[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 161 (Thursday, August 20, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50544-50549]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-20382]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0282; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-168-AD; 
Amendment 39-18242; AD 2015-17-09]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 98-18-02 for 
certain Airbus Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series 
airplanes, and Model C4-605R variant F airplanes (collectively called 
A300-600 series airplanes). AD 98-18-02 required inspections to detect 
cracks in the center spar sealing angles adjacent to the pylon rear 
attachment and in the adjacent butt strap and skin panel, and 
correction of discrepancies. This new AD continues to require 
inspections for cracks. This new AD also requires a modification by 
cold expansion of the center spar sealing angles, replacement of both 
sealing angles and cold expansion of the attachment holes if necessary, 
and post-repair repetitive inspections and corrective actions if 
necessary. This AD was prompted by reports of cracking in the vertical 
web of the center spar sealing angles of the wing, and subsequent 
analyses that showed that the inspection threshold and interval 
specified in AD 98-18-02 must be reduced to allow timely detection of 
cracks on the sealing angles of the center spar, adjacent to rib 8. We 
are issuing this AD to prevent crack formation in the sealing angles, 
which could rupture the sealing angle and lead to subsequent crack 
formation in the bottom skin of the wing, and result in reduced 
structural integrity of the center spar section of the wing.

DATES: This AD becomes effective September 24, 2015.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of September 24, 
2015.

[[Page 50545]]


ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0282; or in person at the 
Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS--
EAW (Airworthiness Office), 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 
Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 
51; email [email protected]; Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information at the 
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. 
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 
425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-
0282.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, 
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone (425) 227-2125; 
fax (425) 227-1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 
part 39 to supersede AD 2006-07-07, Amendment 39-14534 (71 FR 16206, 
March 31, 2006; corrected April 21, 2006 (71 FR 20530)). AD 2006-07-07 
applied to certain Airbus Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R 
series airplanes, and Model C4-605R variant F airplanes (collectively 
called A300-600 series airplanes). The NPRM published in the Federal 
Register on May 9, 2014 (79 FR 26651). The NPRM was prompted by reports 
of cracking in the vertical web of the center spar sealing angles of 
the wing, and subsequent analyses that showed that the inspection 
threshold and interval must be reduced to allow timely detection of 
cracks. The NPRM proposed to continue to require the actions in AD 
2006-07-07: Modification of bolt holes in the vertical flange of the 
center spar sealing angles, and applicable related investigative and 
corrective actions. The NPRM also proposed to require inspections for 
cracks, a modification by cold expansion of the center spar sealing 
angles, replacement of both sealing angles and cold expansion of the 
attachment holes if necessary, and post-repair repetitive inspections 
and corrective actions if necessary. We are issuing this AD to prevent 
crack formation in the sealing angles, which could rupture the sealing 
angle and lead to subsequent crack formation in the bottom skin of the 
wing, and result in reduced structural integrity of the center spar 
section of the wing.
    Although we proposed to supersede AD 2006-07-07, Amendment 39-14534 
(71 FR 16206, March 31, 2006; corrected April 21, 2006 (71 FR 20530)), 
this AD instead supersedes AD 98-18-02, Amendment 39-10718 (63 FR 
45689, August 27, 1998). AD 98-18-02 required inspections using an 
earlier revision of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, 
dated June 6, 2011, which is the appropriate source of service 
information for doing the inspections required by this AD. This change 
to the proposed actions is explained in the ``Request to Supersede a 
Different AD'' paragraph in the preamble of this final rule.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical 
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 
2012-0194, dated September 25, 2012 (referred to after this as the 
Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to 
correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus Model A300 B4-600, B4-
600R, and F4-600R series airplanes, and Model C4-605R variant F 
airplanes (collectively called A300-600 series airplanes). The MCAI 
states:

