[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 222 (Tuesday, November 18, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65008-65011]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-28735]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2002-NM-118-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A320-111, -211, and -231 
Series Airplanes

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 certain Airbus Model A320-
111, -211, and -231 series airplanes, that currently requires 
repetitive inspections for cracking in the transition and pick-up 
angles in the lower part of the center fuselage area, and corrective 
action if

[[Page 65009]]

necessary. That AD also provides for an optional terminating 
modification for the repetitive inspection requirements. This action 
would reduce the compliance time for the inspections for cracking of 
the same area. The actions specified by the proposed AD are intended to 
detect and correct fatigue cracking in the transition and pick-up 
angles of the lower part of the center fuselage, which could result in 
reduced structural integrity of the wing-fuselage support and fuselage 
pressure vessel. This action is intended to address the identified 
unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by December 18, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, 
Attention: Rules Docket No. 2002-NM-118-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. 2002-NM-118-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 or 2000 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: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, 
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 
227-2125; 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 action may be changed in 
light of the comments received.
    Submit comments using the following format:
    [sbull] 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.
    [sbull] For each issue, state what specific change to the proposed 
AD is being requested.
    [sbull] 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 action must submit a self-addressed, 
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments 
to Docket Number 2002-NM-118-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. 2002-NM-118-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 
98055-4056.

Discussion

    On June 2, 1998, the FAA issued AD 98-12-18, amendment 39-10573 (63 
FR 31345, June 9, 1998), applicable to certain Airbus Model A320-111, -
211, and -231 series airplanes, to require repetitive inspections for 
cracking in the transition and pick-up angles in the lower part of the 
center fuselage area, and corrective action if necessary. That AD also 
provides for an optional terminating modification for the repetitive 
inspection requirements. That action was prompted by the issuance of 
mandatory continuing airworthiness information by a foreign civil 
airworthiness authority. The requirements of that AD are intended to 
detect and correct fatigue cracking in the transition and pick-up 
angles of the lower part of the center fuselage, which could result in 
reduced structural integrity of the wing-fuselage support and fuselage 
pressure vessel.

Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rule

    Since the issuance of AD 98-12-18, the Direction 
G[eacute]n[eacute]rale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC), which is the 
airworthiness authority for France, notified the FAA that an unsafe 
condition may exist on certain Airbus Model A320-111, -211, and -231 
series airplanes. The DGAC advises that a full-scale fatigue survey on 
the Model A320 fleet revealed that the weight of fuel at landing and 
the mean flight duration are higher than those defined for the analysis 
of fatigue-related tasks. This has led to an adjustment of the fatigue 
mission for the A320 fleet, in that the DGAC has reduced the compliance 
threshold and intervals in France from landings to flight cycles and 
flight hours for accomplishment of the inspections for fatigue cracking 
required by the existing AD. Fatigue-related cracking in the pick-up 
and transition angles in the lower part of the center fuselage could 
result in reduced structural integrity of the wing-fuselage support and 
fuselage pressure vessel.

Explanation of Relevant Service Information

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A320-53-1028, Revision 01, dated 
February 12, 2002. The inspection procedures specified in Revision 01 
are essentially the same as those in the original issue of the service 
bulletin, which was referenced in the existing AD for accomplishment of 
the inspections and corrective action. However, Revision 01 has a 
change that recommends a reduction in the compliance time specified in 
the original issue by adding flight cycles and flight hours as a 
reduction in thresholds.
    Airbus also has issued Service Bulletin A320-53-1027, Revision 03, 
dated February 12, 2002. The modification procedures in Revision 03 are 
essentially the same as those in Revision 02 of the service bulletin, 
which was referenced in the existing AD for accomplishment of the 
modification. The changes in Revision 03 are minor editorial changes.
    The DGAC classified these service bulletins as mandatory and issued 
French airworthiness directive 2002-183(B), dated April 3, 2002, to 
ensure the continued airworthiness of these airplanes in France.

FAA's Conclusions

    These airplane models are manufactured in France and are type 
certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of 
section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation

[[Page 65010]]

Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the applicable bilateral airworthiness 
agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral airworthiness agreement, the DGAC 
has kept us informed of the situation described above. We have 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 AD

    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 98-12-18 to 
continue to require repetitive inspections for cracking in the 
transition and pick-up angles in the lower part of the center fuselage 
area, and corrective action if necessary. The proposed AD also would 
continue to provide for an optional terminating modification for the 
repetitive inspection requirements. This new action would reduce the 
compliance time for the inspections for fatigue cracking of the same 
area. The actions would be required to be accomplished in accordance 
with the service bulletins described previously, except as discussed 
below.

