13 November 2001 Source: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/fr-cont.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Federal Register: August 27, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 166)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 44990-44993] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr27au01-21] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. 2001-NM-204-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A300 B2 and B4, A300 B4- 600 and B4-600R, and A310 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 B2 and B4, A300 B4-600 and B4-600R, and A310 series airplanes. This proposal would require modification of the terminal blocks of the starter feeder line of the auxiliary power unit (APU). This action is necessary to prevent slackness and subsequent overheat and arcing of certain wiring connections. This action is intended to address the identified unsafe condition. DATES: Comments must be received by September 26, 2001. ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001-NM-204-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. Comments may be submitted via fax to (425) 227-1232. Comments may also be sent via the Internet using the following address: 9-anm-nprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments sent via fax or the Internet must contain ``Docket No. 2001-NM-204-AD'' in the subject line and need not be submitted in triplicate. Comments sent via the Internet as attached electronic files must be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for Windows or ASCII text. The service information referenced in the proposed rule may be obtained from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France. This information may be examined at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 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: Organize comments issue-by-issue. For example, discuss a request to change the compliance time and a request to change the service bulletin reference as two separate issues. For each issue, state what specific change to the proposed AD is being requested. Include justification (e.g., reasons or data) for each request. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report summarizing each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of this proposal will be filed in the Rules Docket. Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments submitted in response to this action must submit a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket Number 2001-NM-204-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. 2001-NM-204-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 B2 and B4, A300 B4- 600, A300 B4-600R, and A310 series airplanes. The DGAC advises that an operator reported a number of cases of incorrect tightening of the retaining nuts of the terminal blocks of the starter feeder line of the auxiliary power unit (APU). In some cases, arcing has been seen at the level of either the terminal lugs or the terminal block itself. Incorrect tightening of the retaining nuts, if not corrected, could result in slackness and subsequent overheat and arcing of certain wiring connections. Background In July 1996, a Boeing Model 747 series airplane was involved in an accident. As part of re-examining all [[Page 44991]] aspects of the service experience of the airplane involved in the accident, the FAA participated in design review and testing to determine possible sources of ignition in center fuel tanks. As part of the review, the FAA examined fuel system wiring with regard to the possible effects that wire degradation may have on arc propagation. In 1997 in a parallel preceding, at the recommendation of the White House Commission on Aviation Safety and Security, the FAA expanded its Aging Transport Program to include non-structural systems and assembled a team for evaluating these systems. This team performed visual inspections of certain transport category airplanes for which 20 years or more had passed since date of manufacture. In addition, the team gathered information from interviews with FAA Principal Maintenance Inspectors and meetings with representatives of airplane manufacturers. This evaluation revealed that the length of time in service is not the only cause of wire degradation; inadequate maintenance, contamination, improper repair, and mechanical damage are all contributing factors. From the compilation of this comprehensive information, we developed the Aging Transport Non-Structural Systems Plan to increase airplane safety by increasing knowledge of how non-structural systems degrade and how causes of degradation can be reduced. In 1999, the FAA Administrator established a formal advisory committee to facilitate the implementation of the Aging Transport Non- Structural Systems Plan. This committee, the Aging Transport Systems Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ATSRAC), is made up of representatives of airplane manufacturers, operators, user groups, aerospace and industry associations, and government agencies. As part of its mandate, ATSRAC will recommend rulemaking to increase transport category airplane safety in cases where solutions to safety problems connected to aging systems have been found and must be applied. Detailed analyses of certain transport category airplanes that have been removed from service, studies of service bulletins pertaining to certain wiring systems, and reviews of previously issued ADs requiring repetitive inspections of certain wiring systems, have resulted in valuable information on the cause and prevention of wire degradation due to various contributing factors (e.g. inadequate maintenance, contamination, improper repair, and mechanical damage). In summary, as a result of the investigations described above, the FAA has determined that corrective action may be necessary to minimize the potential hazards associated with wire degradation and related causal factors (e.g. inadequate maintenance, contamination, improper repair, and mechanical damage). Other Related Rulemaking This proposed AD is one of a series of actions identified as part of the ATSRAC program initiative to maintain continued operational safety of aging non-structural systems in transport category airplanes. The program is continuing, and the FAA may consider additional rulemaking actions as further results of the review become available. Explanation of Relevant Service Information Airbus has issued Service Bulletins A300-24-0079, Revision 02, dated January 3, 2001 (for Model A300 B2 and B4 series airplanes); A300-24-6034, Revision 03, dated April 6, 2001 (for Model A300 B4-600 and B4-600R series airplanes); and A310-24-2045, Revision 05, dated April 6, 2001 (for Model A310 series airplanes). The service bulletins describe procedures for modifying the terminal blocks of the APU starter feeder line. The modification involves inspecting the threaded portion of the terminal portion of the terminal lugs to detect damage, distortion, or elongation; measuring the dimensions of the studs of the terminal blocks; and re-identifying the terminal blocks. Corrective actions include replacing any discrepant terminal block with a new part. Accomplishment of the actions specified in the service bulletins is intended to adequately address the identified unsafe condition. The DGAC classified these service bulletins as mandatory and issued French airworthiness directive 2001-266(B), dated June 27, 2001, 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 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. Cost Impact The FAA estimates that 153 airplanes of U.S. registry would be affected by this proposed AD. It would take approximately 1 to 3 work hours per airplane (depending on configuration) to accomplish the proposed actions, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $60 to $180 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 proposed AD were not adopted. The cost impact figures discussed in AD rulemaking actions represent only the time necessary to perform the specific actions actually required by the AD. These figures typically do not include incidental costs, such as the time required to gain access and close up, planning time, or time necessitated by other administrative actions. Regulatory Impact The regulations proposed herein would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, it is determined that this proposal would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this proposed regulation (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft regulatory evaluation prepared for this action is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by [[Page 44992]] 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 2001-NM-204-AD. Applicability: The following airplanes, certificated in any category: Table 1.