18700 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 83 / Monday, April 29, 1996 / Proposed Rules

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Airbus has issued All Operators Telex

(AOT) 78–05, Revision 01, dated

February 8, 1995, which describes

procedures for a one-time inspection to

detect defects of the DPV; and

replacement of the defective DPV with

a new DPV, or deactivation of the thrust

reverser system, if necessary. The DGAC

classified this AOT as mandatory and

issued French airworthiness directive

95–052–176(B), dated March 15, 1995,

in order to assure the continued

airworthiness of these airplanes in

France.

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 the Requirements of the

Proposed Rule

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other airplanes of the same

type design, the proposed AD would

require a one-time inspection to detect

defects of the DPV. If a defective DPV

is detected, it would be required to be

replaced with a new DPV, or thrust

reverser system would be required to be

deactivated until the DPV is replaced.

The inspection and replacement actions

would be required to be accomplished

in accordance with the AOT described

previously.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 43 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 10 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

one-time 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 $25,800, or $600 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.

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 USC 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

Airbus Industrie: Docket 95–NM–175–AD.

Applicability: Model A300B4–601, –603,

–605R, A300–F4–605R, and A310–203,

–203C, –204, –304, –308 series airplanes,

equipped with General Electric Model CF6–

80 engines; on which General Electric

Service Bulletin 78–031 has been

accomplished; 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 (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 uncommanded deployment and

stowage of the thrust reverser during

maintenance activities, accomplish the

following:

(a) Within 600 flight hours after the

effective date of this AD, perform an

inspection to detect defects of the directional

pilot valves (DPV) in accordance with Airbus

All Operators Telex (AOT) 78–05, Revision

01, February 8, 1995.

(1) If no defects are detected, no further

action is required by this AD.

(2) If any defect is detected, prior to further

flight, either replace the defective DPV with

a new DPV in accordance with the AOT; or

deactivate the thrust reverser system in

accordance with approved procedures of the

Minimum Equipment List (MEL) until the

DPV is replaced

(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–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 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 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 April 23,

1996.

S. R. Miller,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–10509 Filed 4–26–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–109–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A300 B2 and B4 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 83 / Monday, April 29, 1996 / Proposed Rules 18701

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

supersedure of an existing airworthiness

directive (AD), applicable to certain

Airbus Model A300 B2 and B4 series

airplanes, that currently requires

inspection for cracks of the fuselage,

wings, and vertical stabilizer structures;

and repairs or modifications, if

necessary. That AD was prompted by

reports of cracking in several areas of

the fuselage, wings, and vertical

stabilizer structure due to fatigue-related

stress. The actions specified by that AD

are intended to prevent such fatiguerelated cracking, which could result in

reduced structural integrity of the

fuselage, wing, and vertical stabilizer.

This action would provide for a new

optional terminating action, for certain

airplanes, and would expand the

applicability of the existing AD to

include additional airplanes.

DATES: Comments must be received by

June 10, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM–

109–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, 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: Phil

Forde, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(206) 227–2146; 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 95–NM–109–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–109–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue

SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Discussion

On August 13, 1986, the FAA issued

AD 86–19–02, amendment 39–5396 (51

FR 29910, August 21, 1986), applicable

to certain Airbus Model A300 B2 and B4

series airplanes. That AD requires

inspections for cracks of the fuselage,

wings, and vertical stabilizer structures;

and repairs or modifications, if

necessary. That action was prompted by

reports that, during fatigue tests

conducted by the manufacturer, cracks

were detected in several areas of the

fuselage, wings, and vertical stabilizer

structure. The requirements of that AD

are intended to prevent reduced

structural integrity of the fuselage, wing,

and vertical stabilizer.

Explanation of New Relevant Service

Information

Since the issuance of that AD, Airbus

has issued Revision 3 of Service

Bulletin A300–53–182, dated March 16,

1994. The inspection procedures

described in this revision are identical

to those described in the original

version of the service bulletin, which

was referenced in AD 86–19–02 as the

appropriate source of service

information. However, this new revision

of the service bulletin differs in two

ways from the original version:

1. The effectivity listing in the revised

bulletin includes additional airplanes

that are subject to the addressed unsafe

condition.

