[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 174 (Friday, September 9, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-20995]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: September 9, 1994]


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


DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 91-NM-23-AD; Amendment 39-9015; AD 94-18-02]

 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Industrie Model A300 Series 
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), 
applicable to Airbus Industrie Model A300 series airplanes, that 
requires the implementation of a corrosion prevention and control 
program, either by revising the maintenance program or by accomplishing 
specific inspection procedures. This amendment is prompted by reports 
of incidents involving corrosion and fatigue cracking in transport 
category airplanes that are approaching or have exceeded their economic 
design goal; these incidents have jeopardized the airworthiness of the 
affected airplanes. The actions specified by this AD are intended to 
prevent degradation of the structural capabilities of the airplane due 
to the problems associated with corrosion.

DATES: Effective October 11, 1994.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in 
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as 
of October 11, 1994.

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: Stephen Slotte, Aerospace Engineer, 
Standardization Branch, ANM-113, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (206) 
227-2797; fax (206) 227-1320.

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 Airbus Model A300 series airplanes 
was published as a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in 
the Federal Register on May 27, 1993 (58 FR 30722). That action 
proposed to require the implementation of a corrosion prevention and 
control program, either by revising the maintenance program or by 
accomplishing specific inspection procedures.
    Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate 
in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to 
the comments received.
    One commenter supports the proposal.
    Several commenters request that the proposed rule specify whether 
or not the proposed requirements are applicable to Airbus Model A300-
600 series airplanes. These commenters consider that the rule should 
not be applicable to the Model A300-600, since the rule is intended to 
address problems associated with structural failure of aging airplanes, 
and the Model A300-600 fleet is not close to reaching its economic 
design goal. The FAA acknowledges that some clarification of the 
applicability of the rule is warranted. The FAA did not intend for the 
rule to be applicable to the Model A300-600. Therefore, to eliminate 
any confusion that may arise among affected operators, the FAA has 
revised the applicability of the final rule to indicate clearly that 
the requirements of the rule are not applicable to Model A300-600 
series airplanes.
    Another commenter requests that NOTE 2 of the proposal be expanded 
to explain the extent of FAA involvement in paragraphs (c), (d), (e), 
and (f). The FAA does not consider that any additional explanation is 
necessary. NOTE 2 specifically defines the term ``FAA'' for affected 
operators conducting their operations under various parts of the 
Federal Aviation Regulations. The information presented in NOTE 2 is 
valid for each use of the term ``FAA'' throughout the AD.
    This same commenter requests that, in order to ensure consistent 
implementation of the program and to provide a reliable statistical 
data base, the proposal be revised to indicate that credit for 
completion of the initial task is limited to only those inspections 
that are accomplished at a time beyond the implementation age (IA) for 
the particular area. In support of this request, the commenter refers 
to NOTE 7 of the proposal, which states that paragraph (a) does not 
require inspection of any area that has not exceeded the implementation 
age for that area. The FAA does not agree. If an operator elects to 
perform an inspection prior to the IA for a certain area, that 
inspection must then be repeated at the appropriate repeat interval 
(RI). The FAA considers that this will ensure a consistent 
implementation of the program.
    In its comments to the notice, the manufacturer requests that the 
FAA clarify the fact that the issuance of the revised Airbus Industrie 
Document, ``A300 Corrosion Prevention and Control Program,'' was 
intended only to help improve the understanding and handling of the 
inspection procedures described in the baseline corrosion prevention 
and control program (CPCP). However, the baseline program itself, as 
detailed in the original issuance of that Document, was not changed in 
the revised version. The FAA acknowledges this information.
    The manufacturer also notes that the economic impact information 
contained in the preamble to the notice presented the CPCP as if it 
were a program separate from the affected operators' current 
maintenance programs, and that the calculated costs would be 
supplemental to those costs currently incurred through regular 
maintenance practices. The commenter points out that many of the tasks 
listed in the CPCP existed as part of operators' maintenance programs 
prior to the issuance of the Airbus CPCP document (and, thus, prior to 
the issuance of this AD). Therefore, the commenter considers that the 
economic impact of the rule should be adjusted accordingly. The FAA 
acknowledges this information, and has revised the economic impact 
information, below, to clarify this aspect.
    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.

Economic Impact

    The FAA estimates that 54 airplanes of U.S. registry will be 
affected by this AD.
    There are 50 corrosion inspection areas called out in the Airbus 
Industrie Document, and it will take approximately 16 work hours per 
area to accomplish the required actions. The average labor rate is 
approximately $55 per work hour. Based on these figures, the total 
impact of this AD on U.S. operators is approximately $2,376,000, or 
$44,000 per airplane, for the initial 6-year inspection cycle. This 
total cost impact figure 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.
    The FAA points out that the total cost impact figure discussed 
above is presented as if the actions required by this AD were to be 
conducted as ``stand alone'' actions. However, in actual practice, 
these actions will be accomplished coincidentally or in combination 
with normally scheduled airplane inspections and other maintenance 
program tasks. Some affected operators already have been performing 
these actions as part of their regular maintenance program. Therefore, 
the actual number of necessary ``additional'' work hours and associated 
labor costs will be minimal in many instances. Additionally, any costs 
associated with special airplane scheduling also will be minimal.

