Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 58 / Wednesday, March 26, 1997 / Proposed Rules 14361

Compliance: Required within the next 50

hours time-in-service (TIS) after the effective

date of this AD, unless already accomplished.

To prevent loss of engine power and fuel

depletion during flight caused by a false fuel

gauge reading, accomplish the following:

(a) Remove the lanyard (nylon type

material) from the left-hand (LH) and righthand (RH) fuel filler cap assembly in

accordance with the INSTRUCTIONS section

of Mooney Aircraft Corporation Service

Bulletin M20–259, Issue Date: September 1,

1996.

(b) 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.

(c) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an equivalent level of safety may be

approved by the Manager, Fort Worth

Airplane Certification Office, 2601 Meacham

Boulevard, Fort Worth, Texas 76193–0150.

The request shall be forwarded through an

appropriate FAA Maintenance Inspector,

who may add comments and then send it to

the Manager, Fort Worth Airplane

Certification Office.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Fort Worth Airplane

Certification Office.

(d) All persons affected by this directive

may obtain copies of the document referred

to herein upon request to Mooney Aircraft

Corporation, Louis Schreiner Field, Kerrville,

Texas, 78028; or may examine this document

at the FAA, Central Region, Office of the

Assistant Chief Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E.

12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on March

20, 1997.

Larry E. Werth,

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–7679 Filed 3–25–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–NM–182–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus

Industrie 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

certain Airbus Industrie Model A300–

600 series airplanes. This proposal

would require repetitive eddy current

inspections to detect cracks of the outer

skin of the fuselage at certain frames,

and repair or reinforcement of the

structure at the frames, if necessary.

This proposal also would require

eventual reinforcement of the structure

at certain frames, which, when

accomplished, terminates the repetitive

inspections. This proposal is prompted

by a report indicating that fatigue cracks

were found in the area of certain frames.

The actions specified by the proposed

AD are intended to prevent such fatigue

cracking, which could reduce the

structural integrity of the airframe and

result in rapid decompression of the

airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by

May 5, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 96–NM–

182–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice

Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France.

This information may be examined at

the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim

Backman, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2797; fax (206) 227–1149.

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–182–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–182–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue,

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

The Direction Generale de l’Aviation

Civile (DGAC), which is the

airworthiness authority for France,

recently notified the FAA that an unsafe

condition may exist on certain Model

A300–600 series airplanes. The DGAC

advises that, during inspection of inservice Model A300 series airplanes,

fatigue cracks were found after 18,000

flight cycles in the area of frames 28A

and 30A, at left and right-hand stringer

30. Fatigue cracking in this area of the

fuselage could reduce the structural

integrity of the airframe and result in

rapid decompression of the airplane.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Airbus has issued Service Bulletin

A300–53–6045, dated March 21, 1995,

as revised by Change Notice No. O.A.,

dated June 1, 1995, which describes

procedures for repetitive eddy current

inspections to detect cracks of the outer

skin of the fuselage at frames 28A and

30A above stringer 30, and repair or

reinforcement of the structure of the

frames, if necessary.

Airbus also has issued Service

Bulletin A300–53–6037, dated March

21, 1995, which describes procedures

for reinforcement of the structure at

frames 28 and 29, and frames 30 and 31,

between stringers 29 and 30.

Accomplishment of the reinforcement

will limit the risk of cracking in these

areas. Such reinforcement eliminates

the need for the repetitive inspections.

The DGAC classified Airbus Service

Bulletin A300–53–6045 as mandatory

and issued French airworthiness

directive (C/N) 95–244–191(B), dated

December 6, 1995, in order to assure the

continued airworthiness of these

airplanes in France. The DGAC
14362 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 58 / Wednesday, March 26, 1997 / Proposed Rules

classified Airbus Service Bulletin A300–

53–6037 as recommended.

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

repetitive eddy current inspections to

detect cracks of the outer skin of the

fuselage at frames 28A and 30A above

stringer 30; and repair or reinforcement

of the structure of the frames, if

necessary. Additionally, the proposed

AD would require eventual

reinforcement of the structure at frames

28 and 29, and frames 30 and 31,

between stringers 29 and 30.

Accomplishment of this reinforcement

constitutes terminating action for the

repetitive inspections. The actions

would be required to be accomplished

in accordance with the service bulletins

described previously.

Differences Between Proposed Rule and

Service Bulletins

Operators should note that, unlike the

procedures described in Airbus Service

Bulletins A300–53–6045 and A300–53–

6037, this proposed AD would not

permit further flight if cracks are

detected in the outer skin. The FAA has

determined that, because of the safety

implications and consequences

associated with such cracking, any

subject outer skin that is found to be

cracked must be repaired or modified

prior to further flight.

Operators should also note that the

proposed AD would differ from Airbus

FL Service Bulletin A300–53–6045 in

that it would require the initial eddy

current inspection to be accomplished

prior to the accumulation of 14,100 total

flight cycles, or within 12 months of the

effective date of the AD, whichever

occurs later. (The service bulletin

recommends inspection prior to the

accumulation of 18,000 flight cycles, or

at the next ‘‘C’’ check, whichever occurs

first.) In developing an appropriate

compliance time for this action, the

FAA considered not only the degree of

urgency associated with addressing the

subject unsafe condition, but the

susceptibility of the outer skin of the

fuselage to fatigue cracking, which

could result in rapid decompression of

the airplane. The FAA has also received

reports of fatigue cracking on affected

airplanes that had accumulated as few

as 14,100 total flight cycles. In

consideration of these items, the FAA

finds that the initial eddy current

inspection conducted at the proposed

compliance time stated previously will

better ensure that any detrimental effect

associated with fatigue cracking will be

identified and corrected prior to the

time that it could adversely affect the

outer skin of the fuselage.

