Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 1997 / Proposed Rules 4211

(2) If any crack is found, and the crack

cannot be eliminated using the method

specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A310–

53–2037, Revision 1, dated April 29, 1992:

Prior to further flight, repair the crack in

accordance with a method approved by the

Manager, Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate.

(h) Modification of the passenger/crew

door frames in accordance with Airbus

Service Bulletin A310–53–2017, Revision 7,

dated February 25, 1992, constitutes

terminating action for the repetitive

inspections required by paragraph (f) of this

AD.

(i) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113.

Operators shall submit their requests through

an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Standardization

Branch, ANM–113.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Standardization Branch,

ANM–113.

(j) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January

23, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–2224 Filed 1–28–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–42–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A300–600 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

adoption of a new airworthiness

directive (AD) that is applicable to all

Airbus Model A300–600 series

airplanes. This proposal would require

inspections of the lower door

surrounding structure to detect cracks

and corrosion, and repair, if necessary.

This proposal also would require

inspections to detect cracking of the

holes of the corner doublers, the failsafe ring, and the door frames of the

door structures; and repair, if necessary.

In addition, this proposal would

provide for optional terminating action

for certain inspections. This proposal is

prompted by reports indicating that

corrosion was found behind the scuff

plates at exit and cargo doors, and

fatigue cracks originated from certain

fastener holes located in adjacent

structure. The actions specified by the

proposed AD are intended to detect and

correct such corrosion and fatigue

cracking, which could result in reduced

structural integrity of the door

surroundings.

DATES: Comments must be received by

March 10, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 96–NM–

42–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:

Charles Huber, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2589; fax (206) 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 96–NM–42–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

ANM–103, Attention: Rules Docket No.

96–NM–42–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation

Civile (DGAC), which is the

airworthiness authority for France, has

notified the FAA that an unsafe

condition may exist on all Airbus Model

A300–600 series airplanes. The DGAC

advises that it has received reports

indicating that corrosion was found

behind the scuff plates at passenger/

crew doors, emergency exits, and the

bulk cargo door. The DGAC also advises

that results of structural fatigue testing

have revealed that cracks were found on

the corner doublers of the forward, mid,

and aft passenger/crew door frames;

and, after various simulated flights, on

the fail-safe ring and frames 14 and 16A

of the forward passenger/crew door.

After 50,000 simulated flights, cracks

measuring between 8.0 mm and 109.0

mm were found on the forward door

frames and fail-safe ring. On the mid

door frame, a 53.0 mm crack was found

after 60,493 simulated flights. A crack

that measured 32.0 mm was found on

the aft door frame after 106,000

simulated flights. In all cases, the cracks

originated at the fastener holes. In

addition, cracks originating from corner

doubler edges were found at the aft

passenger/crew doors.

Such corrosion and fatigue cracking,

if not detected and corrected, could

result in reduced structural integrity of

the door surroundings.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Airbus has issued Service Bulletin

A300–53–6011, Revision 3, dated

February 4, 1991, which describes

procedures for a one-time inspection to

detect cracks and corrosion in the areas

behind the scuff plates at passenger/

crew doors, emergency exits, and the

bulk cargo door, and repair, if necessary.

Airbus also has issued Service Bulletin

A300–53–6022, dated February 4, 1991,
4212 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 1997 / Proposed Rules

which describes procedures for

corresponding repetitive inspections in

these areas, and repair, if necessary.

In addition, Airbus has issued Service

Bulletin A300–53–6018, Revision 1,

dated April 29, 1992. This service

bulletin describes procedures for

repetitive inspections to detect cracking

of the holes of the corner doublers, the

fail-safe ring, and the door frames at the

left- and right-hand forward, mid, and

aft passenger/crew door structures; and

repair, if necessary.

Airbus also has issued Service

Bulletin A300–53–6002, Revision 3,

dated February 22, 1992, which

describes procedures for modification of

the passenger/crew door frames. This

modification consists of performing cold

expansion procedures on the fastener

holes in door frames, corner doublers,

and fail-safe rings; and installing

oversized Hi-Lok fasteners and

additional steel doublers at door frame

corners, where necessary, to improve

the fatigue life of the corner doublers,

fail-safe rings, and door frames.

Accomplishment of the modification

eliminates the need for the repetitive

inspections specified in Airbus Service

Bulletin A300–53–6018.

The DGAC classified the inspection

service bulletins as mandatory and

issued French airworthiness directive

91–132–124(B), dated June 26, 1991, as

amended by a Correction, dated August

21, 1991, in order to assure the

continued airworthiness of these

airplanes in France. (The DGAC did not

classify the modification service

bulletin as mandatory.)