2. For certain airplanes, the revised

service bulletin provides procedures for

replacement of the web plate and

support fitting at the level of stringer 18

(left- and right-hand) with a new web

plate and support fitting.

Accomplishment of the replacement

would eliminate the need for the

repetitive inspections in the web plate

between frame 30A and frame 32 at

stringer 18.

The Direction Generale de l’Aviation

Civile (DGAC), which is the

airworthiness authority for France,

classified this service bulletin as

mandatory and issued French

airworthiness directive (CN) 83–102–

053(B)R2, dated March 2, 1994, in order

to assure the continued airworthiness of

these airplanes in France.

Explanation of the Provisions of the

Proposed Rule

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.

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

supersede AD 86–19–02 to continue to

require inspections for cracks of the

fuselage, wings, and vertical stabilizer

structures; and repairs or modifications,

if necessary. However, the applicability

of the rule would be expanded to

include additional airplanes that have

been identified as subject to the

addressed unsafe condition.

For certain airplanes, the proposed

AD would provide for a new optional

replacement action, which would

constitute terminating action for certain

repetitive inspection requirements.

These actions would be required to be

accomplished in accordance with the

service bulletin described previously.

Operators who previously elected to

accomplish Airbus Modification 1691 to

terminate the repetitive inspections at

stringers 18 and 22, as was provided by

paragraph D. of AD 86–19–02, should

note that, under the provisions of

paragraph (d)(4) of this proposal,

accomplishment of that modification
18702 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 83 / Monday, April 29, 1996 / Proposed Rules

would constitute terminating action for

the repetitive inspections only at

stringer 22.

Additionally, operators should note

that paragraph G. of AD 86–19–02 has

not been retained in this proposal. That

paragraph required ultrasonic

inspections of the longitudinal lap joints

at stringer 29 between frames 72 and 73,

and eddy current inspections of the

longitudinal skin splices of the top

fuselage joint between frames 72 and 80.

The FAA has issued a separate

rulemaking action to address those

requirements (reference notice of

proposed rulemaking, Docket No. 94–

NM–246–AD).

Cost Impact

Approximately 7 Airbus Model A300

B2 and B4 series airplanes of U.S.

registry would be affected by this

proposed AD.

The actions that are currently

required by AD 86–19–02 take

approximately 919 work hours per

airplane to accomplish, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour. The

cost of required parts will be nominal.

Based on these figures, the cost impact

on U.S. operators of the actions

currently required is estimated to be

$385,980, or $55,140 per airplane, per

inspection cycle.

The new actions that are proposed in

this AD action would take

approximately 3 work hours per

airplane to accomplish, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based

on these figures, the cost impact on U.S.

operators of the proposed requirements

of this AD is estimated to be $1,260, or

$180 per airplane.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the current or 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

removing amendment 39–5396 (51 FR

29910, August 21, 1986), and by adding

a new airworthiness directive (AD), to

read as follows:

Airbus Industrie: Docket 95–NM–109–AD.

Supersedes AD 86–19–02, Amendment

39–5396.

Applicability: All Model A300 B2 and B4

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 (j) 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.

Note 2: Airbus Model A300–600 series

airplanes are not subject to this AD.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent fatigue-related cracking, which

could result in reduced structural integrity of

the fuselage, wing, and vertical stabilizer,

accomplish the following:

(a) For airplanes with serial numbers listed

in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–127,

Revision 4, dated May 10, 1984: Perform a

visual inspection to detect cracks in the

upper fuselage skin at frame 58 between

stringer 5 left and stringer 5 right, in

accordance with the Accomplishment

Instructions of the service bulletin, and in

accordance with the times specified in this

paragraph.

(1) Perform the initial inspection at the

later of the times specified in paragraph

(a)(1)(i) or (a)(1)(ii) of this AD.

(i) Prior to the accumulation of 18,000 total

landings or 18,000 total flight hours,

whichever occurs earlier; or

(ii) Within one year after September 26,

1986 (the effective date of AD 86–19–02,

amendment 39–5396).

(2) If no crack is detected, repeat this

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 3,000 flight hours.

(3) If any crack is detected, prior to further

flight, repair it in accordance with Figure 2,

‘‘Inspection and Repair Alternative Chart,’’ of

the service bulletin.