Operators should also note that this

AD proposes to mandate, within 5 years,

the reinforcement described in Service

Bulletin A300–53–6037 as terminating

action for the repetitive inspections.

[Incorporation of this terminating action

of this service bulletin is optional in the

French C/N 95–244–191(B).] The FAA

has determined that long-term

continued operational safety will be

better assured by design changes to

remove the source of the problem, rather

than by repetitive inspections. Longterm inspections may not be providing

the degree of safety assurance necessary

for the transport airplane fleet.

This, coupled with a better

understanding of the human factors

associated with numerous continual

inspections, has led the FAA to consider

placing less emphasis on inspections

and more emphasis on design

improvements. The proposed

reinforcement requirement is in

consonance with these conditions.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 34 Airbus

Model A300–600 series airplanes of U.S.

registry would be affected by this

proposed AD.

The eddy current inspection that is

proposed by this AD would take

approximately 1 work hour per airplane

to accomplish, 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 $2,040, or $60 per

airplane, per inspection cycle.

The reinforcement that is proposed in

this AD would take approximately 93

work hours per airplane to accomplish,

at an average labor rate of $60 per work

hour. Required parts would cost

approximately $7,200 per airplane.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

of the proposed modification

requirements of this AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $434,520, or

$12,780 per airplane.

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.

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 Industrie: Docket 96–NM–182–AD.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 58 / Wednesday, March 26, 1997 / Proposed Rules 14363

Applicability: Model A300–600 series

airplanes on which Airbus Modification 8683

was not accomplished during production, or

on which Airbus Modification 8684 has not

been installed; certificated in any category.

Note 1: Airbus Models A300 B2 and B4

series airplanes are not subject to the

requirements of this AD.

Note 2: 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 prevent fatigue cracking of the fuselage

outer skin at frames 28A and 30A, which

could reduce the structural integrity of the

airframe and result in rapid decompression

of the airplane, accomplish the following

actions:

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 14,100 total

flight cycles, or within 12 months after the

effective date of the AD, whichever occurs

later, conduct an eddy current inspection to

detect cracking of the fuselage outer skin at

frames 28A and 30A above stringer 30, in

accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin

A300–53–6045, dated March 21, 1995, as

revised by Change Notice No. O.A., dated

June 1, 1995.

(1) If no cracking is found, repeat the

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 4,500 flight cycles.

(2) If any cracking is found that is within

the limits specified in the service bulletin,

repair in accordance with paragraph 2.D. of

the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus

Service Bulletin A300–53–6045, dated March

21, 1995, as revised by Change Notice No.

O.A., dated June 1, 1995; or reinforce the

structure at frames 28 and 29, and at frames

30 and 31, between stringers 29 and 30, in

accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin

A300–53–6037, dated March 21, 1995.

1(i) If the repair is accomplished: After the

repair, repeat the eddy current inspection

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 4,500

flight cycles.

(ii) If the reinforcement is accomplished:

Such reinforcement constitutes terminating

action for the repetitive inspections required

by this AD.

(3) If any cracking is found that is outside

the limits specified in the service bulletin,

prior to further flight, reinforce the structure

at frames 28 and 29, and at frames 30 and

31, between stringers 29 and 30, in

accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin

A300–53–6037, dated March 21, 1995. Such

reinforcement constitutes terminating action

for the repetitive inspections required by this

AD.

(b) Within 5 years after the effective date

of this AD, reinforce the structure at frames

28 and 29, and at frames 30 and 31, between

stringers 29 and 30, in accordance with

Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6037,

dated March 21, 1995. Such reinforcement

constitutes terminating action for the

repetitive inspections required by this AD.

(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,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Standardization

Branch, ANM–113.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Standardization Branch,

ANM–113.

(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.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on March

20, 1997.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 97–7681 Filed 3–25–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 97–NM–06–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Lockheed

Model L–1011 Series Airplanes

Equipped With Rolls-Royce Model

RB.211–524 Series Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

supersedure of an existing airworthiness

directive (AD), applicable to certain

Lockheed Model L–1011 series

airplanes, that currently requires several

modifications of the engine high speed

gearboxes. This action would require

that a new modification be installed in

lieu of one of those previously required.

This proposal is prompted by a report

indicating that one of the currently

required modifications is not

completely effective because it can

create interference problems between

the fireloop and a fuel line. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to reduce the possibility of a

fire in the high speed gear boxes, and to

ensure that any fire which may occur is

readily detected by the flight crew.

DATES: Comments must be received by

May 5, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 97-NM–06-

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

Lockheed Aeronautical Systems

Support Company, Field Support

Department, Dept. 693, Zone 0755, 2251

Lake Park Drive, Smyrna, Georgia

30080; and Rolls-Royce plc, Technical

Publications Department, P.O. Box 17,

Parkside, Coventry CV1 2LZ, England.

This information may be examined at

the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Thomas Peters, Aerospace Engineer,

Systems and Flight Test Branch, ACE–

116A, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft

Certification Office, Small Airplane

Directorate, Campus Building, 1701

Columbia Avenue, Suite 2–160, College

Park, Georgia 30337–2748; telephone

(404) 305–7367; fax (404) 305–7348.

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.