    Fatigue testing applied to a test airframe confirmed the 
initiation of cracks on the sealing angles of the centre spar, 
adjacent to rib 8, which could lead to the rupture of the sealing 
angles and the subsequent crack initiation in the bottom skin of the 
wing.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could affect the 
structural integrity of the aeroplane.
    To address this unsafe condition, DGAC [French Civil Aviation 
Authority] France issued * * * [an earlier AD][which corresponds to 
FAA AD 98-18-02, Amendment 39-10718, (63 FR 45689, August 27, 1998)] 
to require inspection of centre spar sealing angles adjacent to 
pylon rear attachment fittings of Left Hand (LH) and Right Hand (RH) 
wings.
    Early cracks reported on an in-service aeroplane prompted Airbus 
to conduct additional investigations. Based on the results, DGAC 
France issued * * * [an AD that superseded the earlier DGAC AD], to 
require modification of the affected aeroplanes as specified in 
Airbus Service Bulletin (SB) A300-57-6033 (Airbus Mod 8609), as well 
as post-modification repetitive inspections. [DGAC France AD 2003-
290(B)R1 (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2006-
24364-0008) revised the DGAC AD that required modification and post-
modification repetitive inspections.]
    Since DGAC France AD 2003-290(B)R1 was issued [which corresponds 
to FAA AD 2006-07-07, Amendment 39-14534 (71 FR 16206, March 31, 
2006; corrected April 21, 2006 (71 FR 20530))], a fleet survey and 
updated Fatigue and Damage Tolerance analyses have been performed in 
order to substantiate the second A300-600 Extended Service Goal 
(ESG2) exercise. The results of these analyses have shown that the 
inspection threshold and interval must be reduced to allow timely 
detection of cracks on the sealing angles of the centre spar, 
adjacent to rib 8.
    For the reasons described above, this new [EASA] AD retains the 
requirements of DGAC France AD 2003-290(B)R1, which is superseded, 
and requires the accomplishment instructions at the new thresholds 
and intervals given by Revision 07 of Airbus Service Bulletin (SB) 
A300-57-6027.

    The required actions also include repetitive high frequency eddy 
current (HFEC) inspections of the center spar sealing angles adjacent 
to the pylon rear attachment fitting for cracks, modifying the airplane 
by cold expansion of the center spar sealing angles outboard of rib 8 
if necessary, replacing both of the forward and aft sealing angles with 
new sealing angles and cold expanding the attachment holes if 
necessary, and doing post-repair repetitive inspections and corrective 
actions if necessary. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the 
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-
0282-0002.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing 
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM (79 
FR 26651, May 9, 2014) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Supersede a Different AD

    UPS requested that AD 98-18-02, Amendment 39-10718 (63 FR 45689, 
August 27, 1998), be superseded and AD 2006-07-07, Amendment 39-14534 
(71 FR 16206, March 31, 2006; corrected April 21, 2006 (71 FR 20530)), 
remain a stand-alone AD to address potential conflicts with the 
inspection interval differences. UPS stated that AD 98-18-02 refers to 
Airbus Industrie Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 2, dated 
September 13, 1994, as the appropriate source of service information 
for accomplishing inspections required by AD 98-18-02.
    UPS also stated that the NPRM (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014) refers to 
Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011, 
as the

[[Page 50546]]

appropriate source of service information for accomplishing inspections 
specified in the NPRM. UPS stated there is a conflict in the inspection 
intervals between Airbus Industrie Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, 
Revision 2, dated September 13, 1994; and Airbus Service Bulletin A300-
57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011. UPS also noted that AD 2006-
07-07, Amendment 39-14534 (71 FR 16206, March 31, 2006; corrected April 
21, 2006 (71 FR 20530)), requires a one-time modification in accordance 
with different service information (Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-
6033, Revision 01, dated December 18, 2003) and therefore that AD could 
be a stand-alone AD.
    We agree with the commenter's request and rationale. We have 
revised this AD to supersede AD 98-18-02, Amendment 39-10718 (63 FR 
45689, August 27, 1998), and require inspections using Airbus Service 
Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011. This AD does 
not retain the inspections specified in Airbus Industrie Service 
Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 2, dated September 13, 1994, and 
required by AD 98-18-02. In addition, AD 2006-07-07, Amendment 39-14534 
(71 FR 16206, March 31, 2006; corrected April 21, 2006 (71 FR 20530)), 
is not superseded by this AD. Therefore, we have removed paragraphs (g) 
and (h) of the proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014) from this AD and 
redesignated the subsequent paragraphs.
    We have also revised the ``prompted by'' sentence in the SUMMARY 
section of this final rule and paragraph (e) of this AD to specify the 
AD ``was prompted by reports of cracking in the vertical web of the 
center spar sealing angles of the wing, and subsequent analyses that 
showed that the inspection threshold and interval specified in AD 98-
18-02, Amendment 39-10718 (63 FR 45689, August 27, 1998), must be 
reduced to allow timely detection of cracks on the sealing angles of 
the center spar, adjacent to rib 8.''