(4) Installation of Airbus Modification 2147

(reference Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–

110, Revision 10, dated April 7, 1986) or

Airbus Modification 2526/1693 (reference

Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–128,

Revision 5, dated May 10, 1984) constitutes

terminating action for the repetitive

inspection requirements of paragraph (a)(2)

of this AD.

(b) For airplanes with serial numbers listed

in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–101,

Revision 7, dated May 10, 1984: Perform a

radiographic and ultrasonic inspection to

detect cracks in the circumferential fuselage

splice plates and stringer couplings, in

accordance with the Accomplishment

Instructions of the service bulletin, and in

accordance with the times specified in this

paragraph.

(1) Perform the initial inspections at the

applicable time specified in paragraph

(b)(1)(i) or (b)(1)(ii) of this AD:

(i) For airplanes on which the actions

specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–

53–053, Revision 2, dated July 30, 1981, have

been accomplished previously: Inspect prior

to the accumulation of 20,000 landings since

accomplishment of those actions, or within

one year after September 26, 1986, whichever

occurs later.

(ii) For airplanes on which the actions

specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–

53–053, Revision 2, dated July 30, 1981, have

not been accomplished: Inspect prior to the

accumulation of 18,000 total landings, or

within one year after September 26, 1986,

whichever occurs later.

(2) If no crack is detected, repeat the

inspections thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 3,000 landings.

(3) If any crack is detected, prior to further

flight, repair it in accordance with Figures 1

and 2 of the service bulletin.

(4) Installation of Airbus Modification 3760

(reference Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–

170, Revision 1, dated January 25, 1985)

constitutes terminating action for the

repetitive inspection requirements of

paragraph (b)(2) of this AD.

(c) For airplanes with serial numbers listed

in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–143,

Revision 3, dated May 10, 1984: Perform a

visual inspection to detect cracks in frame
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 83 / Monday, April 29, 1996 / Proposed Rules 18703

57A between stringers 15 and 16 (left- and

right-hand), and the stringer 5 connection

angle at frame 65 (left- and right-hand), in

accordance with the Accomplishment

Instructions of the service bulletin, and in

accordance with the times specified in this

paragraph. .

(1) Perform the initial inspection at the

later of the times specified in paragraph

(b)(1)(i) or (b)(1)(ii) of this AD:

(i) Prior to the accumulation of 20,000 total

landings; or

(ii) Within one year after September 26,

1986.

(2) If no crack is detected, repeat this

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 3,000 landings.

(3) If any crack is detected, prior to further

flight, repair it in accordance with the service

bulletin.

(4) Installation of Airbus Modification 2643

(reference Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–

132, Revision 4, dated May 10, 1984)

constitutes terminating action for the

repetitive inspection requirement of

paragraph (c)(2) of this AD.

(d) For airplanes having serial number 002

through 156 inclusive, on which Airbus

Modification 2611 has not been installed:

Perform a visual inspection, and liquid

penetrant test if applicable, to detect cracks

in the web plate and support fitting between

frames 30A and 32 at stringer 18, and

between stringers 22 and 23 (left- and righthand), in accordance with Airbus Service

Bulletin A300–53–182, Revision 3, dated

March 16, 1994, and in accordance with the

times specified in this paragraph.

(1) Perform the initial inspection at the

later of the times specified in paragraph

(d)(1)(i) or (d)(1)(ii) of this AD:

(i) Prior to the accumulation of 30,000 total

landings; or

(ii) Within 1,500 landings after the

effective date of this AD.

(2) If no crack is detected, repeat the

inspection at the applicable intervals

specified in paragraph (d)(2)(i) or (d)(2)(ii) of

this AD.

(i) If, at the time of the most recent

inspection, the airplane has accumulated

fewer than 36,000 total landings, repeat the

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 3,000 landings.

(ii) If, at the time of the most recent

inspection, the airplane has accumulated

36,000 or more total landings, repeat the

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 2,000 landings.

(3) If any crack is detected in the web plate

between frames 30A and 32 at stringer 18,

prior to further flight, replace the web plate

and support fitting at stringer 18 (left- and

right-hand) with a new web plate and

support fitting, in accordance with the

service bulletin. Accomplishment of this

replacement constitutes terminating action

for the repetitive inspection requirements for

stringer 18 as required by paragraph (d)(2) of

this AD.