--Applicability ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Excluding those airplanes modified per Airbus modification 10212, or Model-- Airbus Service Bulletin-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A300 B2 and B4 series airplanes...... A300-24-0079, Revision 02, dated January 3, 2001. A300 B4-600 and B4-600R series A300-24-6034, Revision 03, dated April 6, 2001. airplanes. A310 series airplanes................ A310-24-2045, Revision 05, dated April 6, 2001. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 (b) 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 slackness and subsequent overheat and arcing of certain wiring connections, accomplish the following: Modification (a) Modify the terminal blocks (including a general visual inspection of the threaded portion of the lugs to detect damage, distortion, or elongation; measurement of stud dimensions; and re- identification of the terminal blocks), as specified by Table 2 of this AD. If any discrepancy is detected, prior to further flight, replace the terminal block with a new part in accordance with the applicable service bulletin. Table 2 follows: Table 2.--Modification Requirements ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Prior to the times Perform the specified by modification in paragraphs (i) and For model-- accordance with (ii), whichever Airbus Service occurs later, for Bulletin-- each model: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (1) A300 B2 and B4 series A300-24-0079, (i) The accumulation airplanes. Revision 02, dated of 32,000 total January 3, 2001. flight cycles or 40,000 total flight hours, whichever occurs first. (ii) 3,600 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD. (2) A300 B4-600 and B4-600R A300-24-6034, (i) The accumulation series airplanes. Revision 03, dated of 26,000 total April 6, 2001. flight cycles or 40,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first. (ii) 3,600 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD. (3) A310 series airplanes... A310-24-2045, (i) The accumulation Revision 05, dated of 26,000 total April 6, 2001. flight cycles or 40,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first. (ii) 3,600 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a general visual inspection is defined as: ``A visual examination of an interior or exterior area, installation, or assembly to detect obvious damage, failure, or irregularity. This level of inspection is made under normally available lighting conditions such as daylight, hangar lighting, flashlight, or drop-light, and may require removal or opening of access panels or doors. Stands, ladders, or platforms may be required to gain proximity to the area being checked.'' Note 3: Modification, prior to the effective date of this AD, in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-24-0079, dated March 15, 1993, or Revision 01, dated September 22, 1993 (for Model A300 B2 and B4 series airplanes); A300-24-6034, dated March 15, 1993, Revision 01, dated September 22, 1993; or Revision 02, dated September 7, 1994 (for Model A300 B4-600 and B4-600R series airplanes); or A310-24-2045, dated March 15, 1993, Revision 01, dated September 22, 1993, Revision 02, dated September 7, 1994, Revision 03, dated February 24, 1995, or Revision 04, dated November 24, 1995 (for Model A310 series airplanes); is acceptable for compliance with the requirements of paragraph (a) of this AD. Alternative Methods of Compliance (b) 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, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA. 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 4: Information concerning the existence of approved alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be obtained from the International Branch, ANM-116. [[Page 44993]] Special Flight Permits (c) 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 5: The subject of this AD is addressed in French airworthiness directive 2001-266(B), dated June 27, 2001. Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 16, 2001. Vi L. Lipski, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 01-21223 Filed 8-24-01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-U ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Federal Register: August 22, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 163)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 44089-44093] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22au01-31] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. 99-NM-86-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A300 B2, A300 B4, A300 B4- 600, and A300 B4-600R Series Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT. ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking; reopening of comment period. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: This document revises an earlier proposed airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to all Airbus Model A300 B2 and A300 B4 series airplanes, and all A300 B4-600, A300 B4-600R, and A300 F4-600R (collectively called A300-600) series airplanes. The original notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) would have required repetitive inspections for cracking of certain fittings, corrective action if necessary, and, for certain airplanes, a modification; and would have provided for optional terminating action for the repetitive inspections. That proposal was prompted by issuance of mandatory continuing airworthiness information by a foreign civil airworthiness authority. This supplemental NPRM revises the original NPRM by including additional variables for determination of the compliance times, allowing an optional repair for certain cracking conditions, and removing certain airplanes from the applicability. The actions specified by this new proposed AD are intended to detect and correct propagation of cracks on the frame 40 aft fittings due to local stress concentrations at the frame 40 upper flange runout, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane. DATES: Comments must be received by September 17, 2001. ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, Attention: Rules Docket No. 99-NM-86-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. Comments may be submitted via fax to (425) 227-1232. Comments may also be sent via the Internet using the following address: 9-anm- nprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments sent via fax or the Internet must contain ``Docket No. 99-NM-86-AD'' in the subject line and need not be submitted in triplicate. Comments sent via the Internet as attached electronic files must be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for Windows or ASCII text. The service information referenced in the proposed rule may be obtained from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France. This information may be examined at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 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: Organize comments issue-by-issue. For example, discuss a request to change the compliance time and a request to change the service bulletin reference as two separate issues. For each issue, state what specific change to the proposed AD is being requested. Include justification (e.g., reasons or data) for each request. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report summarizing each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of this proposal will be filed in the Rules Docket. Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments submitted in response to this action must submit a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to [[Page 44090]] Docket Number 99-NM-86-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and returned to the commenter. Availability of NPRMs Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request to the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, Attention: Rules Docket No. 99-NM-86-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056. Discussion A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to add an airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to all Airbus Model A300 B2 and A300 B4 series airplanes, and all Model A300 B4-600, A300 B4-600R, and A300 F4-600R (collectively called A300-600) series airplanes, was published as a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register on January 9, 2001 (66 FR 1612). That original NPRM would have required modifying the frame 40 aft fittings for certain airplanes. For all airplanes, the original NPRM would have required repetitive nondestructive test inspections to detect cracking of the frame 40 aft fittings, and corrective action if necessary; and would have provided for optional terminating action for the repetitive inspections. The original NPRM was prompted by reports that cracks were found on the frame 40 aft fittings at stringer 33 on the left and right sides of the fuselage; the cracks were caused by a local stress concentration at the frame 40 upper flange runout. That condition, if not corrected, could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane. Comments Due consideration has been given to comments received in response to the original NPRM. Request To Include Flight Hours in Compliance Time Determination One commenter, the manufacturer, requests that flight hours also be included as a variable in the compliance time determination for the initial and repetitive inspections. The manufacturer and the FAA have agreed that both flight cycles and flight hours should be considered when determining the appropriate compliance threshold and repetitive interval for the inspections. The FAA concurs with the request, finding that this method of determining the compliance times will ensure an adequate level of safety. The compliance times in Table 3 of this supplemental NPRM have been revised accordingly. Request To Allow Repair for Certain Conditions One commenter requests that the original NPRM be revised to allow rework of cracks in the aft fitting (in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0296 or A300-53-6048) if the cracks are 10 mm or less in length. (The original NPRM would have required replacement of the cracked fitting.) The commenter considers that immediate replacement of a cracked fitting (in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53- 0297 or A300-57-6053) for these smaller cracks is not economically acceptable. The FAA concurs. The FAA has determined that, for cracks that are 10 mm or less in length, either reworking the cracked area or replacing the cracked fitting would be acceptable for affected airplanes to continue to safely operate until the next inspection. For cracks that are more than 10 mm in length, this supplemental NPRM would require either replacement of the cracked fitting in accordance with the applicable service bulletin referenced above, or a repair in accordance with a method approved by the FAA or the DGAC. These conditional actions based on crack length are consistent with those actions described in Service Bulletin A300-53-0296 or A300-53-6048. Therefore, this supplemental NPRM has been revised to simply state that repair would be required in accordance with those service bulletins. In light of the type of repair that would be required to address the identified unsafe condition, and in consonance with existing bilateral airworthiness agreements, the FAA has determined that, for this supplemental NPRM, a repair approved by either the FAA or the DGAC would be acceptable for compliance. Request To Remove Certain Airplanes From Applicability One commenter requests that Model A300 F4-622R series airplanes be removed from the applicability of the original NPRM to correspond to the applicability of the revised parallel French airworthiness directive, which specifically excludes those airplanes because the actions proposed by this supplemental NPRM have been accomplished on those airplanes in production. The FAA concurs and has accordingly revised the applicability of this supplemental NPRM. Request for Credit for Inspection Two commenters request that the proposed AD be revised to provide credit for an inspection already performed in accordance with the original issue of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6048. (The original NPRM would have required compliance in accordance with Revision 01 or 03, and would have provided credit for Revision 02.) The original issue of the parallel French airworthiness directive (1998-481-270(B)) was based on the original service bulletin. The FAA concurs. The actions specified by the original service bulletin do not vary significantly from those proposed in this supplemental NPRM. Note 2 of this supplemental NPRM has been revised to add credit for an inspection done in accordance with the original service bulletin. Request To Change Sequence of Certain Actions One commenter suggests that the original NPRM be revised to change the sequence of the subparagraphs of paragraph (d) so that subparagraph (d)(3) immediately precedes paragraph (d)(1). The modification specified by Service Bulletins A300-53-0297 and A300-57-6053 cancels the inspection specified by Service Bulletins A300-53-0268 and A300-57- 6052; therefore, the commenter suggests that the corrective actions of paragraph (d) of the original NPRM list the inspection requirement before the modification requirement. The FAA agrees that the sequence of instructions as written in the original NPRM may be confusing. This supplemental NPRM has been revised to distinguish the terminating action as a separate action, which is included as new paragraph (e). Request To Provide for Optional Terminating Action for Certain Conditions Two commenters request that the original NPRM be revised to provide for optional terminating action on Model A300 B4-600 and A300 B4-600R series airplanes if no cracks are found and no subsequent rework is required. The FAA partially concurs. Paragraph (b)(8) of the original NPRM does provide for Service Bulletin A300-57-6053 (and Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0297 for Model A300 B2 and A300 B4 series airplanes) as terminating action--whether cracks are found or not. However, the FAA agrees that clarification of the associated text in the original NPRM may be necessary. Therefore, paragraph (b)(8) and new paragraph (e) of this supplemental NPRM have been revised to clarify that the modification would terminate the proposed requirements, regardless of the inspection results. [[Page 44091]] Additional Change to Original NPRM Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6048, described previously, refers to Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6063 as an additional source of service information for accomplishment of certain repairs. New Note 3 of this supplemental NPRM identifies this secondary reference. Conclusion Since these changes expand the scope of the original NPRM, the FAA has determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment period to provide additional opportunity for public comment. Cost Impact The FAA estimates that 70 airplanes of U.S. registry would be affected by this proposed AD. For affected airplanes, it would take approximately 92 work hours per airplane to accomplish the proposed modification, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts would cost as much as $874 per airplane. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the proposed modification is estimated to be as much as $6,394 per airplane. It would take approximately 10 work hours per airplane to accomplish the proposed inspection, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the proposed inspection on U.S. operators is estimated to be $42,000, or $600 per airplane, per inspection cycle. The cost impact figures discussed above are 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. 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 planning time, time required to gain access and close up, or time necessitated by other administrative actions. Regulatory Impact The regulations proposed herein would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, it is determined that this proposal would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this proposed regulation (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft regulatory evaluation prepared for this action is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by contacting the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption ``ADDRESSES.'' List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows: PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. Sec. 39.13 [Amended] 2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new airworthiness directive: Airbus Industrie: Docket 99-NM-86-AD. Applicability: All Model A300 B2, A300 B4, A300 B4-600, and A300 B4-600R 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 (g) 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 propagation of cracks on the frame 40 aft fittings due to local stress concentrations at the upper flange runout of frame 40, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane, accomplish the following: Modification (a) For airplanes on which Airbus Modification 10430 has not been done before the effective date of this AD: Concurrently with the inspection required by paragraph (b) of this AD, modify the profile of frame 40 aft fittings per the service information specified in Table 1, as follows: Table 1.--Service Information ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Do the actions in For model accordance with Of airbus service Dated either bulletin ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) A300 B2 and A300 B4 series (i) Revision 01 or A300-53-0296 September 30, 1998. airplanes. (ii) Revision 02.. A300-53-0296 May 12, 1999. (2) A300 B4-600 and A300 B4-600R (i) Revision 01 or A300-53-6048 September 30, 1998. series airplanes. (ii) Revision 03.. A300-53-6048 February 21, 2000. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note 2: For Model A300 B4-600 and A300 B4-600R series airplanes: Actions performed in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300- 53-6048, dated January 16, 1996; or Revision 02, dated May 12, 1999, are acceptable for compliance with the applicable requirements of this AD. Note 3: Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6048 refers to Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6063 as an additional source of service information for accomplishment of certain repairs. Inspection (b) For all airplanes, inspect the airplane per Table 2, as follows: [[Page 44092]] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Federal Register: February 21, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 35)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 10957-10960] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr21fe01-4] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. 2000-NM-47-AD; Amendment 39-12118; AD 2001-03-14] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A300 B4 Series Airplanes, and Model A300 B4-600, A300 B4-600R, and A300 F4-600R (Collectively Called A300-600) Series Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT. ACTION: Final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to certain Airbus Model A300 series airplanes and all Airbus Model A300-600 series airplanes, that requires a one-time high frequency eddy current inspection to detect cracking of the splice fitting at fuselage frame (FR) 47 between stringers 24 and 25; and corrective actions, if necessary. This amendment is prompted by issuance of mandatory continuing airworthiness information by a foreign civil airworthiness authority. The actions specified by this AD are intended to detect and correct cracking of the splice [[Page 10958]] fitting at fuselage FR 47, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane. DATES: Effective March 28, 2001. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of March 28, 2001. ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be obtained from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France. This information may be examined at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Norman B. Martenson, Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 227- 2110; fax (425) 227-1149. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness directive (AD) that is applicable to certain Airbus Model A300 series airplanes and all Airbus Model A300-600 series airplanes was published in the Federal Register on April 5, 2000 (65 FR 17822). That action proposed to require a one-time high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection to detect cracking of the splice fitting at fuselage frame (FR) 47 between stringers 24 and 25, and corrective actions, if necessary. Comments Received Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to the comments received. Airplane Model Designation and Change in AD Applicability Since the issuance of the proposed AD, the FAA has determined that it is necessary to revise the manner in which it specifies the model designation for Airbus Model A300 and A300-600 series airplanes to reflect the designations that appear on the type certificate data sheet (TCDS). This final rule has been revised accordingly. Additionally, an incorrect reference to Model A300 F4-200 series airplanes has been removed from paragraph (a)(2) of this final rule since that airplane model has not been type certificated in the United States. Further, since the issuance of the proposed AD, the FAA also has determined that the applicability was stated incorrectly in the proposal. Airbus Model A300 B2K-3C airplanes were inadvertently included in the applicability of the proposed AD. Reference to that model has been removed from the applicability of this final rule. In addition, the applicability of the proposed AD indicates that ``All Model A300-600 series airplanes'' and that ``Model * * * A300 B4- 600, A300 B4-600R, and A300 F4-600R series airplanes on which Airbus Modification 5890 (Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0199) has been installed'' are among the affected airplanes. However, Model A300 B4- 600, A300 B4-600R, and A300 F4-600R series airplanes, which are commonly referred to as ``Model A300-600 series airplanes,'' were mistakenly associated in the applicability of the proposed AD with Model A300 series airplanes on which