FAA’s Conclusions

This airplane model is manufactured

in France and is type certificated for

operation in the United States under the

provisions of section 21.29 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.29) and the applicable bilateral

airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to

this bilateral airworthiness agreement,

the DGAC has kept the FAA informed

of the situation described above. The

FAA has examined the findings of the

DGAC, reviewed all available

information, and determined that AD

action is necessary for products of this

type design that are certificated for

operation in the United States.

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

inspections of the lower door

surrounding structure to detect cracks

and corrosion, and repair, if necessary.

The proposed AD also would require

inspections to detect cracking of the

holes of the corner doublers, the failsafe ring, and the door frames of the

door structures; and repair, if necessary.

In addition, the proposed AD would

provide for optional terminating action

for certain inspections. The actions

would be required to be accomplished

in accordance with the service bulletins

described previously.

The FAA has considered the

following criteria in allowing repetitive

inspections of the crack-prone area to be

permitted to continue indefinitely, even

though a positive fix for the unsafe

condition exists: (1) the design of the

airplane is damage tolerant; and (2) the

proposed interval of the repetitive

inspections does not require that

numerous inspections will be

accomplished over the life of the

airplane.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 35 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 700 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

inspections (including access and closeup), 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

$1,470,000, or $42,000 per airplane.

The cost impact figure discussed

above is based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the proposed requirements of this AD

action, and that no operator would

accomplish those actions in the future if

this AD were not adopted.

Should an operator elect to

accomplish the optional terminating

action that would be provided by this

AD action, it would take approximately

147 work hours to accomplish it, at an

average labor rate of $60 per work hour.

The cost of required parts would be

approximately $5,581 per airplane.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the optional terminating action would

be $14,401 per airplane.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations proposed herein

would not have substantial direct effects

on the States, on the relationship

between the national government and

the States, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities among the

various levels of government. Therefore,

in accordance with Executive Order

12612, it is determined that this

proposal would not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this proposed regulation (1)

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if

promulgated, will not have a significant

economic impact, positive or negative,

on a substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft

regulatory evaluation prepared for this

action is contained in the Rules Docket.

A copy of it may be obtained by

contacting the Rules Docket at the

location provided under the caption

‘‘ADDRESSES.’’

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

Airbus: Docket 96–NM–42–AD.

Applicability: All Model A300–600 series

airplanes, certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

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 (i) 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 corrosion behind the scuff plates at

exit and cargo doors, and fatigue cracking in

certain fastener holes located in adjacent

structure, which could result in reduced

structural integrity of the door surroundings,

accomplish the following:
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 19 / Wednesday, January 29, 1997 / Proposed Rules 4213

(a) Perform an initial inspection of the

areas behind the scuff plates below the

passenger/crew doors and bulk cargo door to

detect cracks and corrosion, in accordance

with Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6011,

Revision 3, dated February 4, 1991; at the

time specified in paragraph (a)(1), (a)(2), or

(a)(3) of this AD. If any crack or corrosion is

found during this inspection, prior to further

flight, repair in accordance with the service

bulletin. Accomplishment of this inspection

is not required for the mid and aft passenger/

crew doors if a steel doubler that covers the

entire inspection area is installed.

(1) For airplanes on which Modification

5382S6526 (for forward doors) and

Modification 5382D4741 (for all other doors)

have been accomplished prior to delivery of

the airplane: Perform the initial inspection

within 9 years since manufacture, or within

1 year after the effective date of this AD,

whichever occurs later.

(2) For airplanes on which Modification

5382S6526 (for forward doors) and

Modification 5382D4741 (for all other doors)

have not been accomplished; and on which

the procedures described in Airbus Service

Information Letter (SIL) A300–53–033,

Revision 2 (for all doors), dated November

23, 1984, have been accomplished: Perform

the initial inspection within 5 years after

accomplishment of the procedures described

in the SIL, or within 1 year after the effective

date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

(3) For airplanes on which Modification

5382S6526 (for forward doors), Modification

5382D4741 (for all other doors), and the

procedures described in Airbus SIL A300–

53–033, Revision 2, dated November 23,

1984, have not been accomplished: Perform

the initial inspection within 4 years since

manufacture, or within 1 year after the

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs

later.

(b) Perform repetitive inspections of the

areas behind the scuff plates below the

passenger/crew doors and bulk cargo door to

detect cracks and corrosion, in accordance

with Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6022,

dated February 4, 1991; at the applicable

times specified in paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2)

of this AD. Accomplishment of these

inspection is not required for the mid and aft

passenger/crew doors if a steel doubler that

covers the entire inspection area is installed.