(4) If any crack is detected in the web plate

between frame 30A and 32 between stringers

22 and 23, prior to further flight, replace the

web plate and support fitting between

stringers 22 and 23 (left- and right-hand) with

a new web plate and support fitting, in

accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin

A300–53–182, Revision 3, dated March 16,

1994. Accomplishment of this replacement

constitutes terminating action for the

repetitive inspection requirements for the

subject area between stringers 22 and 23 as

required by paragraph (d)(2) of this AD.

(5) Terminating action for the repetitive

inspection requirements of paragraph (d)(2)

of this AD is as follows:

(i) Installation of Airbus Modification 1691

(reference Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–

063) between stringers 22 and 23 constitutes

terminating action for the repetitive

inspection requirements of paragraph (d)(2)

of this AD for that area only.

(ii) Replacement of the web plates and

support fittings at the level of stringer 18

(left- and right-hand) with a new web plate

and support fitting, in accordance with

Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–182,

Revision 3, dated March 16, 1994, constitutes

terminating action for the repetitive

inspection requirements of paragraph (d)(2)

of this AD for that stringer only.

(iii) Accomplishment of the actions

specified in both paragraph (d)(5)(i) and

paragraph (d)(5)(ii) of this AD constitute

terminating action for all repetitive

inspection requirements required by

paragraph (d)(2) of this AD.

(e) For airplanes with serial numbers listed

in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–112,

Revision 2, dated July 20, 1981: Perform a

visual inspection to detect cracks of the skin

from frame 28 to frame 31 between stringers

29 and 31 (left- and right-hand), in

accordance with the Accomplishment

Instructions of the service bulletin, and in

accordance with the times specified in this

paragraph.

(1) Perform the initial inspection at the

later of the times specified in paragraph

(e)(1)(i) or (e)(1)(ii) of this AD:

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

landings; or

(ii) Within one year after September 26,

1986.

(2) If no crack is detected, repeat the

inspection at the applicable intervals

specified in paragraph (e)(2)(i) or (e)(2)(ii) of

this AD:

(i) If, at the time of the most recent

inspection, the airplane has accumulated

fewer than 36,000 total landings, repeat the

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 6,000 landings.

(ii) If, at the time of the most recent

inspection, the airplane has accumulated

36,000 or more total landings, repeat the

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 3,000 landings.

(3) If any crack is found, prior to further

flight, install Airbus Modification 1358 in

accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin

A300–53–027, Revision 4, dated January 4,

1984. Accomplishment of this modification

constitutes terminating action for the

repetitive inspection requirements of

paragraph (e)(2) of this AD.

(4) Installation of Airbus Modification 1358

(reference Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–

027, Revision 4, dated January 4, 1984)

constitutes terminating action for the

repetitive inspection requirements of

paragraph (e)(2) of this AD.

(f) For airplanes with serial numbers listed

in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–100,

Revision 1, dated May 10, 1984: Perform an

internal and external visual inspection to

detect cracks of the longitudinal joint at

stringer 51 (left- and right-hand) between

frames 72 and 80, in accordance with the

Accomplishment Instructions of the service

bulletin, and in accordance with the times

specified in this paragraph.

(1) Perform the initial inspection at the

later of the times specified in paragraph

(f)(1)(i) or (f)(1)(ii) of this AD:

(i) Prior to the accumulation of 12,000 total

landings or 15,000 total flight hours,

whichever occurs earlier; or

(ii) Within one year after September 26,

1986.

(2) If no crack is found, repeat the internal

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 1,500 flight hours, and repeat the

external inspection thereafter at intervals not

to exceed 12,000 flight hours.

(3) If any crack is detected, prior to further

flight, repair it in accordance with the service

bulletin.

(4) Installation of Airbus Modification 1421

(reference Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–

033, Revision 3, dated May 10, 1984)

constitutes terminating action for the

repetitive inspection requirements of

paragraph (f)(2) of this AD.