Request To Revise Compliance Times

    UPS requested that we revise the compliance times in the proposed 
AD (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014) to reflect specific times regardless of 
the aircraft utilization rate. UPS stated that a comment response in AD 
98-18-02, Amendment 39-10718 (63 FR 45689, August 27, 1998), noted that 
the FAA did not concur with the ``average flight time'' (``AFT'') 
compliance time methodology as it may not address the unsafe condition 
in a timely manner. UPS stated that paragraphs (i) and (j) of the 
proposed AD specify that the compliance time is at the applicable times 
specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Airbus Service Bulletin 
A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011, which establishes the 
initial and repetitive inspection compliance times based on AFT 
methodology. UPS requested changing the compliance times in paragraphs 
(i) and (j) of the proposed AD to reflect specific values regardless of 
the aircraft utilization rate to provide consistency in the compliance 
times for the actions required by paragraph (i) of the proposed AD.
    We disagree with the commenter's request to revise the compliance 
times in this AD. At the time the FAA issued AD 98-18-02, Amendment 39-
10718 (63 FR 45689, August 27, 1998), the required actions in Airbus 
Industrie Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 2, dated September 
13, 1994, contained inspection thresholds and intervals based on 
airplane flight cycles, and provided instructions for adjusting the 
flight cycle threshold and interval using each individual airplane's 
AFT utilization. The FAA did not agree with the AFT method because it 
could result in a different inspection threshold and interval for each 
individual airplane, and the FAA did not agree with adjusting a flight 
cycle based threshold and interval using the average flight time 
utilization without also having a related flight hour based threshold 
and interval. In Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, 
dated June 6, 2011, the inspection thresholds and intervals are now 
based on the accumulation of both flight cycles and flight hours, and 
are listed in tables appropriately grouping airplanes with AFT 
utilization above 1.5 hours, and airplanes with AFT utilization at or 
below 1.5 hours. The changes made in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-
6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011, have addressed the FAA's 
original concerns with the AFT method. Therefore, the current AFT 
method is acceptable for this AD.
    We acknowledge that a fixed compliance time for a fleet could be 
easier for operators to schedule and record compliance. Therefore, 
under the provisions of paragraph (m)(1) of this AD, we will consider 
requests for approval of an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) if 
a proposal is submitted that is supported by technical data that 
includes fatigue and damage tolerance analysis. We have not changed 
this AD in this regard.

Request To Combine Paragraphs (i) Through (m) of the Proposed AD (79 FR 
26651, May 9, 2014)

    UPS requested that we combine paragraphs (i) through (m) of the 
proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014) because the complexity of the 
paragraphs could easily result in incorrect interpretation of the 
proposed requirements and be counterproductive to the intent of the 
rule. The commenter stated that the requirements are distributed over 
five separate paragraphs. The commenter recommended that the 
requirements be revised by first requiring operators to identify 
whether Repair Drawing R57140588 or R57150404 or Airbus Service 
Bulletin A300-57-6033 was done and then by specifying the corresponding 
actions and compliance times for the affected airplanes.
    We acknowledge the requirements are complex. However, we disagree 
with the request to combine paragraphs (g) through (k) of this AD 
(which were designated as paragraphs (i) through (m) in the proposed AD 
(79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014)). As stated previously, we are superseding 
AD 98-18-02, Amendment 39-10718 (63 FR 45689, August 27, 1998), to 
prevent any incorrect interpretation of the inspection compliance 
times. This AD corresponds to EASA AD 2012-0194, dated September 25, 
2012, and both ADs refer to Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, 
Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011, for compliance times, which specifies 
the affected airplanes and corresponding compliance times. Paragraph 
(k) of this AD also specifies exceptions to Airbus Service Bulletin 
A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011, in order to clarify 
certain actions and compliance times. We have not changed the final 
rule regarding this issue.

