that were 
returned appeared to be corroded, which indicates that the failure of 
the springs was due to corrosion instead of fatigue.
    We do not agree with the request to revise this AD to allow for 
replacing the existing locking springs with new springs of the same 
design as an interim action to delay installation of the modification. 
While we recognize FedEx's assertion that failure of the springs was 
due to corrosion instead of fatigue, Airbus did not identify which 
failure mode was actually involved, as fatigue cracks could induce 
spring protection alteration and then corrosion. Further, it is 
possible that corrosion could actually lead to the weakening of the 
spring, where the fatigue effort would deteriorate the spring. 
Regardless of the findings by FedEx, parts kits are now available for 
the replacement of the locking springs, so there is no need to delay 
installation of the modification. However, if operators experience a 
delay in receiving kits, they may request approval of an AMOC in 
accordance with the procedures in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD. We have 
made no change to the AD in this regard.

Request To Use an Alternate Inspection Method

    FedEx requests that the NPRM be revised to allow operators to use 
other methods to perform the detailed inspection required in paragraph 
(f)(1) of this AD. FedEx explains that removing the seat bottom cushion 
and trying to view the springs through lightening holes in the seat 
bottom is difficult. FedEx explains further that maintenance personnel 
have used a mirror to perform the inspection or inspected the seat 
springs by looking up directly from underneath the seat. FedEx 
indicates that the springs are exposed on the bottom side of the seats 
and can be more easily viewed for defects by using this method.
    We agree that other methods of performing the detailed inspection 
required in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD might exist for the reasons 
stated in the previous paragraph. But, we do not agree to change this 
AD in this regard because insufficient data have been submitted to 
substantiate that the alternative inspection method would provide an 
acceptable level of safety. However, under the provisions of paragraph 
(g)(1) of this AD, we will consider requests for approval of an 
alternative inspection method if sufficient data are submitted to 
substantiate that the alternative inspection method would provide an 
acceptable level of safety.

Request for Clarification

    UPS requests that we change the word ``modified'' in paragraph 
(f)(3) of the NPRM to clarify that there is no modification required by 
that paragraph. UPS explains that the service information listed in 
paragraph (f)(3) of the NPRM requires inspection and replacement, but 
not modification.
    We agree to clarify paragraph (f)(3) of this final rule for the 
reason stated by UPS. We have changed ``modified'' to ``replaced'' in 
paragraph (f)(3) of this AD.

Explanation of Additional Change

    We have specified the issue numbers of each Airbus operations 
engineering bulletin throughout this final rule to adhere to 
requirements of the Office of the Federal Register's (OFR), for 
material incorporated by reference (IBR).

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comments received, 
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting 
the AD with the changes described previously. We determined that these 
changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or 
increase the scope of the AD.

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 required different actions in this AD from those 
in the MCAI in order to follow our FAA policies. Any such differences 
are highlighted in a Note within the AD.

Explanation of Change to Costs of Compliance

    Since issuance of the NPRM, we have increased the labor rate used 
in the Costs of Compliance from $80 per work-hour to $85 per work-hour. 
The Costs of Compliance information, below, reflects this increase in 
the specified hourly labor rate.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 132 products of U.S. registry. 
We also estimate that it will take about 11 work-hours 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 $1,214 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 parts. 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 this AD to the 
U.S. operators to be $283,668, or $2,149 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.

[[Page 7944]]

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 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); 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 AD and placed it in the AD docket.

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 the NPRM, 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by 
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, 
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
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]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2010-04-13 Airbus: Amendment 39-16206. Docket No. FAA-2009-0615; 
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-043-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective March 
30, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to the airplanes identified in paragraphs 
(c)(1) and (c)(2) of the AD, certificated in any category, having 
IPECO part number (P/N) 3A218-000X-01-1 pilot or co-pilot mechanical 
seats installed.
    (1) Airbus Model A310-203, A310-221, and A310-222 airplanes, all 
serial numbers.
    (2) Airbus Model A300 F4-605R and A300 F4-622R airplanes, all 
serial numbers.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 25: 
Equipment/Furnishings.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) 
states:
    An A300-600 operator reported two events of IPECO pilot seat 
moved in the aft position, one during take-off roll and one during 
climb out. The investigation of these events showed that a broken/
missing spring contributed to the seat not being correctly locked.
    An unwanted movement of pilot or co-pilot seat in the aft 
direction is considered as potentially dangerous, especially during 
the take-off phase when the speed of the aeroplane is greater than 
100 knots and until landing gear retraction.
    To prevent further incidents of inadvertent flight crew seat aft 
movement, this AD requires repetitive inspections of the affected 
seat springs and replacement of missing or broken parts. In 
addition, this AD requires replacement of the affected seats with 
modified P/N 3A218-000X-01-2 seats. Installation of both pilot and 
co-pilot seats P/N 3A218-000X-01-2 on an aeroplane constitutes 
terminating action for the repetitive inspection requirements of 
this AD for that aeroplane.

