[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 73 (Monday, April 15, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16418-16420]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-9233]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 95-NM-228-AD]
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A300-600 Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document proposes the adoption of a new airworthiness
directive (AD) that is applicable to all Airbus Model A300-600 series
airplanes. This proposal would require an inspection to detect cracks
of certain attachment holes; and installation of a new fastener and
follow-on inspections or repair, if necessary. This proposal is
prompted by reports of fatigue cracking found on the forward fitting of
frame 47 at the level of the last fastener of the external angle
fitting. The actions specified by the proposed AD are intended to
prevent such fatigue cracking, which could result in reduced structural
integrity of the airframe.
DATES: Comments must be received by May 28, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-103,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 95-NM-228-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington 98055-4056. Comments may be inspected at this
location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
The service information referenced in the proposed rule may be
obtained from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707
Blagnac Cedex, France. This information may be examined at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Backman, Aerospace Engineer,
Standardization Branch, ANM-113, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (206)
227-2797; fax (206) 227-1149.
[[Page 16419]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the
proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as
they may desire. Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number
and be submitted in triplicate to the address specified above. All
communications received on or before the closing date for comments,
specified above, will be considered before taking action on the
proposed rule. The proposals contained in this notice may be changed in
light of the comments received.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All
comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing
date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested
persons. A report summarizing each FAA-public contact concerned with
the substance of this proposal will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this notice must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket Number 95-NM-228-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
Availability of NPRMs
Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request
to the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-103, Attention: Rules
Docket No. 95-NM-228-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98055-4056.
Discussion
The Direction Generale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC), which is the
airworthiness authority for France, recently notified the FAA that an
unsafe condition may exist on all Airbus Model A300-600 series
airplanes. The DGAC advises that it has received reports of cracking on
the forward fitting of frame 47 at the level of the last fastener of
the external angle fitting on Airbus Model A300 B2 and B4 series
airplanes. The incidents occurred on airplanes that had accumulated
approximately 20,000 total flights. The cause of such cracking has been
attributed to fatigue. Fatigue cracking on the forward fitting of frame
47 at the level of the last fastener of the external angle fitting, if
not detected and corrected in a timely manner, could result in reduced
structural integrity of the airframe.
The subject area on certain Model A300-600 series airplanes is
identical to that on the affected Model A300 B2 and B4 series
airplanes. Therefore, those Model A300-600 series airplanes may be
subject to the same unsafe condition revealed on the Model A300 B2 and
B4 series airplanes. [AD 93-01-24, amendment 39-8478 (58 FR 6703,
February 2, 1993) requires inspections of the subject area for affected
Airbus Model A300 B2 and B4 series airplanes.] Explanation of Relevant
Service Information
Explanation of Relevant Service Information
Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A300-57-6049, dated September 9,
1994, which describes procedures for performing a rotating probe
inspection to detect cracks of the attachment holes H and I, and
various follow-on actions. (These follow-on actions include installing
new fasteners and reaming/drilling holes.) The service bulletin permits
further flight, under certain conditions, with attachment holes that
are cracked within certain limits. The DGAC classified this service
bulletin as mandatory and issued French airworthiness directive 94-241-
170(B), dated November 9, 1994, in order to assure the continued
airworthiness of these airplanes in France.
Explanation of the Proposed Rule
This airplane model is manufactured in France and is type
certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of
section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and
the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to this
bilateral airworthiness agreement, the DGAC has kept the FAA informed
of the situation described above. The FAA has examined the findings of
the DGAC, reviewed all available information, and determined that AD
action is necessary for products of this type design that are
certificated for operation in the United States.
Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to
exist or develop on other airplanes of the same type design, the
proposed AD would require a rotating probe inspection to detect cracks
of the attachment holes H and I, and installation of a new fastener and
follow-on inspections, if necessary. The actions would be required to
be accomplished in accordance with the service bulletin described
previously.
Differences Between the Proposed Rule and Relevant Service
Information
Operators should note that, unlike the procedures described in the
referenced service bulletin, this proposed AD would not permit further
flight with cracking detected in the attachment holes. The FAA has
determined that, due to safety implications and consequences associated
with such cracking, the subject attachment holes that are found to be
cracked must be repaired. Certain repairs would be required to be
accomplished in accordance with a method approved by the FAA.