Request To Revise Compliance Time Header

    UPS requested that the header for paragraph (j) of the proposed AD 
(79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014) be revised from ``Initial Compliance Times'' 
to ``Inspection Compliance Times.'' (Paragraph (j) of the proposed AD 
is redesignated as paragraph (h) of this AD.) UPS stated that ``Initial 
Compliance Times'' implies that requirements for subsequent or 
repetitive actions will be defined elsewhere in the final rule.
    We agree to revise the header for paragraph (h) of this AD; however 
we do not agree to use the terminology specified by the commenter. The 
requirements for subsequent and

[[Page 50547]]

repetitive actions are, in fact, identified elsewhere in the final 
rule. The repetitive intervals for the inspections are specified in 
paragraph (g) of this AD, which was designated as paragraph (i) of the 
proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014). Paragraph (g) of this AD 
contains a sentence that specifies, ``Repeat the inspection required by 
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD thereafter at intervals not to exceed . . . 
.'' For clarity, we have revised the header for paragraph (h) of this 
AD to specify ``Initial Compliance Times for the Actions Required by 
Paragraph (g) of this AD.''
    In addition, we have clarified the corrective action statement in 
paragraph (i) of this AD by also referring to paragraph (g) of this AD, 
which contains the repetitive interval for the inspections specified in 
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.

Request To Remove Requirement To Refer to This AD in Repair Approvals

    UPS requested that we remove the sentence ``For a repair method to 
be approved, the repair approval must specifically refer to this AD'' 
from paragraph (m)(1) of the proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014), 
which is designated as paragraph (k)(1) of this AD. UPS stated that the 
FAA included this sentence in the NPRM because there is a ``potential'' 
for operators to do repairs that do not adequately address the unsafe 
condition. UPS commented that adding a reference to the applicable AD 
on repair documentation does not address the root cause of repair 
documentation availability. UPS stated that previously approved repairs 
for an AD should have been vetted as part of the corrective action and 
AD development process. However, if a repair is not identified during 
that process, the operator is still responsible for adhering to the 
Airworthy Product provision in an AD. UPS added that the Airworthy 
Product provision, in conjunction with FAA Advisory Circular 120-77, 
``Maintenance and Alteration Data,'' dated October 7, 2002 (http://
rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/
199e798c7ee4347786256c4d004ae5dc/$FILE/AC%20120-77.pdf), provides 
sufficient guidance and clarification for repairs accomplished during 
compliance with the requirements of an AD.
    We concur with the commenter's request to remove from this AD the 
requirement that repair approvals specifically refer to this AD. We 
have revised paragraph (k)(1) of this AD accordingly (designated as 
paragraph (m)(1) of the proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014)).
    In addition, to address misinterpretation of the Airworthy Product 
paragraph, we have changed that paragraph and retitled it ``Contacting 
the Manufacturer.'' This paragraph now clarifies that for any 
requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a 
manufacturer, the actions must be accomplished using a method approved 
by the FAA, or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), or Airbus's 
EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).
    The Contacting the Manufacturer paragraph also clarifies that, if 
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized 
signature. The DOA signature indicates that the data and information 
contained in the document are EASA approved, which is also FAA 
approved. Messages and other information provided by the manufacturer 
that do not contain the DOA-authorized signature approval are not EASA 
approved, unless EASA directly approves the manufacturer's message or 
other information. This clarification does not remove flexibility 
afforded previously by the Airworthy Product paragraph. Consistent with 
long-standing FAA policy, such flexibility was never intended for 
required actions. Once we determine that an action is required, any 
deviation from the requirement must be approved as an alternative 
method of compliance.

Request To Clarify Actions in Paragraphs (k) and (l) of the Proposed AD 
(79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014)

    UPS requested that we clarify paragraphs (k) and (l) of the 
proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014). UPS stated that paragraph (l) 
of the proposed AD specifies ``post-modification'' actions, but 
paragraph (k) refers to accomplishing a ``repair'' using Airbus Service 
Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011. UPS noted that 
Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011, 
includes subsequent inspection requirements for airplanes on which the 
actions specified in repair drawing R57140588 or R57150404 or Airbus 
Service Bulletin A300-57-6033 were done. UPS concluded that the intent 
of paragraph (l) of the proposed AD was for repairs outside of Repair 
Drawing R57140588 or R57150404 or Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6033.
    We agree that clarification is necessary regarding which action is 
the ``modification'' specified in paragraph (j) in this AD, which was 
designated as paragraph (l) of the proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May 9, 
2014). We have replaced the text ``After modification of the airplane, 
as specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, 
dated June 6, 2011,'' with the following text: ``For airplanes on which 
the modification specified in Airbus Repair Drawing R571504040 has been 
done.''

Request To Clarify Applicability

    UPS requested that we revise paragraph (c) of the proposed AD (79 
FR 26651, May 9, 2014) to clarify that airplanes are excluded from the 
applicability if Airbus Modification 8608 is incorporated ``in 
production.''
    We agree with the commenter. Airbus Modification 8608 is a 
production modification. We have revised paragraph (c) of this AD 
accordingly by adding ``in production'' to the text.

