[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 73 (Monday, April 15, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16418-16420]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-9233]



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


DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95-NM-228-AD]


Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A300-600 Series Airplanes

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 all Airbus Model A300-600 series 
airplanes. This proposal would require an inspection to detect cracks 
of certain attachment holes; and installation of a new fastener and 
follow-on inspections or repair, if necessary. This proposal is 
prompted by reports of fatigue cracking found on the forward fitting of 
frame 47 at the level of the last fastener of the external angle 
fitting. The actions specified by the proposed AD are intended to 
prevent such fatigue cracking, which could result in reduced structural 
integrity of the airframe.

DATES: Comments must be received by May 28, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-103, 
Attention: Rules Docket No. 95-NM-228-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: Tim Backman, Aerospace Engineer, 
Standardization Branch, ANM-113, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (206) 
227-2797; fax (206) 227-1149.

[[Page 16419]]

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-228-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-228-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 all Airbus Model A300-600 series 
airplanes. The DGAC advises that it has received reports of cracking on 
the forward fitting of frame 47 at the level of the last fastener of 
the external angle fitting on Airbus Model A300 B2 and B4 series 
airplanes. The incidents occurred on airplanes that had accumulated 
approximately 20,000 total flights. The cause of such cracking has been 
attributed to fatigue. Fatigue cracking on the forward fitting of frame 
47 at the level of the last fastener of the external angle fitting, if 
not detected and corrected in a timely manner, could result in reduced 
structural integrity of the airframe.
    The subject area on certain Model A300-600 series airplanes is 
identical to that on the affected Model A300 B2 and B4 series 
airplanes. Therefore, those Model A300-600 series airplanes may be 
subject to the same unsafe condition revealed on the Model A300 B2 and 
B4 series airplanes. [AD 93-01-24, amendment 39-8478 (58 FR 6703, 
February 2, 1993) requires inspections of the subject area for affected 
Airbus Model A300 B2 and B4 series airplanes.] Explanation of Relevant 
Service Information

Explanation of Relevant Service Information

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A300-57-6049, dated September 9, 
1994, which describes procedures for performing a rotating probe 
inspection to detect cracks of the attachment holes H and I, and 
various follow-on actions. (These follow-on actions include installing 
new fasteners and reaming/drilling holes.) The service bulletin permits 
further flight, under certain conditions, with attachment holes that 
are cracked within certain limits. The DGAC classified this service 
bulletin as mandatory and issued French airworthiness directive 94-241-
170(B), dated November 9, 1994, in order to assure the continued 
airworthiness of these airplanes in France.

Explanation of the Proposed Rule

    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.
    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 rotating probe inspection to detect cracks 
of the attachment holes H and I, and installation of a new fastener and 
follow-on inspections, if necessary. The actions would be required to 
be accomplished in accordance with the service bulletin described 
previously.

Differences Between the Proposed Rule and Relevant Service 
Information

    Operators should note that, unlike the procedures described in the 
referenced service bulletin, this proposed AD would not permit further 
flight with cracking detected in the attachment holes. The FAA has 
determined that, due to safety implications and consequences associated 
with such cracking, the subject attachment holes that are found to be 
cracked must be repaired. Certain repairs would be required to be 
accomplished in accordance with a method approved by the FAA.
    In addition, the service bulletin specifies that inspection 
thresholds and intervals may be adjusted based on certain average 
flight operations of the airplane. However, the FAA has determined that 
in certain cases such adjustments would not address the unsafe 
condition in a timely manner. Therefore, this proposed AD does not 
permit such adjustments. In developing the appropriate compliance time 
for the proposed rule, the FAA considered not only the manufacturer's 
recommendation, but the safety implications involved with cracking on 
the forward fitting of frame 47 at the level of the last fastener of 
the external angle fitting and the number of landings that had been 
accumulated when cracking was detected. In light of these factors, the 
FAA finds the compliance times specified in the proposed AD for 
initiating the required actions to be warranted, in that they represent 
an appropriate interval of time allowable for the affected airplanes to 
continue to operate without compromising safety.
    Furthermore, the service bulletin specifies that operators need not 
count touch-and-go landings in determining the total number of landings 
between two consecutive inspections, even if those landings are less 
than five percent of the landings between inspection intervals. Since 
fatigue cracking that was found on the forward fitting of frame 47 at 
the level of the last fastener of the external angle fitting is 
aggravated by landing, the FAA finds that all touch-and-go landings 
must be counted in determining the total number of landings between two 
consecutive inspections.

Cost Impact

    The FAA estimates that 35 Airbus Model A300-600 series airplanes of 
U.S. registry would be affected by this proposed AD, that it would take 
approximately 37 work hours per airplane to accomplish the proposed 
actions, and that the average labor rate is $60 per work hour. The 
required kits for accomplishing the inspection would cost approximately 
$75 per airplane. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the 
proposed AD on U.S. operators is

[[Page 16420]]

estimated to be $80,325, or $2,295 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 U.S.C. 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-228-AD.

    Applicability: All Model A300-600 series airplanes, certificated 
in any category.

    Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the 
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been 
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 (f) 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 fatigue cracking on the forward fitting of frame 47 
at the level of the last fastener of the external angle fitting, 
which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airframe, 
accomplish the following:
    (a) Perform a rotating probe inspection to detect cracks of the 
attachment holes H and I in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin 
A300-57-6049, dated September 9, 1994, at the applicable time 
specified in paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this AD.
    (1) For airplanes on which Airbus Modification 10454 (reference 
Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6050) has not been installed: 
Inspect prior to the accumulation of 13,800 total landings, or 
within 750 landings after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) For airplanes on which Airbus Modification 10454 (reference 
Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6050) or Airbus Modification 10155 
has been installed: Inspect prior to the accumulation of 18,700 
total landings, or within 750 landings after the effective date of 
this AD.
    (b) If no crack is found, prior to further flight, install a new 
fastener in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6049, 
dated September 9, 1994. Repeat the rotating probe inspection 
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 5,600 landings.
    (c) If any crack in hole I is found to be greater than 0.196 
inches in length and/or depth, prior to further flight, repair it in 
accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Standardization 
Branch, ANM-113, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate.
    (d) If any crack in hole H is found to be greater than .062 
inches in length, prior to further flight, repair it in accordance 
with a method approved by the Manager, Standardization Branch, ANM-
113.
    (e) If any crack in hole H or hole I is found to be less than or 
equal to the limits specified in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this AD, 
prior to further flight, repair it in accordance with Airbus Service 
Bulletin A300-57-6049, dated September 9, 1994.
    (f) 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.

    (g) 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 9, 1996.
Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-9233 Filed 4-12-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U