96-10509. Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A300-600 and A310 Series Airplanes Equipped With General Electric Model CF6-80 Engines  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 83 (Monday, April 29, 1996)]
    [Proposed Rules]
    [Pages 18699-18700]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-10509]
    
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
    14 CFR Part 39
    
    [Docket No. 95-NM-175-AD]
    RIN 2120-AA64
    
    
    Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A300-600 and A310 Series 
    Airplanes Equipped With General Electric Model CF6-80 Engines
    
    AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
    
    ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: This document proposes the adoption of a new airworthiness 
    directive (AD) that is applicable to certain Airbus Model A300-600 and 
    A310 series airplanes. This proposal would require an inspection to 
    detect defects of the directional pilot valves (DPV); and replacement 
    of any defective DPV with a new DPV, or deactivation of the thrust 
    reverser system, if necessary. This proposal is prompted by a report 
    indicating that, during a maintenance check, an uncommanded deployment 
    and stowage of the thrust reverser occurred due to improperly modified 
    DPV's. The actions specified by the proposed AD are intended to prevent 
    uncommanded deployment and stowage of the thrust reverser during 
    maintenance activities, as a result of improperly modified DPV's, which 
    could result in injury to maintenance personnel or other people on the 
    ground.
    
    DATES: Comments must be received by June 10, 1996.
    
    ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation 
    Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-103, 
    Attention: Rules Docket No. 95-NM-175-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 
    Washington 98055-4056. Comments may be inspected at this location 
    between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
    holidays.
        The service information referenced in the proposed rule may be 
    obtained from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 
    Blagnac Cedex, France. This information may be examined at the FAA, 
    Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 
    Washington.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Huber, Aerospace Engineer, 
    Standardization Branch, ANM-113, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
    1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (206) 
    227-2589; fax (206) 227-1149.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    Comments Invited
    
        Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the 
    proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as 
    they may desire. Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number 
    and be submitted in triplicate to the address specified above. All 
    communications received on or before the closing date for comments, 
    specified above, will be considered before taking action on the 
    proposed rule. The proposals contained in this notice may be changed in 
    light of the comments received.
        Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, 
    economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All 
    comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing 
    date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested 
    persons. A report summarizing each FAA-public contact concerned with 
    the substance of this proposal will be filed in the Rules Docket.
        Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments 
    submitted in response to this notice must submit a self-addressed, 
    stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments 
    to Docket Number 95-NM-175-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and 
    returned to the commenter.
    
    Availability of NPRMs
    
        Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request 
    to the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-103, Attention: Rules 
    Docket No. 95-NM-175-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 
    98055-4056.
    
    Discussion
    
        The Direction Generale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC), which is the 
    airworthiness authority for France, recently notified the FAA that an 
    unsafe condition may exist on certain Airbus Model A300-600 and A310 
    series airplanes, equipped with General Electric Model CF6-80 engines. 
    The DGAC advises that it has received a report indicating that, during 
    a maintenance check, an uncommanded deployment and stowage of the 
    thrust reverser occurred.
        Investigation of this incident revealed that, when the thrust 
    reverser handle was moved from the ``stow'' position to the thrust 
    reverser test point, the directional pilot valve (DPV) stuck in the 
    ``open'' (``deploy'') position. The air supply first caused the thrust 
    reverser to deploy, and then caused the DPV solenoid to move the DPV to 
    the ``stow'' direction, which resulted in the thrust reverser stowing. 
    This same sequence of events happened when the opposite engine was 
    tested. When both DPV's were replaced and a functional test carried 
    out, no anomaly was found. This indicated that the originally-installed 
    DPV's apparently were faulty.
        Further tests carried out at the Airbus flight line on a General 
    Electric CF6-80C2 engine with the faulty DPV's installed, demonstrated 
    that deployment of the thrust reverser could not be reproduced with the 
    engine running. The thrust reverser deployment could be recreated only 
    with a progressive increase of ground air supply at low pressure 
    (approximately 10 to 15 psi) to the ground test point on the airplane. 
    When direct test pressure of 28 psi was applied to the DPV, the valve 
    reseated to the ``stow'' position. (This same scenario was confirmed by 
    bench testing performed by both General Electric and Allied Signal.)
        Further investigation of the two faulty DPV's revealed that the 
    valves had been improperly modified when procedures specified in 
    General Electric Service Bulletin 78-031 had been accomplished on the 
    engine. The DPV armature spring had not been replaced with a new 
    stronger spring in accordance with the service bulletin instructions.
        Accordingly, such an improperly modified DPV, if not corrected, 
    could result in uncommanded deployment and stowage of the thrust 
    reverser during maintenance activities, which consequently could cause 
    injury to maintenance personnel or other people on the ground.
    