(g) For airplanes with serial numbers listed

in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–55–026,

Revision 3, dated May 10, 1984: Perform a

visual inspection of the 6 vertical stabilizer

attachment fittings for cracks, which initiate

from the rivet holes, in accordance with the

Accomplishment Instructions of the service

bulletin, and in accordance with the times

specified in this paragraph.

(1) Perform the initial inspection at the

later of the times specified in paragraph

(g)(1)(i) or (g)(1)(ii) of this AD:

(i) Prior to the accumulation of 20,000 total

landings or 20,000 total flight hours,

whichever occurs earlier; or

(ii) Within one year after September 26,

1986, whichever occurs earlier.

(2) If no crack is detected, repeat the

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 1,500 landings.

(3) If any crack is detected, prior to further

flight, repair it in accordance with the service

bulletin.

(4) Installation of Airbus Modification 3172

(reference Airbus Service Bulletin A300–55–

024, Revision 4, dated May 25, 1984)

constitutes terminating action for the

repetitive inspection requirements of

paragraph (g)(2) of this AD.

(h) For airplanes with serial numbers listed

in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–109,

Revision 1, dated July 10, 1982: Perform a

visual inspection to detect cracks in the

landing angle attached to the outboard side

of the wing leading edge at nose rib 8 (leftand right-hand), in accordance with the

Accomplishment Instructions of the service

bulletin, and in accordance with the times

specified in this paragraph.

(1) Perform the initial inspecton at the later

of the times specified in paragraph (h)(1)(i)

or (h)(1)(ii):

(i) Prior to the accumulation of 15,000 total

landings; or
18704 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 83 / Monday, April 29, 1996 / Proposed Rules

(ii) Within one year after September 26,

1986.

(2) If no crack is detected, repeat the

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 3,000 landings.

(3) If any crack is detected, within the next

1,000 landings following crack detection,

install Airbus Modification 1307 in

accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin

A300–57–026, Revision 3, dated October 21,

1982.

(4) Installation of Airbus Modification 1307

(reference Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–

026, Revision 3, dated October 21, 1982)

constitutes terminating action for the

repetitive inspection requirements of

paragraph (h)(2) of this AD.

(i) 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.

(j) 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.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 23,

1996.

S.R. Miller,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–10508 Filed 4–26–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–NM–267–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A320–200 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 A320–200 series

airplanes. This proposal would require

modification of the shock absorber subassembly of the main landing gear

(MLG). This proposal is prompted by

reports of internal damage to the shock

absorber sub-assembly due to loose

screws in the upper bearing dowels. The

actions specified by the proposed AD

are intended to prevent such damage,

which could result in the overextension

of the shock absorber and failure of the

torque link. This situation may lead to

the inability of the MLG to retract and

subsequent collapse of the MLG.

DATES: Comments must be received by

June 10, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–103,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM–

267–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;

or Dowty Aerospace, Customer Support

Center, P.O. Box 49, Sterling, Virginia

20166.

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 95–NM–267–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–267–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 certain Airbus

Model A320–200 series airplanes. The

DGAC advises that it has received

reports of internal damage to the shock

absorber sub-assembly of the main

landing gear (MLG). Investigation

revealed that, due to an improper fit, the

screws in the upper bearing dowels of

the shock absorber sub-assembly can

become loose and come out of position.

A loose screw in the upper bearing

dowels can come out and cause internal

damage to the shock absorber tube

assembly. If this were to occur, the

shock absorber sub-assembly may

overextend and the torque link may fail,

which could result in the inability of the

MLG to retract and the subsequent

collapse of the MLG.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Airbus has issued Service Bulletin

A320–32–1144, dated December 8,

1994, which describes procedures for

modification of the shock absorber subassembly of the MLG. The modification

involves installing new dowels and a

retaining ring to the shock absorber

assembly. The modification will reduce

the possibility of internal damage to the

sub-assembly. (The Airbus service

bulletin references Dowty Service

Bulletin 200–32–215, dated July 7, 1994,

and Dowty Service Bulletin 200–32–

216, Revision 1, dated August 4, 1994,

as additional sources of service

information for accomplishment of

these procedures.) The DGAC classified

this service bulletin as mandatory and

issued French airworthiness directive

(CN) 95–016–063 (B), dated January 18,

1995, in order to assure the continued

airworthiness of these airplanes in

France.