AD 2010-04-13
final rule
Applicability
| Type | Manufacturer | Model | Details |
|---|---|---|---|
| aircraft | Airbus | A300 F4-605R | Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310-203, -221, -222 Airplanes; and Model A300 F4-605R and -622R Airplanes |
| aircraft | Airbus | A300 F4-622R | Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310-203, -221, -222 Airplanes; and Model A300 F4-605R and -622R Airplanes |
| aircraft | Airbus | A310-203 | Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310-203, -221, -222 Airplanes; and Model A300 F4-605R and -622R Airplanes |
| aircraft | Airbus | A310-221 | Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310-203, -221, -222 Airplanes; and Model A300 F4-605R and -622R Airplanes |
| aircraft | Airbus | A310-222 | Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A310-203, -221, -222 Airplanes; and Model A300 F4-605R and -622R Airplanes |
Unsafe Condition
unsafe condition on an aviation product.
Affected Aircraft
Airbus Model A310-203, -221, -222 Airplanes; and Model A300 F4-605R and -622R Airplanes.
AI-generated summary from the source AD text. Verify against the official source before acting.
Federal Register Abstract
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:
Document Text
Show stored source text (verify against official source)
[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 [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[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 <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a> 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 <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a>; 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: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#eb8a8888849e859fc58a82999c84999f83c68e8a98ab8a8299899e98c5888486"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="523331313d273c267c333b20253d20263a7f37332112333b203027217c313d3f">[email protected]</span></a>;
Internet <a href="http://www.airbus.com">http://www.airbus.com</a>.
(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: <a href="http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html">http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html</a>.
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
Source: Official FAA Source ↗
Retrieved: Apr 4, 2026
Rights: U.S. Government Public Domain
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FAA. Always verify with official sources.