[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 2 (Tuesday, January 4, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 254-256]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-48]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 98-NM-211-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A300, A310, and 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 certain Airbus Model A300, A310,
and A300-600 series airplanes. This proposal would require repetitive
eddy current inspections to detect cracking on the door edge frames of
the fuselage bulk cargo compartment, and repair, if necessary. 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 detect and correct cracks
in the door edge frames of the fuselage bulk cargo compartment, which
could result in reduced structural integrity of the airframe.
DATES: Comments must be received by February 3, 2000.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 98-NM-211-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.
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.
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 98-NM-211-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. 98-NM-211-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, notified the FAA that an unsafe
condition may exist on certain Airbus Model A300, A310, and A300-600
series airplanes. The DGAC advises that, during routine maintenance on
a Model A300 series airplane, stress corrosion induced cracks were
found in door edge frames FR67 and FR69 of the bulk cargo compartment
between stringers 33 and 48 (right-hand side). This condition, if not
corrected, could result in reduced structural integrity of the
airframe.
The subject door edge frames on Airbus Model A310 and A300-600
series airplanes are identical to those on the affected Airbus Model
A300 series airplanes. Therefore, all of these airplanes may be subject
to the same unsafe condition.
Explanation of Relevant Service Information
Airbus has issued Service Bulletins A300-53-0339, Revision 1, dated
July 28, 1998, including Appendix 01 (for Model A300 series airplanes);
A310-53-2106 (for Model A310 series airplanes), dated October 2, 1997,
including Appendix 01; and A300-53-6114, dated October 2, 1997,
including Appendix 01 (for Model A300-600 series airplanes). These
service bulletins describe procedures for a one-time eddy current
inspection to detect cracks in the door edge frames of the bulk cargo
compartment, and repair of the door edge frame, if necessary. The
service bulletins also describe procedures for reporting the results of
the inspection to
[[Page 255]]
Airbus. The DGAC classified these service bulletins as mandatory and
issued French airworthiness directive 98-123-245(B), dated March 11,
1998, in order to assure 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 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 require accomplishment of
the actions specified in the service bulletins described previously,
except as discussed below. This proposed AD also would provide for
optional terminating action for the repetitive inspections.
The FAA has determined that the repetitive inspections proposed by
this AD can be allowed to continue in lieu of accomplishment of a
terminating action. In making this determination, the FAA considers
that, in the case of this proposed AD, long-term continued operational
safety will be adequately assured by accomplishing the repetitive
inspections to detect cracking before it represents a hazard to the
airplane.
Differences Between Proposed Rule and Foreign Airworthiness
Directive
The proposed AD would differ from the parallel French airworthiness
directive in that it would require the eddy current inspection to be
repeated at intervals not to exceed 5 years. The FAA has determined
that, because of the unpredictable nature of stress corrosion induced
crack propagation, repetitive inspections are necessary. In addition,
the DGAC has informed the FAA that it may consider revising its
airworthiness directive to also require repetitive eddy current
inspections.
Operators also should note that, unlike the parallel French
airworthiness directive, this proposed AD would not permit further
flight if cracks are detected in the door edge frames. The FAA has
determined that, because of the safety implications and consequences
associated with such cracking, any subject door edge frame that is
found to be cracked must be repaired prior to further flight.
Interim Action
This is considered to be interim action. The inspection reports
that are required by this proposed AD will enable the manufacturer to
obtain better insight into the nature, cause, and extent of the
cracking, and eventually to develop final action to address the unsafe
condition. Once final action has been identified, the FAA may consider
further rulemaking.
Cost Impact
The FAA estimates that 126 airplanes of U.S. registry would be
affected by this proposed AD, that it would take approximately 2 work
hours per airplane to accomplish the proposed inspection, and that the
average labor rate is $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the
cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be
$15,120, or $120 per airplane, per inspection cycle.
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 98-NM-211-AD.
Applicability: Model A300 series airplanes on which Airbus
Modification 2140 (reference Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-109)
has been accomplished; and Model A310 and A300-600 series airplanes,
except those airplanes on which Airbus Modification 5438 was
accomplished during production; certificated in any category.
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
otherwise 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 (d) 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 detect and correct cracks in the door edge frames of the bulk
cargo compartment, which could result in reduced structural
integrity of the airframe, accomplish the following:
Repetitive Inspections
(a) Perform an eddy current inspection to detect cracking in the
inner and outer flanges on the door edge frames of the fuselage bulk
cargo compartment, in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletins A300-
53-0339, Revision 1, dated July 28, 1998, including Appendix 01 (for
Model A300 series airplanes); A310-53-2106, dated October 2, 1997,
including Appendix 01 (for Model A310 series airplanes); or A300-53-
6114,
[[Page 256]]
dated October 2, 1997, including Appendix 01 (for Model A300-600
series airplanes); as applicable; at the applicable time specified
in paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this AD. Thereafter, repeat the
inspection at intervals not to exceed 5 years.
(1) For airplanes with less than 15 years since date of
manufacture as of the effective date of this AD: Inspect within 10
years since date of manufacture, or within 12 months after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.
(2) For airplanes with 15 or more years since date of
manufacture as of the effective date of this AD: Inspect within 6
months after the effective date of this AD.
Note 2: For Model A300 series airplanes, accomplishment of an
eddy current inspection prior to the effective date of this AD in
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0339, dated October
2, 1997, is considered acceptable for compliance with the initial
eddy current inspection required by paragraph (a) of this AD.
Corrective Actions
(b) If any crack is detected during any inspection required by
paragraph (a) of this AD, prior to further flight, repair the door
edge frame in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletins A300-53-0339,
Revision 1, dated July 28, 1998 (for Model A300 series airplanes);
A310-53-2106 (for Model A310 series airplanes), dated October 2,
1997; or A300-53-6114 (for Model A300-600 series airplanes), dated
October 2, 1997; as applicable. Complete replacement of a door edge
frame with a new door frame in accordance with the service bulletin
constitutes terminating action for the repetitive inspections
required by this AD for that door frame only.
Report Requirements
(c) Submit a report of the inspection results (both positive and
negative findings) to Airbus Industrie, Customer Services
Directorate, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex,
France, at the applicable time specified in paragraph (e)(1) or
(e)(2) of this AD. Information collection requirements contained in
this regulation have been approved by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and have been assigned OMB Control
Number 2120-0056.
(1) For airplanes on which any inspection is accomplished after
the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days
after performing any inspection required by paragraph (a) or (b) of
this AD.
(2) For airplanes on which the inspection has been accomplished
prior to the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 10
days after the effective date of this AD.
Alternative Methods of Compliance
(d) 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, 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, International
Branch, ANM-116.
Note 3: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the International Branch, ANM-116.
Special Flight Permits
(e) 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.
Note 4: The subject of this AD is addressed in French
airworthiness directive 98-123-245(B), dated March 11, 1998.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 28, 1999.
D.L. Riggin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 00-48 Filed 1-3-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