In addition, the service bulletin specifies that inspection
thresholds and intervals may be adjusted based on certain average
flight operations of the airplane. However, the FAA has determined that
in certain cases such adjustments would not address the unsafe
condition in a timely manner. Therefore, this proposed AD does not
permit such adjustments. In developing the appropriate compliance time
for the proposed rule, the FAA considered not only the manufacturer's
recommendation, but the safety implications involved with cracking on
the forward fitting of frame 47 at the level of the last fastener of
the external angle fitting and the number of landings that had been
accumulated when cracking was detected. In light of these factors, the
FAA finds the compliance times specified in the proposed AD for
initiating the required actions to be warranted, in that they represent
an appropriate interval of time allowable for the affected airplanes to
continue to operate without compromising safety.
Furthermore, the service bulletin specifies that operators need not
count touch-and-go landings in determining the total number of landings
between two consecutive inspections, even if those landings are less
than five percent of the landings between inspection intervals. Since
fatigue cracking that was found on the forward fitting of frame 47 at
the level of the last fastener of the external angle fitting is
aggravated by landing, the FAA finds that all touch-and-go landings
must be counted in determining the total number of landings between two
consecutive inspections.
Cost Impact
The FAA estimates that 35 Airbus Model A300-600 series airplanes of
U.S. registry would be affected by this proposed AD, that it would take
approximately 37 work hours per airplane to accomplish the proposed
actions, and that the average labor rate is $60 per work hour. The
required kits for accomplishing the inspection would cost approximately
$75 per airplane. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the
proposed AD on U.S. operators is
[[Page 16420]]
estimated to be $80,325, or $2,295 per airplane.
The cost impact figure discussed above is based on assumptions that
no operator has yet accomplished any of the proposed requirements of
this AD action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in
the future if this AD were not adopted.
Regulatory Impact
The regulations proposed herein would not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this
proposal would not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant
the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this proposed
regulation (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
and (3) if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact,
positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under
the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft
regulatory evaluation prepared for this action is contained in the
Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by contacting the Rules
Docket at the location provided under the caption ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend
part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as
follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
Airbus Industrie: Docket 95-NM-228-AD.
Applicability: All Model A300-600 series airplanes, certificated
in any category.
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (f) of
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to
address it.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent fatigue cracking on the forward fitting of frame 47
at the level of the last fastener of the external angle fitting,
which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airframe,
accomplish the following:
(a) Perform a rotating probe inspection to detect cracks of the
attachment holes H and I in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin
A300-57-6049, dated September 9, 1994, at the applicable time
specified in paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this AD.
(1) For airplanes on which Airbus Modification 10454 (reference
Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6050) has not been installed:
Inspect prior to the accumulation of 13,800 total landings, or
within 750 landings after the effective date of this AD.
(2) For airplanes on which Airbus Modification 10454 (reference
Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6050) or Airbus Modification 10155
has been installed: Inspect prior to the accumulation of 18,700
total landings, or within 750 landings after the effective date of
this AD.
(b) If no crack is found, prior to further flight, install a new
fastener in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6049,
dated September 9, 1994. Repeat the rotating probe inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 5,600 landings.
(c) If any crack in hole I is found to be greater than 0.196
inches in length and/or depth, prior to further flight, repair it in
accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Standardization
Branch, ANM-113, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate.
(d) If any crack in hole H is found to be greater than .062
inches in length, prior to further flight, repair it in accordance
with a method approved by the Manager, Standardization Branch, ANM-
113.
(e) If any crack in hole H or hole I is found to be less than or
equal to the limits specified in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this AD,
prior to further flight, repair it in accordance with Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-57-6049, dated September 9, 1994.
(f) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, Standardization Branch, ANM-113,
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators shall submit their
requests through an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector,
who may add comments and then send it to the Manager,
Standardization Branch, ANM-113.
Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Standardization Branch, ANM-113.
(g) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 9, 1996.
Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-9233 Filed 4-12-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