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. App. 1354(a), 1421 and 1423; 49 U.S.C. 
106(g); and 14 CFR 11.89.


Sec. 39.13  [Amended]

    2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new 
airworthiness directive:

94-18-02  Airbus: Amendment 39-9015. Docket 91-NM-23-AD.

    Applicability: Model A300 series airplanes (excluding Model 
A300-600 series), certificated in any category.
    Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished 
previously.

    Note 1: This AD references Airbus Industrie Document, ``A300 
Corrosion Prevention and Control Program,'' dated November 1992, for 
corrosion instructions, compliance times, and reporting 
requirements. In addition, this AD specifies inspection and 
reporting requirements beyond those included in that Document. Where 
there are differences between the AD and the Document, the AD 
prevails.

    Note 2: As used throughout this AD, the term ``the FAA'' is 
defined differently for different operators, as follows: For those 
operators complying with paragraph (a) of this AD, ``the FAA'' is 
defined as ``the Manager of the Standardization Branch, ANM-113, 
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate.'' For those operators operating 
under Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) part 121 or 129 (14 CFR 
part 121 or part 129), and complying with paragraph (b) of this AD, 
``the FAA'' is defined as ``the cognizant Principal Maintenance 
Inspector (PMI).'' For those operators operating under FAR part 91 
or 125 (14 CFR part 91 or part 125), and complying with paragraph 
(b) of this AD, ``the FAA'' is defined as ``the cognizant 
Maintenance Inspector at the appropriate FAA Flight Standards 
office.''

    To prevent degradation of the structural capabilities of the 
airplane due to the problems associated with corrosion damage, 
accomplish the following:
    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this AD, complete 
each of the corrosion instructions specified in Section 5 of Airbus 
Industrie Document, ``A300 Corrosion Prevention and Control 
Program,'' dated November 1992 (hereinafter referred to as ``the 
Document''), in accordance with the procedures of the Document, and 
the schedule specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this AD.

    Note 3: A ``corrosion instruction,'' as defined in Section 5 of 
the Document, includes inspections; procedures for a corrective 
action, including repairs, under identified circumstances; 
application of corrosion inhibitors; and other follow-on actions.

    Note 4: Corrosion instructions completed in accordance with the 
Document before the effective date of this AD may be credited for 
compliance with the initial corrosion instruction requirements of 
paragraph (a)(1) of this AD.

    Note 5: Where non-destructive inspection (NDI) methods are 
employed, in accordance with Section 5 of the Document, the 
standards and procedures used must be acceptable to the 
Administrator in accordance with FAR section 43.13 (14 CFR 43.13).

    Note 6: Procedures identified in the Document as ``informational 
only'' are not required to be accomplished by this AD.

    (1) Complete the initial corrosion instruction of each 
``corrosion inspection area'' defined in Section 5 of the Document 
as follows:
    (i) For aircraft areas that have not yet reached the 
``implementation age'' (IA) as of one year after the effective date 
of this AD, initial compliance must occur no later than the IA plus 
the ``repeat interval'' (RI).
    (ii) For aircraft areas that have exceeded the IA as of one year 
after the effective date of this AD, initial compliance must occur 
within the RI for the area, measured from a date one year after the 
effective date of this AD.
    (iii) For airplanes that are 20 years old or older as of one 
year after the effective date of this AD, initial compliance must 
occur for all areas within one RI, or within six years, measured 
from a date one year after the effective date of this AD, whichever 
occurs first.
    (iv) Notwithstanding paragraphs (a)(1)(i), (a)(1)(ii), and 
(a)(1)(iii) of this AD, accomplish the initial task, for each area 
that exceeds the IA for that area, at a minimum rate of one such 
area per year, beginning one year after the effective date of this 
AD.

     -Note 7: This paragraph does not require inspection of any area 
that has not exceeded the IA for that area.

    Note 8: This minimum rate requirement may cause a hardship on 
some small operators. In those circumstances, requests for 
adjustments to the implementation rate will be evaluated on a case-
by-case basis under the provisions of paragraph (h) of this AD.

