[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 140 (Thursday, July 20, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44991-44994]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-18403]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99-NM-322-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A300 B4-600, A300 B4-600R, 
and A300 F4-600R Series Airplanes (A300-600)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This document proposes the supersedure of an existing 
airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to all Airbus Model A300 B4-
600, A300 B4-600R, and A300 F4-600R series airplanes (A300-600), that 
currently requires an inspection to detect cracks of certain attachment 
holes; and installation of new fasteners and follow-on inspections or 
repair, if necessary. This action would require a reduction in the 
inspection threshold and repetitive intervals and an increase in the 
number of attachment holes to be inspected. This proposal is prompted 
by issuance of mandatory continuing airworthiness information by a 
foreign civil airworthiness authority. The actions specified by the 
proposed AD are intended to prevent fatigue cracking of the forward 
fitting of fuselage frame FR47, which could result in reduced 
structural integrity of the frame.

DATES: Comments must be received by August 21, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, 
Attention: Rules Docket No. 99-NM-322-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 
Renton, Washington 98055-4056. Comments may be inspected at this 
location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 
Federal holidays. Comments may be submitted via fax to (425) 227-1232. 
Comments may also be sent via the Internet using the following address: 
[email protected]. Comments sent via fax or the Internet must 
contain ``Docket No. 99-NM-322-AD'' in the subject line and need not be 
submitted in triplicate. Comments sent via the Internet as attached 
electronic files must be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for Windows or 
ASCII text.
    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: Norman B. Martenson, Manager, 
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 
227-2110; fax (425) 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.
    Submit comments using the following format:
     Organize comments issue-by-issue. For example, discuss a 
request to change the compliance time and a request to change the 
service bulletin reference as two separate issues.
     For each issue, state what specific change to the proposed 
AD is being requested.
     Include justification (e.g., reasons or data) for each 
request.
    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 99-NM-322-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-114, Attention: Rules 
Docket No. 99-NM-322-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 
98055-4056.

Discussion

    On July 25, 1997, the FAA issued AD 97-16-06, amendment 39-10097 
(62 FR 41257, August 1, 1997) [A correction was published in the 
Federal Register on August 25, 1997 (62 FR 44888)], applicable to all 
Airbus Model A300 B4-600 (A300-600), A300 B4-600R, and A300 F4-600R 
series airplanes (A300-600), to require an inspection to detect cracks 
of certain attachment holes; and installation of new fasteners and 
follow-on inspections or repair, if necessary. That action was prompted 
by reports of cracking on the forward fitting of fuselage frame FR47 at 
the level of the last fastener of the external angle fitting. The 
requirements of that AD are intended to prevent such fatigue cracking, 
which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airframe.

Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rule

    Since the issuance of AD 97-16-06, the Direction Gonorale de 
l'Aviation Civile (DGAC), which is the airworthiness authority for 
France, has

[[Page 44992]]

informed the FAA that cracks have been found in the internal angle 
fittings of the wing center box at fuselage frame FR 47 on airplanes 
that had not reached the threshold of the fastener hole inspections 
required by AD 97-16-06. The DGAC also has informed the FAA that cracks 
have been found in additional fastener holes that were not required to 
be inspected by AD 97-16-06.

Explanation of Relevant Service Information

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A300-57-6049, Revision 3, dated 
December 15, 1998, which describes procedures for performing a rotating 
probe inspection to detect cracks of the attachment holes H, I, K, L, M 
and N, and various follow-on actions. (These follow-on actions include 
reaming/drilling holes and installing new fasteners.) The service 
bulletin also describes procedures for repair of certain cracking 
conditions. The repair procedures include reaming/drilling holes, re-
inspecting the hole, and trimming the external fitting. The service 
bulletin permits further flight, under certain conditions, with 
attachment holes that are cracked within certain limits. Accomplishment 
of the actions specified in the service bulletin is intended to 
adequately address the identified unsafe condition. The DGAC classified 
this service bulletin as mandatory and issued French airworthiness 
directive 1999-147-279(B) R1, dated July 12, 2000, 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 
Sec. 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 Requirements of Proposed Rule

    Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to 
exist or develop on other airplanes of the same type design registered 
in the United States, the proposed AD would supersede AD 97-16-06 to 
require accomplishment of the actions specified in the service bulletin 
described previously, except as discussed below.