Modification 5890 has been incorporated. The parallel French airworthiness directive 1999-515- 298(B), dated December 29, 1999, indicates that all Model A300-600 series airplanes are affected. The FAA intended to mirror the applicability of the French airworthiness directive in the applicability of the proposed AD. Therefore, the applicability of this final rule has been revised to reflect the affected models as shown in the French airworthiness directive. Request to Allow Flight with Cracks One commenter, Airbus, requests that the proposed AD be revised to provide a 100-flight-cycle grace period for splice replacement under certain conditions. That is, this grace period would allow flight with cracks in the area from hole A to the edge, provided that inspection of the area between holes A and J reveals no cracks. Airbus states that flight with such cracks was allowed by the Direction Generale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC), which is the airworthiness authority for France, in its parallel French airworthiness directive for the following reasons. The commenter notes that its statements are justified in two technical notes and in a laboratory report. There are three stages of crack propagation of the splice that occur in the following sequence: From hole A to the edge; Between hole A and hole J (hole B in the laboratory report); From hole J to failure of the splice (the duration of this phase is 1,600 flight cycles). The first inspection specified in the All Operators Telex (AOT) is accomplished to detect cracks from hole A to the edge. If a crack is found, then an inspection is performed between holes A and J. If no crack is found between holes A and J, then a grace period of 100 flight cycles is given for splice replacement. Since the measured crack propagation from hole J to splice failure is 1,600 flight cycles (as measured on the airplane having manufacturer's serial number 255), it is conservative to allow 100 flight cycles as a grace period for splice replacement. In addition, the structure can still sustain ultimate loads with the splice failed and limit loads with the splice plus frame failed. The 100-flight-cycle grace period is provided to allow operators to get a spare splice and plan the work. The FAA concurs with the commenter's request to provide a 100- flight-cycle grace period for splice replacement under certain conditions, as specified in the referenced AOT's. While it is not the FAA's normal policy to allow flight with known cracks, in light of the technical data submitted by the manufacturer in this case, the FAA has determined that further flight with cracking in the situation described by the commenter can be permitted for the recommended 100-flight-cycle grace period. The FAA recognizes the unusual need that exists due to the work that is required to replace a splice fitting. Further, the FAA finds that the cracks observed are sufficiently far from other known crack sites so that existing inspection programs can be considered valid independently from one another. In consideration of these findings and based on the FAA's criteria for flight with known cracking, the FAA has determined that further flight with cracking is permissible for a grace period of 100 flight cycles in this specific case. It should be noted that Airbus specified the 100-flight-cycle grace period in the AOT's that are cited in this final rule. Now that the FAA is allowing that same grace period, this final rule has been revised to more closely parallel the actions and compliance times specified in the AOT's with one exception. (That exception involves contacting the FAA, rather than the manufacturer, for disposition of certain findings, which was explained in the preamble of the proposed AD.) Therefore, the FAA has revised the formatting of this final rule to coincide with the actions and compliance times specified in the AOT's. Conclusion After careful review of the available data, including the comment noted [[Page 10959]] above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public interest require the adoption of the rule with the changes described previously. The FAA has determined that these changes will neither increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD. Interim Action This is considered to be interim action until final action is identified, at which time the FAA may consider further rulemaking. Cost Impact The FAA estimates that 83 airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected by this AD, that it will take approximately 1 work hour per airplane to accomplish the required one-time HFEC inspection, and that the average labor rate is $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $4,980, or $60 per airplane. The cost impact figure discussed above is based on assumptions that no operator has yet accomplished any of the 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 adopted herein 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. Therefore, it is determined that this final rule does not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) 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 final evaluation has been prepared for this action and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption ADDRESSES. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. Adoption of the Amendment Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 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: 2001-03-14 Airbus Industrie: Amendment 39-12118. Docket 2000-NM-47- AD. Applicability: All Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R (Collectively Called A300-600) series airplanes; and Model A300 B4 series airplanes on which Airbus Modification 5890 (Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0199) has been installed; 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 (c) 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 cracking of the splice fitting at fuselage frame (FR) 47, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane, accomplish the following: Inspection and Corrective Actions (a) Perform a high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection to detect cracking of the splice fitting at fuselage FR 47 between stringers 24 and 25 (left- and right-hand sides), in accordance with Airbus All Operators Telex (AOT) A300-53A0350 (for Model A300 series airplanes) or A300-600-53A6123 (for Model A300-600 series airplanes), both dated October 25, 1999; as applicable. Do the inspection at the applicable time specified in paragraph (a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), or (a)(4) of this AD. Perform applicable corrective actions (e.g., removing the nut at hole ``A'' and performing an inspection using a shielded probe; replacing the splice fitting with a new splice fitting; performing an inspection around fastener holes ``A'' to ``N'' on the face of FR 47 adjacent to the splice fitting), in accordance with and at the times specified in the applicable AOT. Compliance Times for Inspection of Model A300 Series Airplanes (1) For Model A300 B4-100 series airplanes: Perform the HFEC inspection at the applicable time specified in paragraph (a)(1)(i) or (a)(1)(ii) of this AD. (i) For airplanes that, as of the effective date of this AD, have accumulated fewer than 20,000 flight cycles since installation of Airbus Modification 5890 (Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0199): Perform the HFEC inspection at the later of the times specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(i)(A) and (a)(1)(i)(B) of this AD. (A) Within 10,900 flight cycles or 22,000 flight hours since installation of Airbus Modification 5890, whichever occurs earlier. (B) Within 1,500 flight cycles after the effective of this AD. (ii) For airplanes that, as of the effective date of this AD, have