    [[Page 18700]]
    
    Explanation of Relevant Service Information
    
        Airbus has issued All Operators Telex (AOT) 78-05, Revision 01, 
    dated February 8, 1995, which describes procedures for a one-time 
    inspection to detect defects of the DPV; and replacement of the 
    defective DPV with a new DPV, or deactivation of the thrust reverser 
    system, if necessary. The DGAC classified this AOT as mandatory and 
    issued French airworthiness directive 95-052-176(B), dated March 15, 
    1995, in order to assure the continued airworthiness of these airplanes 
    in France.
    
    FAA's Conclusions
    
        This airplane model is manufactured in France and is type 
    certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of 
    section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and 
    the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to this 
    bilateral airworthiness agreement, the DGAC has kept the FAA informed 
    of the situation described above. The FAA has examined the findings of 
    the DGAC, reviewed all available information, and determined that AD 
    action is necessary for products of this type design that are 
    certificated for operation in the United States.
    
    Explanation of the Requirements of the Proposed Rule
    
        Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to 
    exist or develop on other airplanes of the same type design, the 
    proposed AD would require a one-time inspection to detect defects of 
    the DPV. If a defective DPV is detected, it would be required to be 
    replaced with a new DPV, or thrust reverser system would be required to 
    be deactivated until the DPV is replaced. The inspection and 
    replacement actions would be required to be accomplished in accordance 
    with the AOT described previously.
    
    Cost Impact
    
        The FAA estimates that 43 airplanes of U.S. registry would be 
    affected by this proposed AD, that it would take approximately 10 work 
    hours per airplane to accomplish the proposed one-time inspection, and 
    that the average labor rate is $60 per work hour. Based on these 
    figures, the cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S. operators is 
    estimated to be $25,800, or $600 per airplane.
        The cost impact figure discussed above is based on assumptions that 
    no operator has yet accomplished any of the proposed 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 proposed herein would 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 
    proposal would not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant 
    the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
        For the reasons discussed above, I certify that 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) if promulgated, 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 copy of the draft 
    regulatory evaluation prepared for this action is contained in the 
    Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by contacting the Rules 
    Docket at the location provided under the caption ADDRESSES.
    
    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
    
        Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
    
    The Proposed Amendment
    
        Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the 
    Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 
    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 USC 106(g), 40113, 44701.
    
    
    Sec. 39.13  [Amended]
    
        2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new 
    airworthiness directive:
    
        Airbus Industrie: Docket 95-NM-175-AD.
    
        Applicability: Model A300B4-601, -603, -605R, A300-F4-605R, and 
    A310-203, -203C, -204, -304, -308 series airplanes, equipped with 
    General Electric Model CF6-80 engines; on which General Electric 
    Service Bulletin 78-031 has been accomplished; certificated in any 
    category.
    
        Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the 
    preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been 
    otherwise 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 (b) 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 prevent uncommanded deployment and stowage of the thrust 
    reverser during maintenance activities, accomplish the following:
        (a) Within 600 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, 
    perform an inspection to detect defects of the directional pilot 
    valves (DPV) in accordance with Airbus All Operators Telex (AOT) 78-
    05, Revision 01, February 8, 1995.
        (1) If no defects are detected, no further action is required by 
    this AD.
        (2) If any defect is detected, prior to further flight, either 
    replace the defective DPV with a new DPV in accordance with the AOT; 
    or deactivate the thrust reverser system in accordance with approved 
    procedures of the Minimum Equipment List (MEL) until the DPV is 
    replaced
        (b) 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 2: Information concerning the existence of approved 
    alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be 
    obtained from the Standardization Branch, ANM-113.
    
        (c) 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.
    
        Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 23, 1996.
    S. R. Miller,
    Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
    Service.
    [FR Doc. 96-10509 Filed 4-26-96; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    
    

Document Information

Published:
04/29/1996
Department:
Transportation Department
Entry Type:
Proposed Rule
Action:
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
Document Number:
96-10509
Dates:
Comments must be received by June 10, 1996.
Pages:
18699-18700 (2 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket No. 95-NM-175-AD
RINs:
2120-AA64: Airworthiness Directives
RIN Links:
https://www.federalregister.gov/regulations/2120-AA64/airworthiness-directives
PDF File:
96-10509.pdf
CFR: (1)
14 CFR 39.13