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 prior to further flight. Repairs would be 
required to be accomplished in accordance with a method approved by the 
FAA, the DGAC (or its delegated agent), or the service bulletin 
described previously, as applicable.
    Operators also should note that, unlike particular provisions in 
the service bulletin regarding adjustment of the compliance times using 
an ``adjustment-for-range'' formula, this proposed AD would not permit 
formulaic adjustments of the inspection compliance times. The FAA has 
determined that such adjustments may present difficulties in 
determining if the applicable inspections and modifications have been 
accomplished within the appropriate time frame. Further, while such 
adjustable compliance times are utilized as part of the Maintenance 
Review Board program, they do not fit practically into the AD tracking 
process for operators or for Principal Maintenance Inspectors 
attempting to ascertain compliance with AD's. Therefore, the FAA has 
determined that fixed compliance times should be specified for 
accomplishment of the actions required by this AD.
    Additionally, after discussions with the DGAC and the manufacturer, 
the FAA has determined that flight-hour maximums should be included as 
part of the compliance threshold and repetitive intervals for the 
inspections required by this proposed AD. Inclusion of a compliance 
threshold in terms of total flight hours as well as total flight 
cycles, and requiring inspection at the earlier of those times, will 
ensure that airplanes with longer-than-average flight times are 
inspected at a threshold and intervals necessary to maintain safety. 
Accordingly, the FAA has specified that the initial inspection must be 
accomplished at the earliest time an airplane reaches certain 
accumulated total flight cycles or total flight hours, and that 
repetitive inspections are to be accomplished at intervals not to 
exceed certain flight cycles or flight hours, whichever occurs first.
    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, when those landings are less than 
five percent of the landings between inspection intervals. Since 
fatigue cracking that was was found on the forward fitting of fuselage 
frame FR47 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.
    The service bulletin also recommends a grace period of 1,500 flight 
cycles (after receipt of the service bulletin) for accomplishing the 
rotating probe inspection, unless the threshold has been exceeded by 
more than 2,000 flight cycles; in which case, the grace period is 750 
flight cycles (after receipt of the service bulletin). The FAA has 
determined that a grace period of 750 flight cycles and 1,700 flight 
hours, as applicable, would address the identified unsafe condition in 
a timely manner. In developing an appropriate grace period for this AD, 
the FAA considered not only the manufacturer's recommendation, but the 
degree of urgency associated with addressing the subject unsafe 
condition, the average utilization of the affected fleet, and the time 
necessary to perform the inspection (7 work hours). In light of all of 
these factors, the FAA finds a grace period of 750 flight cycles and 
1,700 flight hours, as applicable, for initiating the required actions 
to be warranted, in that it represents an appropriate interval of time 
allowable for affected airplanes to continue to operate without 
compromising safety.

Explanation of Change to Applicability

    The applicability throughout AD 97-16-06 reads ``all Model A300-600 
series airplanes.'' The FAA has revised the applicability of this 
proposed AD to identify the specific affected model designations as 
published on the type certificate data sheet [i.e., Model A300 B4-600 
(A300-600), A300 B4-600R, and A300 F4-600R series airplanes].

Cost Impact

    There are approximately 74 airplanes of U.S. registry that would be 
affected by this proposed AD.
    The actions that are proposed in this AD action would take 
approximately 7 work hours per airplane to accomplish, at an average 
labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts would cost as

[[Page 44993]]

much as $6,327 per airplane. Based on these figures, the cost impact of 
the proposed requirements of this AD on U.S. operators is estimated to 
cost as much as $499,278, or $6,747 per airplane, per inspection cycle.
    The cost impact figure discussed above is based on assumptions that 
no operator has yet accomplished any of the current or proposed 
requirements of this AD action, and that no operator would accomplish 
those actions in the future if this AD were not adopted. The cost 
impact figures discussed in AD rulemaking actions represent only the 
time necessary to perform the specific actions actually required by the 
AD. These figures typically do not include incidental costs, such as 
the time required to gain access and close up, planning time, or time 
necessitated by other administrative actions.