Change to Existing AD

    The compliance time in the existing AD specified landings; however, 
this proposed AD would specify flight cycles (which are essentially the 
same as landings) and flight hours as a reduction in thresholds.

Differences in Proposed AD, Referenced Service Bulletins, and Related 
French AD

    The service bulletins specify that operators may contact the 
manufacturer for disposition of certain repair conditions; however, 
this proposed AD would require operators to repair those conditions per 
a method approved by either the FAA or the DGAC (or its delegated 
agent). In light of the type of repair that would be required to 
address the unsafe condition, and consistent with existing bilateral 
airworthiness agreements, we have determined that, for this proposed 
AD, a repair approved by either the FAA or the DGAC would be acceptable 
for compliance with this proposed AD.
    The service bulletins describe procedures for submitting a sheet 
recording compliance with the service bulletin, this proposed AD would 
not require those actions. We do not need this information from 
operators.
    Service Bulletin A320-52-1028 refers only to a ``visual 
inspection'' for cracking of the transition and pick-up angles in the 
lower part of the center fuselage area. We have determined that the 
procedures in the service bulletin should be described as a ``detailed 
inspection.'' For clarification purposes, all references to a visual 
inspection in the existing AD have been changed accordingly. A new Note 
2 has been included in this proposed AD to define this type of 
inspection.
    The service bulletins specify Model A320-212 series airplanes, 
while the applicability of this proposed AD specifies Model A320-111, -
211, and -231 series airplanes without modification 21202 in 
production, as these are the only airplanes affected by the unsafe 
condition.

Cost Impact

    There are approximately 24 airplanes of U.S. registry that would be 
affected by this proposed AD. The new requirements of this AD add no 
additional economic burden. The current costs for this AD are repeated 
for the convenience of affected operators, as follows:
    The inspections that are currently required by AD 98-12-18, and 
retained in this proposed AD, take about 9 work hours per airplane to 
accomplish, at an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Based on 
these figures, the cost impact of the currently required actions on 
U.S. operators is estimated to be $14,040, or $585 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.
    If an operator chooses to do the optional terminating modification 
rather than continue the repetitive inspections, it would take between 
5 and 10 work hours per airplane to accomplish the proposed 
modification, at an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Required 
parts would cost between $1,077 and $1,837 per airplane. Based on these 
figures, the cost impact of the modification proposed by this AD is 
estimated to be between $1,402 and $2,487 per airplane.

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 39-10573 (63 FR 
31345, June 9, 1998), and by adding a new airworthiness directive (AD), 
to read as follows:

Airbus: Docket 2002-NM-118-AD. Supersedes AD 98-12-18, Amendment 39-
10573.

    Applicability: Model A320-111, -211, and -231 series airplanes; 
certificated in any category; as listed in Airbus Service Bulletin 
A320-53-1027, Revision 03, dated February 12, 2002; or Airbus 
Service Bulletin A320-53-1028, Revision 01, dated February 12, 2002.
    Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished 
previously.
    To detect and correct fatigue cracking in the transition and 
pick-up angles of the lower part of the center fuselage, which could

[[Page 65011]]

result in reduced structural integrity of the wing-fuselage support 
and fuselage pressure vessel, accomplish the following:

Restatement of Requirements of AD 98-12-18

Repetitive Inspections/Corrective Actions/Modification

    (a) Prior to the accumulation of 16,000 total landings, or 
within 6 months after July 14, 1998 (the effective date of AD 98-12-
18, amendment 39-10573), whichever occurs later, accomplish 
paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this AD, in accordance with Airbus 
Service Bulletin A320-53-1028, dated March 1, 1994.
    (1) Perform a detailed inspection to detect cracks of the 
transition angle, in accordance with the service bulletin.
    (i) If no crack is detected during the detailed inspection 
required by paragraph (a)(1) of this AD, accomplish either paragraph 
(a)(1)(i)(A) or paragraph (a)(1)(i)(B) of this AD.
    (A) Repeat the detailed inspection thereafter at intervals not 
to exceed 12,000 landings. Or
    (B) Prior to further flight, modify the center fuselage in 
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1027, Revision 2, 
dated June 8, 1995. Accomplishment of the modification constitutes 
terminating action for the repetitive inspection requirements of 
paragraph (a)(1)(i)(A) of this AD.
    (ii) If any crack is detected during the detailed inspection 
required by paragraph (a)(1) of this AD, prior to further flight, 
replace the transition angle with a new transition angle, in 
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1027, Revision 2, 
dated June 8, 1995.
    (2) Perform a rotating probe inspection to detect cracks of the 
pick-up angle, in accordance with the service bulletin.
    (i) If no crack is detected during the rotating probe inspection 
required by paragraph (a)(2) of this AD, accomplish either paragraph 
(a)(2)(i)(A) or (a)(2)(i)(B) of this AD.
    (A) Repeat the rotating probe inspection thereafter at intervals 
not to exceed 12,000 landings. Or
    (B) Prior to further flight, modify the center fuselage in 
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1027, Revision 2, 
dated June 8, 1995. Accomplishment of the modification constitutes 
terminating action for the repetitive inspection requirements of 
paragraph (a)(2)(i)(A) of this AD.
    (ii) If any crack is detected and it is less than 1.9 mm in 
length, prior to further flight, accomplish the applicable 
corrective actions specified in the service bulletin. For holes that 
have not been modified in accordance with the service bulletin, 
repeat the rotating probe inspection thereafter at intervals not to 
exceed 12,000 landings.
    (iii) If any crack is detected and it is 1.9 mm or greater in 
length, prior to further flight, repair it in accordance with the 
method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, 
Transport Airplane Directorate.

    Note 1: Accomplishment of the replacement/modification in 
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1027, dated March 1, 
1994, or Revision 01, dated September 5, 1994, prior to the 
effective date of this AD, is considered acceptable for compliance 
with the applicable action specified in this AD.

New Requirements of This AD

Detailed and Rotating Probe Inspections

    (b) For airplanes on which the modification specified in AD 98-
12-18 has not been done: Do the applicable inspections specified in 
paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this AD, in accordance with the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-53-1028, 
Revision 01, dated February 12, 2002.
    (1) For airplanes on which the inspections required by AD 98-12-
18 have been done: Within 12,000 flight cycles after accomplishment 
of the last inspection required by paragraphs (a)(1)(i)(A) and 
(a)(2)(i)(A) of this AD, as applicable; do a detailed inspection of 
the transition angle and a rotating probe inspection of the pick-up 
angle in the lower part of the center fuselage area for cracking.
    (2) For airplanes on which the inspections required by AD 98-12-
18 have not been done: At the later of the times specified in 
paragraph (b)(2)(i) or (b)(2)(ii) of this AD; do a detailed 
inspection of the transition angle and a rotating probe inspection 
of the pick-up angle in the lower part of the center fuselage area 
for cracking.
    (i) Before the accumulation of 10,400 total flight cycles, or 
24,600 total flight hours, whichever is first.
    (ii) Before the accumulation of 16,000 total flight cycles, or 
within 3,500 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, 
whichever is first.

Repetitive Inspections

    (c) Repeat the detailed and rotating probe inspections specified 
in paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this AD at intervals not to 
exceed 10,400 flight cycles or 24,600 flight hours, whichever is 
first, until the modification specified in paragraph (e) of this AD 
has been done.

    Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is 
defined as: ``An intensive visual examination of a specific 
structural area, system, installation, or assembly to detect damage, 
failure, or irregularity. Available lighting is normally 
supplemented with a direct source of good lighting at intensity 
deemed appropriate by the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror, 
magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface cleaning and elaborate 
access procedures may be required.''

Corrective Action

    (d) If any cracking is found during any inspection required by 
paragraph (b) or (c) of this AD: Prior to further flight, either 
repair the cracking per the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 
Service Bulletin A320-53-1028, Revision 01, dated February 12, 2002; 
or do the modification specified in paragraph (e) of this AD. Where 
the service bulletin specifies to contact the manufacturer for 
repair instructions, prior to further flight, repair the cracking in 
accordance with the method approved by the Manager, International 
Branch, ANM-116; or the Direction Generale de l'Aviation Civile (or 
its delegated agent). If the cracking is repaired, repeat the 
inspections as required by paragraph (c) of this AD.

Modification

    (e) Modification of the transition and pick-up angles in the 
lower part of the center fuselage in accordance with paragraphs 3.A. 
through 3.D. of the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service 
Bulletin A320-53-1027, Revision 03, dated February 12, 2002, ends 
the repetitive inspections required by this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (f) In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, the Manager, International 
Branch, ANM-116, is authorized to approve alternative methods of 
compliance for this AD.

    Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed in French 
airworthiness directive 2002-183(B), dated April 3, 2002.


    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 12, 2003.
Kalene C. Yanamura,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 03-28735 Filed 11-17-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P