(1) For the forward and mid passenger/

crew doors, the bulk cargo door, and the aft

passenger/crew doors, except the upper and

lower edges of the fail-safe ring and the

upper edges of the corner doubler: Perform

the first inspection within 5 years after

accomplishing the inspection required by

paragraph (a) of this AD; and repeat the

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 5 years.

(2) For the upper and lower edges of the

fail-safe ring and the upper edges of the

corner doubler of the aft passenger/crew

doors: Perform the first inspection within 5

years or 6,000 landings after accomplishing

the inspection required by paragraph (a) of

this AD, whichever occurs first; and repeat

the inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 5 years or 6,000 landings, whichever

occurs first.

(c) If cracks are found as a result of any

inspection required by paragraph (b) of this

AD, prior to further flight, repair in

accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin

A300–53–6022, dated February 4, 1991.

Thereafter, perform the repetitive inspections

required by paragraph (b) of this AD at the

applicable times specified in paragraphs

(b)(1) and (b)(2) of this AD.

(d) If corrosion is found as a result of any

inspection required by paragraph (b) of this

AD, prior to further flight, repair in

accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin

A300–53–6022, dated February 4, 1991.

Thereafter, perform the repetitive inspections

required by paragraph (b) of this AD at the

applicable times specified in paragraphs

(d)(1) or (d)(2) of this AD.

(1) For the upper and lower edges of the

fail-safe ring and the upper edges of the

corner doubler of the aft passenger/crew

doors, and for the mid passenger/crew door:

Inspect at intervals not to exceed 5 years or

5,000 landings, whichever occurs first.

(2) For the forward passenger/crew doors

and bulk cargo doors: Inspect at intervals not

to exceed 5 years.

(e) Perform an inspection to detect cracking

of the holes of the corner doublers, the failsafe ring, and the door frames of the left- and

right-hand forward, mid, and aft passenger/

crew door structures, in accordance with

Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6018,

Revision 1, dated April 29, 1992, and at the

applicable times specified in paragraphs

(e)(1), (e)(2), (e)(3), or (e)(4) of this AD.

(1) For the upper corners of the forward

doors: Inspect prior to the accumulation of

20,000 total landings, or within 2,000

landings after the effective date of this AD,

whichever occurs later.

(2) For the lower corners of the forward

doors: Inspect prior to the accumulation of

20,000 total landings, or within 4,000

landings after the effective date of this AD,

whichever occurs later.

(3) For the upper and lower corners of the

mid doors: Inspect prior to the accumulation

of 20,000 total landings, or within 2,000

landings after the effective date of this AD,

whichever occurs later.

(4) For the upper and lower corners of the

aft doors, and for the parts underneath the

corners of the upper door frames: Inspect

prior to the accumulation of 20,000 total

landings, or within 4,000 landings after the

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs

later.

(f) Repeat the inspections required by

paragraph (e) of this AD at the applicable

times specified in paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2),

(f)(3), (f)(4), and (f)(5).

(1) For the upper corners of the forward

doors: Inspect at intervals not to exceed 6,000

landings.

(2) For the lower corners of the forward

doors: Inspect at intervals not to exceed

10,000 landings.

(3) For the upper and lower corners of the

mid and aft doors on which an inspection

required by paragraph (e) of this AD was

accomplished using a Roto test technique:

Inspect at intervals not to exceed 8,000

landings.

(4) For the upper and lower corners of the

mid and aft doors on which an inspection

required by paragraph (e) of this AD was

accomplished using an X-ray technique:

Inspect at intervals not to exceed 3,500

landings.

(5) For the areas around the fasteners in the

vicinity of stringer 12 on the upper door

frames of the aft doors on which an

inspection required by paragraph (e) of this

AD was accomplished using a visual

technique: Inspect at intervals not to exceed

6,900 landings.

(g) If any crack is found during any

inspection required by paragraph (e) or (f) of

this AD: Prior to further flight, accomplish

the requirement of paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2)

of this AD, as applicable.

(1) If any crack is found, and the crack can

be eliminated using the method specified in

Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6018,

Revision 1, dated April 29, 1992: Prior to

further flight, repair the crack in accordance

with that service bulletin.

(2) If any crack is found, and the crack

cannot be eliminated using the method

specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–

53–6018, Revision 1, dated April 29, 1992:

Prior to further flight, repair the crack in

accordance with a method approved by the

Manager, Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate.

(h) Modification of the passenger/crew

door frames in accordance with Airbus

Service Bulletin A300–53–6002, Revision 3,

dated February 22, 1992, constitutes

terminating action for the repetitive

inspections required by paragraph (f) of this

AD.

(i) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113.

Operators shall submit their requests through

an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Standardization

Branch, ANM–113.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Standardization Branch,

ANM–113.

(j) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January

23, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–2221 Filed 1–28–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–43–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A300 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.