The unsafe condition is potential loss of control of the airplane 
during take-off and landing.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, and 
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 30 days, do a detailed visual 
inspection of the two springs of the pilot seat and co-pilot seat 
locking device, in accordance with Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 
A310-25A2199 or A300-25A6210, both dated July 9, 2008, as 
applicable.
    (i) If only one spring is missing or found damaged during any 
inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, within 10 days 
after the inspection or before further flight, whichever occurs 
later, replace the spring with a serviceable part, in accordance 
with Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-25A2199 or A300-25A6210, 
both dated July 9, 2008, as applicable. Before an airplane may be 
dispatched with one spring missing or damaged, the instructions 
contained in Airbus A310 Operations Engineering Bulletin 160, Issue 
2, dated October 2008; or Airbus A300-600 Operations Engineering 
Bulletin 121, Issue 1, dated May 2008; as applicable; must be 
accomplished by the flightcrew.
    (ii) If two springs are missing or found damaged during any 
inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, before further 
flight, replace the springs in accordance with Airbus Mandatory 
Service Bulletin A310-25A2199 or A300-25A6210, both dated July 9, 
2008, as applicable.
    (2) Replacing parts in accordance with Airbus Mandatory Service 
Bulletin A310-25A2199 or A300-25A6210, both dated July 9, 2008, as 
applicable, is not a terminating action for the repetitive 
inspections required in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD.
    (3) As of the effective date of this AD, do not install an IPECO 
pilot or co-pilot mechanical seat P/N 3A218-000X-01-1 on any 
airplane, unless the seat has been inspected and replaced as 
applicable, in accordance with Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 
A310-25A2199 or A300-25A6210, both dated July 9, 2008, as 
applicable.
    (4) Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, modify 
the airplane by replacing the pilot and co-pilot mechanical seats P/
N 3A218-000X-01-1 with P/N 3A218-000X-01-2 seats, in accordance with 
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-25-2202 or A300-25-6214, both 
dated February 3, 2009, as applicable.
    (5) Installing both pilot and co-pilot seats P/N 3A218-000X-01-2 
in accordance with Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-25-2202 or 
A300-25-6214, both dated February 3, 2009, as applicable, on any 
airplane is a terminating action for the repetitive inspections 
required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD for that airplane.
    (6) As of 6 months after the effective date of this AD, do not 
install an IPECO pilot or co-pilot mechanical seat P/N 3A218-000X-
01-1 on any airplane.
    (7) Although Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletins A310-25A2199 and 
A300-25A6210, both dated July 9, 2008, specify to submit certain 
information to the manufacturer, this AD does not include that 
requirement.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1:  This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service 
information as follows: Although the MCAI or service information 
tells you to submit information to Airbus, paragraph (f)(7) of this 
AD specifies that such submittal is not required.

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,

[[Page 7945]]

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.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness 
Directive 2009-0045, dated February 27, 2009, and the service 
information listed in Table 1 of this AD, for related information.

                                      Table 1--Related Service Information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Airbus Service Information                   Issue/revision                           Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airbus A300-600 Operations Engineering    1.................................  May 2008.
 Bulletin 121.
Airbus A310 Operations Engineering        2.................................  October 2008.
 Bulletin 160.
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A300-   Original..........................  February 3, 2009.
 25-6214.
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A300-   Original..........................  July 9, 2008.
 25A6210.
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-   Original..........................  February 3, 2009.
 25-2202.
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-   Original..........................  July 9, 2008.
 25A2199.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use the service information contained in Table 2 of 
this AD to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD 
specifies otherwise.

                                   Table 2--Material Incorporated by Reference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Airbus Service Information                   Issue/revision                           Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airbus A300-600 Operations Engineering    1.................................  May 2008.
 Bulletin 121.
Airbus A310 Operations Engineering        2.................................  October 2008.
 Bulletin 160.
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A300-   Original..........................  February 3, 2009.
 25-6214.
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A300-   Original..........................  July 9, 2008.
 25A6210 excluding Appendix 1, and
 including Appendices 2 and 3.
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-   Original..........................  February 3, 2009.
 25-2202.
Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A310-   Original..........................  July 9, 2008.
 25A2199 excluding Appendix 1, and
 including Appendices 2 and 3.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the 
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5 
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this 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: [email protected]; 
Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the 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.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that 
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records 
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this 
material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 11, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-3222 Filed 2-22-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

The complete text was extracted from the official GovInfo HTML edition for this publication. Acquired 2026-10-09T03:17:30.872578+00:00. Text extraction preserves the recorded source wording; it does not determine current requirements.

Open the captured official edition

Source SHA-256

89b727430eb9839136e571903a39f891b0106286d99abc2965635c95d437c587

Text SHA-256

80aae7ac14cad4b476e52893f96acbb10a5d75513f0eb7da733b6424d41a94b8