accumulated 20,000 or more flight cycles since installation of Airbus Modification 5890: Perform the HFEC inspection within 750 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD. (2) For Model A300 B4-200 series airplanes: Perform the HFEC inspection at the applicable time specified in paragraph (a)(2)(i) or (a)(2)(ii) of this AD. (i) For airplanes that, as of the effective date of this AD, have accumulated fewer than 20,000 flight cycles since installation of Airbus Modification 5890 (Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0199): Perform the HFEC inspection at the later of the times specified in paragraphs (a)(2)(i)(A) and (a)(2)(i)(B) of this AD. (A) Within 8,950 flight cycles or 18,600 flight hours since installation of Airbus Modification 5890, whichever occurs earlier. (B) Within 1,500 flight cycles after the effective of this AD. (ii) For airplanes that, as of the effective date of this AD, have accumulated 20,000 or more flight cycles since installation of Airbus Modification 5890 (Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0199): Perform the HFEC inspection within 750 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD. Compliance Times for Inspection of Model A300-600 Series Airplanes (3) For Model A300-600 series airplanes on which Airbus Modification 5890 is not installed: Perform the HFEC inspection at the applicable time specified in paragraph (a)(3)(i) or (a)(3)(ii) of this AD. (i) For airplanes that have accumulated fewer than 10,000 total flight cycles as of the effective date of this AD: Perform the HFEC inspection at the later of the times specified in paragraphs (a)(3)(i)(A) and (a)(3)(i)(B) of this AD. (A) Prior to the accumulation of 2,500 total flight cycles or 6,400 total flight hours, whichever occurs earlier. (B) Within 1,500 flight cycles after the effective of this AD. (ii) For airplanes that have accumulated 10,000 or more total flight cycles as of the effective date of this AD: Perform the HFEC inspection within 500 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD. [[Page 10960]] (4) For Model A300-600 series airplanes on which Airbus Modification 5890 is installed: Perform the HFEC inspection at the applicable time specified in paragraph (a)(4)(i) or (a)(4)(ii) of this AD. (i) For airplanes that have accumulated fewer than 10,000 total flight cycles as of the effective date of this AD: Perform the one- time HFEC inspection at the later of the times specified in paragraph (a)(4)(i)(A) and (a)(4)(i)(B) of this AD. (A) Prior to the accumulation of 6,500 total flight cycles or 16,700 total flight hours, whichever occurs earlier. (B) Within 1,500 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD. (ii) For airplanes that have accumulated 10,000 or more total flight cycles as of the effective date of this AD: Perform the HFEC inspection within 500 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD. Disposition of Certain Crack Findings (b) Where Airbus AOT A300-53A0350 (for Model A300 series airplanes) or A300-600-53A6123 (for Model A300-600 series airplanes), both dated October 25, 1999, specifies to contact Airbus in case of certain crack findings, this AD requires that a repair be accomplished in accordance with a method approved by either the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate; or the Direction Generale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC) (or its delegated agent). For a repair method to be approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, as required by this paragraph, the Manager's approval letter must specifically reference this AD. Alternative Methods of Compliance (c) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used if approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116. Operators shall submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the Manager, International Branch ANM-116. Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be obtained from the International Branch, ANM-116. Special Flight Permits (d) 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. Incorporation by Reference (e) Except as required by paragraph (b) of this AD, the actions shall be done in accordance with Airbus All Operators Telex A300- 53A0350, dated October 25, 1999; or Airbus All Operators Telex A300- 600-53A6123, dated October 25, 1999; as applicable. This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC. Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed in French airworthiness directive 1999-515-298(B), dated December 29, 1999. Effective Date (f) This amendment becomes effective on March 28, 2001. Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 9, 2001. Vi L. Lipski, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 01-3852 Filed 2-20-01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P ----------------------------------------------------------------------- [Federal Register: January 9, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 6)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 1612-1616] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr09ja01-23] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. 99-NM-86-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A300 B2 and A300 B4 Series Airplanes, and Model A300 B4-600, A300 B4-600R, and A300 F4-600R (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 B2 and A300 B4 series airplanes, and all A300 B4-600, A300 B4-600R, and A300 F4- 600R (A300-600) series airplanes. For certain airplanes, this proposal would require modifying the frame 40 aft fittings. For all airplanes, this proposal would require repetitive nondestructive test inspections to detect cracking of the frame 40 aft fittings; a modification would be required as corrective action for cracking or provided as optional terminating action for the repetitive inspections. 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 propagation of cracks on the frame 40 aft fittings due to local stress concentrations at the frame 40 upper flange runout, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane. DATES: Comments must be received by February 8, 2001. ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, Attention: Rules Docket No. 99-NM-86-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 action may be changed in light of the comments received. Submit comments using the following format: Organize comments issue-by-issue; e.g., discuss a request to change a compliance time and a request to change a service bulletin reference as two issues. For each issue, state the specific change requested to the proposed AD. 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 ++.'' The postcard will be date stamped and returned to the commenter. Availability of NPRMs Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request to the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, Attention: Rules Docket No. 99-NM-86-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, [[Page 1613]] notified the FAA that an unsafe condition may exist on all Airbus Model A300 B2 and A300 B4 series airplanes, and all Model A300 B4-600, A300 B4-600R, and A300 F4-600R (A300-600) series airplanes. The DGAC reports that cracks have been found on the frame 40 aft fittings at stringer 33 on the left and right sides of the fuselage. The cracks were caused by a local stress concentration at the frame 40 upper flange runout. This condition, if not corrected, could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane. Explanation of Relevant Service Information Airbus has issued the following service bulletins: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Model Service bulletin Revision level Date ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A300.............................. A300-53-0296 01 Sep. 30, 1998. 