Regulatory Impact

    The regulations proposed herein would 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. Therefore, it 
is determined that this proposal would not have federalism implications 
under Executive Order 13132.
    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 removing amendment 39-10097 (62 FR 
44888, August 25, 1997), and by adding a new airworthiness directive 
(AD), to read as follows:

Airbus Industrie: Docket 99-NM-322-AD. Supersedes AD 97-16-06, 
Amendment 39-10097.

    Applicability: All Model A300 B4-600, A300 B4-600R, and A300 F4-
600R series airplanes (A300-600), 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 (e)(1) 
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 of the forward fitting of fuselage 
frame FR47, which could result in reduced structural integrity of 
the airframe, accomplish the following:

Inspection of Holes H, I, K, L, M, and N

    (a) Perform a rotating probe inspection to detect cracks of the 
attachment holes H, I, K, L, M, and N on the left and right internal 
angles of the wing center box, in accordance with Airbus Service 
Bulletin A300-57-6049, Revision 3, dated December 15, 1998, 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) and Airbus Modification 10155 
have not been installed: Inspect at the earlier of the times 
specified in paragraph (a)(1)(i) or (a)(1)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Prior to the accumulation of 10,400 total flight cycles, or 
within 750 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, 
whichever occurs later; or
    (ii) Prior to the accumulation of 23,900 total flight hours, or 
within 1,700 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, 
whichever occurs later.
    (2) For airplanes on which Airbus Modification 10454 (reference 
Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6050) or Airbus Modification 10155 
has been installed: Inspect at the earlier of the times specified in 
paragraph (a)(2)(i) or (a)(2)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Prior to the accumulation of 14,200 total flight cycles, or 
within 750 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, 
whichever occurs later; or
    (ii) Prior to the accumulation of 32,600 total flight hours, or 
within 1,700 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, 
whichever occurs later.

No Cracking Found: Installation of New Fastener and Repetitive 
Inspections

    (b) If no crack is found during any rotating probe inspection 
required by paragraph (a) of this AD, prior to further flight, 
install new fasteners in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin 
A300-57-6049, Revision 3, dated December 15, 1998. Repeat the 
rotating probe inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 
5,900 flight cycles or 13,500 flight hours, whichever occurs first.

Cracking Found: Corrective Actions

    (c) If any crack is found during any rotating probe inspection 
required by paragraph (a) of this AD that is within the limits 
specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6049, Revision 3, dated 
December 15, 1998, prior to further flight, except as required by 
paragraph (d) of this AD, accomplish all applicable corrective 
actions (including reaming, drilling, drill-stopping holes, 
chamfering, follow-on inspections, and installing new or oversize 
fasteners), in accordance with the service bulletin. Repeat the 
rotating probe inspection required by paragraph (a) of this AD 
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 5,900 flight cycles or 13,500 
flight hours, whichever occurs first.
    (d) If any crack is found during any rotating probe inspection 
required by paragraph (a) of this AD that exceeds the limits 
specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6049, Revision 3, dated 
December 15, 1998, or if any cracking remains after the applicable 
repairs required by paragraph (c) of this AD, prior to further 
flight, repair the crack in accordance with a method approved by 
either the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport 
Airplane Directorate; or the Direction Generale de l'Aviation Civile 
(DGAC) (or its delegated agent). For a repair method to be approved 
by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, as required by this 
paragraph, the Manager's approval letter must specifically reference 
this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (e)(1) 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, International Branch, ANM-116. 
Operators shall submit their requests through an appropriate FAA 
Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send 
it to the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116.

    Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved 
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be 
obtained from the International Branch, ANM-116.

    (2) Alternative methods of compliance, approved previously in 
accordance with AD 97-16-06, amendment 39-10097, are approved as 
alternative methods of compliance with this AD.

Special Flight Permits

    (f) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with 
Secs. 21.197 and 21.199 of the

[[Page 44994]]

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.

    Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed in French 
airworthiness directive 1999-147-279(B) R1, dated July 12, 2000.


    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 14, 2000.
Donald L. Riggin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 00-18403 Filed 7-19-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U