[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