02 May 12, 1999. A300-600.......................... A300-53-6048 01 Sep. 30, 1998. 03 Feb. 21, 2000. A300.............................. A300-53-0268 4 Aug. 16, 1995. A300-600.......................... A300-57-6052 02 April 4, 1997. A300.............................. A300-53-0297 2 Oct. 31, 1995. A300-600.......................... A300-57-6053 1 Oct. 31, 1995. 02 June 2, 1999. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Service Bulletins A300-53-0296 and A300-53-6048 describe procedures for modification of the frame 40 aft fittings on certain airplanes, and repetitive nondestructive test inspections to detect cracking of the frame 40 aft fittings on all airplanes. Corrective actions for cracking involve trimming the front spar angle and vertical stiffener; drilling, reaming, and spotfacing attachment holes; installing a new frame 40 aft fitting and pick-up angles; and inspecting (by a detailed visual, high frequency eddy current, or liquid penetrant method) to detect cracking of the frame 40 forward fittings. Those service bulletins refer to Service Bulletins A300-53-0268 and A300-57-6052 as additional sources of service information for corrective actions if cracking is found in the frame 40 aft fitting. Service Bulletins A300-53-0268 and A300-57-6052 describe procedures for, among other things, an inspection (detailed visual, eddy current, or liquid penetrant) to detect cracking of the forward fitting at frame 40. Service Bulletins A300-53-0296 and A300-53-6048 also refer to Service Bulletins A300-53-0297 and A300-57-6053 as additional sources of service information to modify the aft angle fittings at frame 40. The modification involves replacing the angle fittings with new larger fittings. The service bulletins recommend the modification to repair cracked fittings and eliminate the need for the repetitive inspections. Accomplishment of the actions specified in the service bulletins described above is intended to adequately address the identified unsafe condition. The DGAC classified Airbus Service Bulletins A300-53-0296 and A300-53-6048 as mandatory, and issued French airworthiness directive 1998-481-270(B) R1, dated July 12, 2000, 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 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. For airplanes on which no cracking is found, this proposed AD would also provide for optional terminating action for the repetitive inspections. Operators should note that, to be consistent with the findings of the DGAC, 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 this case, long-term continued operational safety will be adequately ensured by accomplishing the repetitive inspections to detect cracking before it represents a hazard to the airplane. Differences Between Proposed AD and Relevant Service Information Operators should note that the service bulletins provide a method of adjustment of the inspection thresholds and intervals, relative to average flight times, of various groups of airplanes. The service bulletins provide a complicated method of determining the thresholds and intervals for various groups of airplanes. The FAA has determined that it would be difficult to enforce the implementation of that method for determining the compliance times. Therefore, this proposed AD does not provide for adjustments to the compliance times to accommodate average flight times that vary among operators. The FAA has established a single threshold and interval for each identified group of airplanes. In developing appropriate compliance times for this AD, the FAA considered not only the manufacturer's method for determining the compliance times, but the degree of urgency associated with addressing the subject unsafe condition and the average utilization of the affected fleet. The compliance times in this proposed AD are derived from the average flight times for affected airplanes as follows: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Average flight Model time (in minutes) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ A300 B2 series......................................... 65 A300 B4-100 series..................................... 80 A300 B4-200 series..................................... 125 A300-600 series........................................ 125 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ In light of these factors, the FAA finds the proposed thresholds and intervals to be warranted, in that they represent appropriate intervals of time for affected [[Page 1614]] airplanes to continue to operate without compromising safety. However, the provisions of paragraph (e) of this proposed AD would enable the FAA to approve requests for adjustments to the compliance time if data are submitted that substantiate an acceptable level of safety provided by such an adjustment. Operators should further note that, unlike the procedures described in Airbus Service Bulletins A300-57-6052 and A300-53-0268, this proposed AD would not permit further flight if cracking is detected in the frame 40 forward fitting. The FAA has determined that, because of the safety implications and consequences associated with such cracking, any cracked subject fitting must be repaired or modified before further flight. In addition, although the service bulletins specify that the manufacturer may be contacted for disposition of certain repair conditions, this proposal would require that those conditions be repaired in accordance with 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 identified unsafe condition, and, in consonance with existing bilateral airworthiness agreements, the FAA has 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. Cost Impact The FAA estimates that 70 airplanes of U.S. registry would be affected by this proposed AD. For affected airplanes, it would take approximately 92 work hours per airplane to accomplish the proposed modification, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts would cost as much as $874 per airplane. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the proposed modification is estimated to be as much as $6,394 per airplane. It would take approximately 10 work hours per airplane to accomplish the proposed inspection, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the proposed inspection on U.S. operators is estimated to be $42,000, or $600 per airplane, per inspection cycle. The cost impact figures discussed above are 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. 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 planning time, time required to gain access and close up, or time necessitated by other administrative actions. Regulatory Impact The regulations proposed herein would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, it is determined that this proposal would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this proposed regulation (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft regulatory evaluation prepared for this action is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by contacting the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption ADDRESSES. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows: PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. Sec. 39.13 [Amended] 2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new airworthiness directive: Airbus Industrie: Docket 99-NM-86-AD. Applicability: All Model A300 B2 and A300 B4 series airplanes, and Model A300 B4-600, A300 B4-600R, and A300 F4-600R (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 (e) 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 propagation of cracks on the frame 40 aft fittings due to local stress concentrations at the upper flange runout of frame 40, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane, accomplish the following: Modification (a) For airplanes on which Airbus Modification 10430 has not been done before the effective date of this AD: When you do the inspection required by paragraph (b) of this AD, modify the profile of frame 40 aft fittings per the service information specified in Table 1 of this AD. Table 1 is as follows: Table 1.