Request To Fix Typographical Error

    UPS requested that the paragraph designation for paragraph (o)(3) 
of the proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014) be revised because there 
are only two sub-paragraphs in paragraph (o) of the proposed AD.
    We agree. Paragraph (o) of the proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May 9, 
2014) has been redesignated as paragraph (m) of this AD. Therefore, we 
have redesignated paragraph (o)(3) of the proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May 
9, 2014) as paragraph (m)(2) of this AD.

Clarification of Compliance Times and Actions

    We have revised the compliance time exception in paragraph (k)(4) 
of this AD, designated as paragraph (m)(4) of the proposed AD (79 FR 
26651, May 9, 2014), to clarify the specified compliance times are 
since first flight of the airplane.
    We have also revised the reference to ``paragraph (k)(3) of this 
AD'' within paragraph (g) of this AD to specify ``paragraph (k) of this 
AD'' for the compliance time exception.
    We have also replaced the word ``repairing'' with the word 
``inspecting'' in paragraph (k)(1) of this AD because that paragraph 
specifies compliance times for inspection requirements.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comments received, 
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting 
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial 
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the 
NPRM (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014) for correcting the unsafe condition; 
and

[[Page 50548]]

     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was 
already proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014).

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued the following service information:
     Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 
2011, describes procedures for repetitive high frequency eddy current 
inspections for cracking of the center spar sealing angles adjacent to 
the pylon rear attachment fitting, and repair.
     Service Bulletin A300-57-6033, Revision 02, dated 
September 19, 2011, describes procedures for modifying the airplane by 
cold expansion of the center spar sealing angles outboard of rib 8, 
including doing the eddy current inspections for cracks of the bolt 
holes.
    This service information is reasonably available because the 
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of 
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section of this 
AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 21 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate that it takes 8 work-hours per product to comply with 
the new basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $85 
per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the AD 
on U.S. operators to be $14,280, or $680 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions will 
take about 42 work-hours and require parts costing $10,000, for a cost 
of $13,570 per product. We have no way of determining the number of 
aircraft that may need these actions.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to 
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the 
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation 
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's 
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in 
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General 
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with 
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing 
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator 
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within 
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition 
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this 
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications 
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    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);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. 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.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0282; or in person at the 
Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the 
regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. 
The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by 
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
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]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 
98-18-02, Amendment 39-10718 (63 FR 45689, August 27, 1998), and adding 
the following new AD:

2015-17-09 Airbus: Amendment 39-18242. Docket No. FAA-2014-0282; 
Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-168-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective September 24, 2015.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 98-18-02, Amendment 39-10718 (63 FR 45689, 
August 27, 1998).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, B4-
622, B4-605R, and B4-622R airplanes, Model A300 F4-605R and F4-622R 
airplanes, and Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes, certificated 
in any category, except those on which Airbus Modification 8608 is 
incorporated in production.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracking in the vertical web 
of the center spar sealing angles of the wing, and subsequent 
analyses that showed that the inspection threshold and interval 
specified in AD 98-18-02, Amendment 39-10718 (63 FR 45689, August 
27, 1998), must be reduced to allow timely detection of cracks on 
the sealing angles of the center spar, adjacent to rib 8. We are 
issuing this AD to prevent crack formation in the sealing angles; 
such cracks could rupture the sealing angle and lead to subsequent 
crack formation in the bottom skin of the wing, and resultant 
reduced structural integrity of the center spar section of the wing.

(f) Compliance

    You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD 
performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions 
have already been done.

(g) Inspection and Modification

    For all airplanes, at the applicable time specified in paragraph 
(h) of this AD, accomplish the actions specified in paragraphs 
(g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD concurrently. Repeat the inspection 
required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD thereafter at intervals not 
to exceed the values as specified in the ``Repeat Interval'' column 
in Table 1 or Table 2 of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, 
Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011, as applicable to the airplane 
configuration and utilization; except as required by paragraph (k) 
of this AD.
    (1) Do a high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection of the 
center spar sealing angles adjacent to the pylon rear attachment 
fitting for cracks, in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, 
dated June 6, 2011.
    (2) Unless already done: Modify the airplane by cold expansion 
of the center spar sealing angles outboard of rib 8, adjacent to the 
pylon rear attachment fitting, including doing the eddy current 
inspections for cracks

[[Page 50549]]

of the bolt holes, in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6033, Revision 02, 
dated September 19, 2011.

