This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

21470

Vol. 60, No. 84

Tuesday, May 2, 1995

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–03–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A300–600 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

adoption of a new airworthiness

directive (AD) that is applicable to all

Airbus Model A300–600 series

airplanes. This proposal would require

repetitive inspections to detect cracks in

the bottom skin of the wing in the area

of the cutout for the pylon rear

attachment fitting, and repair, if

necessary. This proposal is prompted by

a report indicating that, during full-scale

fatigue testing, a crack was found in the

bottom skin of the wing at the cutout for

the aft pylon attachment fitting due to

fatigue-related stress. The actions

specified by the proposed AD are

intended to prevent such fatigue-related

cracking, which could result in reduced

structural integrity of the wing.

DATES: Comments must be received by

June 12, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM–

03–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:

Stephen Slotte, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2797; fax (206) 227–1320.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications shall

identify the Rules Docket number and

be submitted in triplicate to the address

specified above. All communications

received on or before the closing date

for comments, specified above, will be

considered before taking action on the

proposed rule. The proposals contained

in this notice may be changed in light

of the comments received.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons. A report

summarizing each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this

proposal will be filed in the Rules

Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number 95–NM–03–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

ANM–103, Attention: Rules Docket No.

95–NM–03–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,

recently notified the FAA that an unsafe

condition may exist on all Airbus Model

A300–600 series airplanes. The DGAC

advises that, during full scale fatigue

testing, a crack was found in the bottom

skin of the wing at the cut out for the

aft pylon attachment fitting after the

airplane accumulated approximately

58,650 total simulated flights.

Investigation revealed that such

cracking was caused by fatigue-related

stress. Such fatigue-related cracking, if

not detected and corrected in a timely

manner, could result in reduced

structural integrity of the wing.

Airbus has issued Service Bulletin

A300–57–6028, Revision 3, dated

September 13, 1994, which describes

procedures for repetitive detailed visual

inspections to detect cracks in the

bottom skin of the wing in the area of

the cut out for the pylon rear attachment

fitting, and repair, if necessary. The

DGAC classified this service bulletin as

mandatory and issued French

airworthiness directive 94–069–158(B),

dated March 30, 1994, in order to assure

the continued airworthiness of these

airplanes in France.

This airplane model is manufactured

in France and is type certificated for

operation in the United States under the

provisions of § 21.29 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29)

and the applicable bilateral

airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to

this bilateral airworthiness agreement,

the DGAC has kept the FAA informed

of the situation described above. The

FAA has examined the findings of the

DGAC, reviewed all available

information, and determined that AD

action is necessary for products of this

type design that are certificated for

operation in the United States.

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other airplanes of the same

type design registered in the United

States, the proposed AD would require

repetitive detailed visual inspections to

detect cracks in the wing bottom skin of

the wing in the area of the cut out for

the pylon rear attachment fitting, and

repair, if necessary. The inspection

actions would be required to be

accomplished in accordance with the

service bulletin described previously.

Any necessary repair of the wing bottom

skin would be required to be

accomplished in accordance with a

method approved by the FAA.

As a result of recent communications

with the Air Transport Association
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 2, 1995 / Proposed Rules 21471

(ATA) of America, the FAA has learned

that, in general, some operators may

misunderstand the legal effect of AD’s

on airplanes that are identified in the

applicability provision of the AD, but

that have been altered or repaired in the

area addressed by the AD. The FAA

points out that all airplanes identified in

the applicability provision of an AD are

legally subject to the AD. If an airplane

has been altered or repaired in the

affected area in such a way as to affect

compliance with the AD, the owner or

operator is required to obtain FAA

approval for an alternative method of

compliance with the AD, in accordance

with the paragraph of each AD that

provides for such approvals. A note has

been included in this notice to clarify

this long standing requirement.

The FAA estimates that 35 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 6 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. Based on these

figures, the total cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $12,600, or $360 per

airplane.

The total 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.

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. App. 1354(a), 1421

and 1423; 49 U.S.C. 106(g); and 14 CFR

11.89.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

Airbus Industrie: Docket 95–NM–03–AD.

Applicability: All Model A300–600 series

airplanes, certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area

subject to the requirements of this AD. For

airplanes that have been modified, altered, or

repaired so that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must use the authority

provided in paragraph (b) to request approval

from the FAA. This approval may address

either no action, if the current configuration

eliminates the unsafe condition; or different

actions necessary to address the unsafe

condition described in this AD. Such a

request should include an assessment of the

effect of the changed configuration on the

unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no

case does the presence of any modification,

alteration, or repair remove any airplane from

the applicability of this AD.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent reduced structural integrity of

the wing, accomplish the following:

(a) Prior to the accumulation of 24,000 total

flight cycles since date of manufacture of the

airplane, or within 750 flight cycles after the

effective date of the AD, whichever occurs

later, perform a detailed visual inspection to

detect cracks in the bottom skin of the wing

in the area of the cut out for the pylon rear

attachment fitting, in accordance with Airbus

Service Bulletin A300–57–6028, Revision 3,

dated September 13, 1994. Repeat the

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 9,000 flight cycles. If any crack is

detected, prior to further flight, repair the

wing bottom skin in accordance with a

method approved by the Manager,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate.

(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,

Standardization Branch, ANM–13. 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.

(c) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197

and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a

location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 26,

1995.

James V. Devany,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–10710 Filed 5–1–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–CE–20–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Twin

Commander Aircraft Corporation 680,

681, 690, and 695 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

adopt a new airworthiness directive

(AD) that would apply to certain Twin

Commander Aircraft Corporation (Twin

Commander) 680, 681, 690, and 695

series airplanes. The proposed action

would require installing a placard

warning the pilot to observe turbulent

air penetration speeds. Two accidents

involving Model 690 airplanes where

the affected airplanes encountered

turbulence while descending at high

speeds prompted the proposed action.

The actions specified by the proposed

AD are intended to prevent structural

damage to the airplane caused by

excessive turbulence, which could

result in loss of the airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before June 28, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Central Region,

Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–CE–20–

AD, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street,

Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Comments

may be inspected at this location

between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday, holidays excepted.