--Service Information for Modification and Inspection ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Model Service Bulletin Revision level Date ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A300............................. A300-53-0296 Revision 01......... Sept. 30, 1998. Or Revision 02...... May 12, 1999. A300-600......................... A300-53-6048 Revision 01......... Sept. 30, 1998. Or Revision 03...... Feb. 21, 2000 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [[Page 1615]] Note 2: Modification per Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6048, Revision 02, dated May 12, 1999, is acceptable for compliance with paragraph (a) of this AD for Model A300-600 series airplanes. Inspection (b) For all airplanes, inspect the airplane per Table 2 of this AD, as follows: Table 2.--Inspection Requirements ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Requirements Description ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (1) Area to inspect.................... The frame 40 aft fitting. (2) Type of inspection................. Nondestructive test (NDT). (3) Compliance time.................... As specified by paragraph (c) of this AD. (4) Discrepancies to detect............ Cracking. (5) Required service information....... As specified by Table 1 of this AD. (6) Follow-on actions if you find no Repeat the inspection cracking. thereafter at the intervals specified by Table 3 of this AD. (7) Corrective actions if you find Do the actions specified by cracking. paragraph (d) of this AD. (8) Terminating action................. Paragraph (d) terminates paragraph (b) of this AD. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Note 3: A nondestructive test (NDT) per Part 6 53-15-30 procedure C of the NDT manual, is also acceptable for compliance with paragraph (b) of this AD. Note 4: Accomplishment of an inspection per Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6048, Revision 02, dated May 12, 1999, is acceptable for compliance with the requirements of paragraph (b) of this AD for Model A300-600 series airplanes. (c) Perform the inspection of paragraph (b) of this AD per the schedule in Table 3, as follows: Table 3.--Compliance Thresholds for Inspection ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If the total flight cycles accumulated And repeat the inspection at For model . . . on the airplane is . Then inspect . . . least every . . . . . ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A300-600 series airplanes, pre- Fewer than 6,200.... Before the airplane 7,500 flight cycles. Modification 10430S20428. accumulates 7,700 total flight cycles. At least 6,200 and Within 1,500 flight fewer than 9,700. cycles after the effective date of this AD. At least 9,700...... Within 750 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD. A300-600 series airplanes, post- Fewer than 19,600... Before the airplane 7,500 flight cycles. Modification 10430S20428. accumulates 21,100 total flight cycles. At least 19,600 and Within 1,500 flight fewer than 23,100. cycles after the effective date of this AD. At least 23,100..... Within 750 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD. A300 B2 series airplanes......... Fewer than 12,000... Before the airplane 5,500 flight cycles. accumulates 14,000 total flight cycles. At least 12,000 and Within 2,000 flight fewer than 17,000. cycles after the effective date of this AD. At least 17,000..... Within 1,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD. A300 B4-100 series airplanes..... Fewer than 9,500.... Before the airplane 4,500 flight cycles. accumulates 11,500 total flight cycles. At least 9,500 and Within 2,000 flight fewer than 14,500. cycles after the effective date of this AD. At least 14,500..... Within 1,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD. A300 B4-200 series airplanes..... Fewer than 8,500.... Before the airplane 4,000 flight cycles. accumulates 10,500 total flight cycles. At least 8,500 and Within 2,000 flight fewer than 13,500. cycles after the effective date of this AD. At least 13,500..... Within 1,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note 5: An NDT inspection is also required by AD 98-25-07, amendment 39-10933, to be repetitively performed on Model A300-600 series airplanes on which Airbus Modification 10453 has not been installed. For those airplanes, if the inspection is done within the applicable compliance time specified by paragraph (c) of this AD, the threshold for the initial inspection of paragraph (b) of this AD may be extended by 1,500 flight cycles. Corrective Actions (d) If any crack is found during any inspection of a frame 40 aft fitting required by this AD, prior to further flight, accomplish the actions specified by paragraph (d)(1) or (d)(2), as applicable, and paragraph (d)(3) of this AD. Accomplishment of the actions of this paragraph terminates the repetitive inspection requirements of paragraph (b) of this AD. (1) For Model A300-600 series airplanes: Replace the angle fittings with new, larger [[Page 1616]] fittings, in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6053, Revision 1, dated October 31, 1995, or Revision 02, dated June 2, 1999. (2) For Model A300 series airplanes listed in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0297, Revision 2, dated October 31, 1995: Replace the angle fittings with new, larger fittings, in accordance with the service bulletin. (3) For all airplanes: Perform a detailed visual, high frequency eddy current (HFEC), or liquid penetrant inspection, as applicable, to detect cracking in the frame 40 forward fitting in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6052, Revision 02, dated April 4, 1997 (for Model A300-600 series airplanes), or Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0268, Revision 4, dated August 16, 1995 (for Model A300 series airplanes); as applicable. (i) If no crack is found: No further action is required by this AD. (ii) Except as provided by paragraph (d)(3)(iii) of this AD: If any crack is found, during an inspection required by paragraph (d)(3) of this AD, prior to further flight, repair per the applicable service bulletin. (iii) If any crack is detected during any inspection required by paragraph (d)(3) of this AD, and the applicable service bulletin specifies to contact the manufacturer for an appropriate action. Prior to further flight, repair in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate; or the Direction Gonorale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC) (or its delegated agent). For a repair method to be approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, as required by this paragraph, the Manager's approval letter must specifically reference this AD. Alternative Methods of Compliance (e) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used if approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116. Operators shall submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116. Note 6: 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 (f) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with Secs. 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 7: The subject of this AD is addressed in French airworthiness directive 1998-481-270(B) R1, dated July 12, 2000. Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 3, 2001. Dorenda D. Baker, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 01-511 Filed 1-8-01; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-U ----------------------------------------------------------------------