```
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 3 (Wednesday, January 5, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 397-399]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-137]

[[Page 397]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99-NM-82-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A300-600 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 A300-600 and A310 
series airplanes. This proposal would require repetitive high frequency 
eddy current (HFEC) inspections to detect cracking of the inner flange 
of fuselage frame FR73A, between beams 5 and 7, and corrective actions, 
if necessary. This proposal is prompted by issuance of mandatory 
continuing airworthiness information by a foreign civil airworthiness 
authority. The actions specified by the proposed AD are intended to 
detect and correct fatigue cracking of the inner flange of fuselage 
frame FR73A, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the 
fuselage.

DATES: Comments must be received by February 4, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-114, 
Attention: Rules Docket No. 99-NM-82-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: Norman B. Martenson, Manager, 
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 
227-2110; fax (425) 227-1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the 
proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as 
they may desire. Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number 
and be submitted in triplicate to the address specified above. All 
communications received on or before the closing date for comments, 
specified above, will be considered before taking action on the 
proposed rule. The proposals contained in this notice may be changed in 
light of the comments received.
    Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All 
comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing 
date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested 
persons. A report summarizing each FAA-public contact concerned with 
the substance of this proposal will be filed in the Rules Docket.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments 
submitted in response to this notice must submit a self-addressed, 
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments 
to Docket Number 99-NM-82-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-82-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 A300-600 and A310 series 
airplanes on which a certain fuselage frame FR73A modification has been 
accomplished. The DGAC advises that, during the A330/A340 full-scale 
fatigue test, a crack was found on the right-hand side of fuselage 
frame FR73A between beams 5 and 6. The crack ran the full width of the 
inner flange and extended 1.3 inches into the frame web. Such cracking, 
if not detected and corrected, could result in reduced structural 
integrity of the fuselage.

Identical Structures

    Frame FR73A of Airbus Model A330/A340 series airplanes is identical 
to frame FR73A of certain Model A300-600 and A310 series airplanes. 
Therefore, Model A300-600 and A310 series airplanes are also subject to 
the unsafe condition identified by this proposed AD.

Explanation of Relevant Service Information

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletins A310-53-2107 (for Model A310 
series airplanes) and A300-53-6116 (for Model A300-600 series 
airplanes), both Revision 01, both dated July 2, 1999. These service 
bulletins describe procedures for repetitive high frequency eddy 
current (HFEC) inspections to detect cracking of the inner flange (left 
and right sides) of fuselage frame FR73A, between beams 5 and 7; and 
corrective actions, if necessary. The corrective actions involve rework 
of frame FR73A or replacement with a new frame section between beams 5 
and 7. However, accomplishment of these actions would not eliminate the 
need for repetitive HFEC inspections. Furthermore, the service 
bulletins recommend that operators report all findings (both positive 
and negative) to Airbus.
    The DGAC classified the service bulletins as mandatory and issued 
French airworthiness directive 1999-013-276(B), dated January 13, 1999, 
in order to assure the continued airworthiness of these airplanes in 
France.

FAA's Conclusions

    These airplane models are manufactured in France and are type 
certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of 
section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and 
the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to this 
bilateral airworthiness agreement, the DGAC has kept the FAA informed 
of the situation described above. The FAA has examined the findings of 
the DGAC, reviewed all available information, and determined that AD 
action is necessary for products of this type design that are 
certificated for operation in the United States.

Explanation of Requirements of Proposed Rule

    Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to 
exist or develop on other airplanes of the same type design registered 
in the United States, the proposed AD would require accomplishment of 
the actions specified in Airbus Service Bulletins A310-53-2107 and 
A300-53-6116, described previously, except as discussed below.

[[Page 398]]

    The proposed AD also would require that operators report results of 
inspection findings (both positive and negative) directly to Airbus.

Differences Between Proposed Rule and Relevant Service Information

    Operators should also note that, although both service bulletins 
specify that the manufacturer may be contacted for disposition of 
certain repair conditions, this proposal would require the repair of 
those conditions to be accomplished in accordance with a method 
approved by the FAA or the DGAC (or its delegated agent).

Interim Action

    This is considered to be interim action. The inspection reports 
that would be required by this proposed AD will enable the manufacturer 
to obtain better insight into the nature, cause, and extent of the 
cracking, and eventually to develop final action to fully address the 
unsafe condition. Once final action has been identified, the FAA may 
consider further rulemaking.