(h) Initial Compliance Times for the Actions Required by Paragraph (g) 
of This AD

    At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and 
(h)(2) of this AD, except as required by paragraph (k) of this AD, 
do the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD.
    (1) At the applicable compliance time specified in Table 1 and 
Table 2 in the ``Threshold Inspection,'' column in paragraph 1.E., 
``Compliance,'' of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 
07, dated June 6, 2011.
    (2) At the applicable compliance time specified in Table 1 and 
Table 2 in the ``Grace Period,'' column in paragraph 1.E., 
``Compliance,'' of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 
07, dated June 6, 2011.

(i) Corrective Actions

    If, during any inspection required by paragraph (g), (g)(1), or 
(g)(2) of this AD, any crack is found: Before further flight, repair 
the crack by replacing both of the forward and aft sealing angles 
with new sealing angles and cold expansion of the attachment holes, 
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service 
Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011. The 
corrective actions, as required by this paragraph, do not constitute 
as a terminating action for the repetitive inspections specified in 
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.

(j) Post-Modification Actions

    For airplanes on which the modification specified in Airbus 
Repair Drawing R571504040 has been done: Within 3 months after the 
effective date of this AD, or before further flight after doing the 
modification, whichever occurs later, contact the Manager, 
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 
or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA 
Design Organization Approval (DOA) for repetitive post-repair 
inspections and corrective actions, and do those actions.

(k) Exceptions to the Service Information

    (1) Where Note 01 and Note 02 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' 
of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 
2011, specify to contact Airbus for inspection requirements, this AD 
requires, at the applicable compliance time specified in Table 1 and 
Table 2 in the ``Grace Period,'' column in paragraph 1.E., 
``Compliance,'' of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 
07, dated June 6, 2011, inspecting using a method approved by the 
Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane 
Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA.
    (2) Where Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, 
dated June 6, 2011, specifies a compliance time in Table 1 and Table 
2 in the ``Grace Period,'' column in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' 
this AD requires compliance within the specified compliance time 
after the effective date of this AD.
    (3) Where Table 1 and Table 2 in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' 
of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 
2011, specify a choice between flight cycles or flight hours, this 
AD requires a compliance time within the specified flight cycles or 
flight hours, whichever occurs first.
    (4) Where Table 1 and Table 2 in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' 
of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 
2011, specify compliance times in the ``Threshold Inspection'' 
column for pre-modification 8609, those compliance times are flight 
cycles or flight hours since first flight of the airplane.
    (5) Where Table 1 and Table 2 in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' 
of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 
2011, specify compliance times in the ``Threshold Inspection'' 
column for any post modification or repair, this AD requires 
compliance within the applicable compliance time specified in the 
``Threshold Inspection'' column of Table 1 and Table 2 in paragraph 
1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, 
Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011. Those compliance times are flight 
cycles or flight hours since accomplishing the modification or 
repair.

(l) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by 
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, if those actions were performed before 
the effective date of this AD using the service information 
specified in paragraphs (l)(1) through (l)(3) of this AD, which is 
not incorporated by reference in this AD.
    (1) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 04, dated 
August 4, 1999.
    (2) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 05, dated 
November 21, 2002.
    (3) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 06, dated 
March 2, 2005.

(m) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, 
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using 
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight 
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information 
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Dan Rodina, 
Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport 
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; telephone (425) 227-2125; fax (425) 227-1149. Information may 
be emailed to: [email protected]. Before using any 
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or 
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight 
standards district office/certificate holding district office. The 
AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: As of the effective date of 
this AD, for any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions 
from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method 
approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport 
Airplane Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. If 
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized 
signature.

(n) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information 
(MCAI) EASA AD 2012-0194, dated September 25, 2012, for related 
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet 
at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket 
No. FAA-2014-0282.
    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not 
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in 
paragraphs (o)(3) and (o)(4) of this AD.

(o) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the 
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed 
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do 
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated 
June 6, 2011.
    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6033, Revision 02, dated 
September 19, 2011.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact 
Airbus SAS--EAW (Airworthiness Office), 1 Rond Point Maurice 
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; 
fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email [email protected]; 
Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport 
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated 
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration 
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at 
NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 10, 2015.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-20382 Filed 8-19-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P