    (2) Repeat each corrosion instruction at a time interval not to 
exceed the RI specified in the Document for that task.
    (b) As an alternative to the requirements of paragraph (a) of 
this AD: Prior to one year after the effective date of this AD, 
revise the FAA-approved maintenance/inspection program to include 
the corrosion prevention and control program specified in the 
Document; or to include an equivalent program that is approved by 
the FAA. In all cases, the initial corrosion instruction for each 
corrosion inspection area must be completed in accordance with the 
compliance schedule specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this AD.
    (1) Any operator complying with paragraph (b) of this AD may use 
an alternative recordkeeping method to that otherwise required by 
FAR section 91.417 (14 CFR 91.417) or section 121.380 (14 CFR 
121.380) for the actions required by this AD, provided it is 
approved by the FAA and is included in a revision to the FAA-
approved maintenance/inspection program.
    (2) Subsequent to the accomplishment of the initial corrosion 
instruction, extensions of RI's specified in the Document must be 
approved by the FAA.
    (c) To accommodate unanticipated scheduling requirements, it is 
acceptable for an RI to be increased by up to 10%, but not to exceed 
6 months. The FAA must be informed, in writing, of any such 
extension within 30 days after such adjustment of the schedule.
    (d)(1) If, as a result of any inspection conducted in accordance 
with paragraph (a) or (b) of this AD, Level 3 corrosion is 
determined to exist in any area, accomplish either paragraph 
(d)(1)(i) or (d)(1)(ii) of this AD within 7 days after such 
determination:
    (i) Submit a report of that determination to the FAA and 
complete the corrosion instruction in the affected areas on all 
Model A300 series airplanes in the operator's fleet; or
    (ii) Submit to the FAA for approval one of the following:
    (A) A proposed schedule for performing the corrosion 
instructions in the affected areas on the remaining Model A300 
series airplanes in the operator's fleet, which is adequate to 
ensure that any other Level 3 corrosion is detected in a timely 
manner, along with substantiating data for that schedule; or
    (B) Data substantiating that the Level 3 corrosion found is an 
isolated occurrence.

    Note 9: Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 2 of the 
Document, which would permit corrosion that otherwise meets the 
definition of Level 3 corrosion (i.e., which is determined to be a 
potentially urgent airworthiness concern requiring expeditious 
action) to be treated as Level 1 if the operator finds that it ``can 
be attributed to an event not typical of the operator's usage of 
other airplanes in the same fleet,'' this paragraph requires that 
data substantiating any such finding be submitted to the FAA for 
approval.

    (2) The FAA may impose schedules other than those proposed, upon 
finding that such changes are necessary to ensure that any other 
Level 3 corrosion is detected in a timely manner.
    (3) Within the time schedule approved under paragraph (d)(1) or 
(d)(2) of this AD, accomplish the corrosion instructions in the 
affected areas of the remaining Model A300 series airplanes in the 
operator's fleet.
    (e) If, as a result of any inspection, after the initial 
inspection, conducted in accordance with paragraph (a) or (b) of 
this AD, it is determined that corrosion findings exceed Level 1 in 
any area, within 60 days after such determination a means approved 
by the FAA must be implemented to reduce future findings of 
corrosion in that area to Level 1 or better.
    (f) Before any operator places into service any airplane subject 
to the requirements of this AD, a schedule for the accomplishment of 
corrosion instructions required by this AD must be established in 
accordance with paragraph (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this AD, as 
applicable:
    (1) For airplanes previously maintained in accordance with this 
AD, the first corrosion instruction in each area to be performed by 
the new operator must be accomplished in accordance with the 
previous operator's schedule or with the new operator's schedule, 
whichever would result in the earlier accomplishment date for that 
task. After each corrosion instruction has been performed once, each 
subsequent task must be performed in accordance with the new 
operator's schedule.
    (2) For airplanes that have not been previously maintained in 
accordance with this AD, the first corrosion instruction for each 
area to be performed by the new operator must be accomplished prior 
to further flight or in accordance with a schedule approved by the 
FAA.
    (g) Reports of Level 2 and Level 3 corrosion must be submitted 
at least quarterly to Airbus in accordance with Section 6 of the 
Document.

    Note 10: Reporting of Level 2 and Level 3 corrosion found as a 
result of any opportunity inspection is highly desirable.

    (h) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the 
compliance time, which provides an acceptable level of safety, may 
be used when approved by the Manager, Standardization Branch, ANM-
113, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators shall submit 
their requests through the cognizant Maintenance Inspector at the 
appropriate FAA Flight Standards office, who may concur or comment 
and then send it to the Manager, Los Angeles ACO.

    Note 11: Information concerning the existence of approved 
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be 
obtained from the Standardization Branch, ANM-113.

    (i) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with 
Secs. 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.
    (j) Reports of corrosion inspection results required by this AD 
have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and have been assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.
    (k) The actions shall be done in accordance with Airbus 
Industrie Document, ``A300 Corrosion Prevention and Control 
Program,'' dated November 1992. 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.
    (l) This amendment becomes effective on October 11, 1994.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 19, 1994.
Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 94-20995 Filed 9-8-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U