Cost Impact

    The FAA estimates that 198 airplanes of U.S. registry would be 
affected by this proposed AD, that it would take approximately 1 work 
hour per airplane to accomplish the proposed inspection, and that the 
average labor rate is $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the 
cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be 
$11,880, or $60 per airplane, per inspection cycle.
    The cost impact figure discussed above is based on assumptions that 
no operator has yet accomplished any of the proposed requirements of 
this AD action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in 
the future if this AD were not adopted.

Regulatory Impact

    The regulations proposed herein would not have 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-82-AD.

    Applicability: Model A300-600 and A310 series airplanes, 
certificated in any category, on which Airbus Modification 6925 has 
been accomplished.

    Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the 
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been 
otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the 
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified, 
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of 
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an 
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (d) of 
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of 
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition 
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been 
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to 
address it.

    Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished 
previously.
    To detect and correct fatigue cracking of the inner flange of 
fuselage frame FR73A, which could result in reduced structural 
integrity of the fuselage, accomplish the following:

HFEC Inspection

    (a) Prior to the accumulation of 18,000 total flight cycles, or 
within 3,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, 
whichever occurs later: Perform a high frequency eddy current (HFEC) 
inspection to detect cracking of the inner flange (left and right 
sides) of the rear fuselage frame FR73A, between beams 5 and 7, in 
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A310-53-2107, Revision 01 
(for Model A310 series airplanes), or A300-53-6116, Revision 01 (for 
Model A300-600 series airplanes); both dated July 2, 1999; as 
applicable.
    (1) If no crack is detected, repeat the HFEC inspection 
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 5,000 flight cycles.
    (2) For any crack that is less than or equal to 0.20 inch (5.0 
millimeters) in length: Prior to further flight, accomplish either 
paragraph (a)(2)(i) or (a)(2)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Rework the frame in accordance with the applicable service 
bulletin. Within 3,000 flight cycles after accomplishing the rework, 
replace the fuselage frame FR73A between beams 5 and 7 with a new 
frame section in accordance with the applicable service bulletin. Or
    (ii) Replace the fuselage frame FR73A between beams 5 and 7 with 
a new frame section, in accordance with the applicable service 
bulletin.
    (3) For any crack greater than 0.20 inch (5.0 millimeters) in 
length: Prior to further flight, accomplish either paragraph 
(a)(3)(i) or (a)(3)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Repair in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, 
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate; 
or the Direction Generale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC) (or its 
delegated agent). Or
    (ii) Replace the fuselage frame FR73A between beams 5 and 7 with 
a new section, in accordance with the applicable service bulletin.
    (b) Within 18,000 flight cycles after any replacement 
accomplished in accordance with paragraph (a)(2)(i), (a)(2)(ii), or 
(a)(3)(ii) of this AD: Repeat the inspection specified by paragraph 
(a) of this AD. Thereafter, repeat the inspection at intervals not 
to exceed 5,000 flight cycles.
    (c) Submit a report of inspection findings (both positive and 
negative) of any inspection required by this AD to Airbus Industrie, 
Customer Services Directorate, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 
Blagnac Cedex, France; at the applicable time specified in paragraph 
(c)(1) or (c)(2) of this AD. The report must include the inspection 
results, a description of any discrepancies found, the airplane 
serial number, the age of the airplane since entry into service, and 
the number of landings and flight hours on the airplane. Information 
collection requirements contained in this regulation have been 
approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq.) and have been assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056.
    (1) For airplanes on which the inspection required by paragraph 
(a) of this AD is accomplished after the effective date of this AD: 
Submit the report within 10 days after performing the inspection.
    (2) For airplanes on which the inspection required by paragraph 
(a) of this AD has been accomplished prior to the effective date of 
this AD: Submit the report within 10 days after the effective date 
of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (d) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the 
compliance time that

[[Page 399]]

provides an acceptable level of safety may be used if approved by 
the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane 
Directorate. Operators shall submit their requests through an 
appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add 
comments and then send it to the Manager, International Branch, ANM-
116.

    Note 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

    (e) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with 
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where 
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.

    Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed in French 
airworthiness directive 1999-013-276(B), dated January 13, 1999.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 29, 1999.
D.L. Riggin,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 00-137 Filed 1-4-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
```