1610 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 2001 / Proposed Rules

Date: July 22, 1999, and German AD 1999–

167, Effective Date: May 20, 1999.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on January

2, 2001.

Marvin R. Nuss,

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–509 Filed 1–8–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–NM–223–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A300 B4–620, A310–203, A310–221,

and A310–222 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 A300 B4–620,

A310–203, A310–221, and A310–222

series airplanes. This proposal would

require repetitive inspections of fuselage

frame 07 in the upper frame section

assemblies of the lateral cockpit

windows, and corrective action, if

necessary. Accomplishment of certain

corrective actions would extend the

repetitive inspection interval. This

action is necessary to detect and correct

fatigue cracking in that area, which

could result in reduced structural

integrity of the airplane. This action is

intended to address the identified

unsafe condition.

DATES: Comments must be received by

February 8, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM–

223–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. Comments may be

submitted via fax to (425) 227–1232.

Comments may also be sent via the

Internet using the following address: 9-

anm-nprmcomment@faa.gov. Comments

sent via fax or the Internet must contain

‘‘Docket No. 2000–NM–223–AD’’ in the

subject line and need not be submitted

in triplicate. Comments sent via the

Internet as attached electronic files must

be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for

Windows or ASCII text.

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: Dan

Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055–4056; telephone

(425) 227–2125; fax (425) 227–1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications shall

identify the Rules Docket number and

be submitted in triplicate to the address

specified above. All communications

received on or before the closing date

for comments, specified above, will be

considered before taking action on the

proposed rule. The proposals contained

in this action may be changed in light

of the comments received.

Submit comments using the following

format:

• Organize comments issue-by-issue.

For example, discuss a request to

change the compliance time and a

request to change the service bulletin

reference as two separate issues.

• For each issue, state what specific

change to the proposed AD is being

requested.

• Include justification (e.g., reasons or

data) for each request.

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 action

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket No. 2000–NM–223–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

ANM–114, Attention: Rules Docket No.

2000–NM–223–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,

notified the FAA that an unsafe

condition may exist on certain Airbus

Model A300 B4–620, A310–203, A310–

221, and A310–222 series airplanes. The

DGAC has advised that, during a

scheduled corrosion inspection in

accordance with the Model A300

Corrosion Prevention and Control

Programme (A300 CPCP), a crack of 100

millimeters in length was discovered

forward of fuselage frame 07, in the

upper frame section assembly of the

lateral cockpit windows. When the

crack was discovered, the airplane had

accumulated 36,077 total flight hours

and 30,733 total flight cycles. During the

Model A300 full-scale fatigue test

program, similar cracking was found at

approximately 84,000 simulated flight

cycles. The test results indicated that

the onset of cracking could occur sooner

than calculated from the original test

results, suggesting the inspection

threshold for this area of the airplane

should be reduced from the threshold

specified by the A300 CPCP. The

cracking has been attributed to the effect

of cabin pressure on the junction points,

where thickness variations can lead to

local bending and subsequent fatigue

damage. If not corrected, the cracking

could result in reduced structural

integrity of the airplane.

Similar Model

The frame section is similar on all

airplanes affected by this AD. Therefore,

Model A310–203, A310–221, and A310–

222 series airplanes are also subject to

the identified unsafe condition.

Explanation of Relevant Service

Information

Airbus has issued Service Bulletins

A300–53–6120 (for Model A300–600

series airplanes) and A310–53–2109 (for

Model A310 series airplanes), both

dated May 5, 2000. These service

bulletins describe procedures for

repetitive detailed visual inspections of

the upper frame section assemblies of

the left and right forward lateral cockpit

windows. The service bulletins describe

temporary and permanent repairs for

cracking. The temporary repair, which

is acceptable if cracking is found only

in a certain area, involves replacing a

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 2001 / Proposed Rules 1611

pick-up fitting and bracket with new

parts, and installing a doubler. The

permanent repair, which is

recommended if any cracking is found

in any other specified area, involves

replacing the upper frame section

assembly with a new assembly, which

would reset the inspection threshold.

The DGAC classified these service

bulletins as mandatory and issued

French airworthiness directive 2000–

263–314(B), dated June 28, 2000, in

order to ensure the continued

airworthiness of these airplanes in

France.

FAA’s Conclusions

These airplane models are

manufactured in France and are type

certificated for operation in the United

States under the provisions of section

21.29 of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the

applicable bilateral airworthiness

agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral

airworthiness agreement, the DGAC has

kept the FAA informed of the situation

described above. The FAA has

examined the findings of the DGAC,

reviewed all available information, and

determined that AD action is necessary

for products of this type design that are

certificated for operation in the United

States.

Explanation of Requirements of

Proposed Rule

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other airplanes of the same

type design registered in the United

States, the proposed AD would require

accomplishment of the actions specified

in the service bulletins described

previously, except as described below.

Difference Between Proposed AD and

Service Bulletins

Operators should note that, although

the service bulletins specify that the

manufacturer may be contacted for

certain repair or inspection instructions,

this proposal would require the repair

or inspection to be accomplished in

accordance with a method approved by

either the FAA, or the DGAC (or its

delegated agent). In light of the type of

repair or inspection that would be

required to address the identified unsafe

condition, and in consonance with

existing bilateral airworthiness

agreements, the FAA has determined

that, for this proposed AD, a repair or

inspection approved by either the FAA

or the DGAC would be acceptable for

compliance with this proposed AD.

Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 27 airplanes

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 1 work hour per airplane

to accomplish the proposed inspection,

and that the average labor rate is $60 per

work hour. Based on these figures, the

cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $1,620, or

$60 per airplane, per inspection cycle.

The cost impact figure discussed

above is based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the proposed requirements of this AD

action, and that no operator would

accomplish those actions in the future if

this proposed AD were not adopted. The

cost impact figures discussed in AD

rulemaking actions represent only the

time necessary to perform the specific

actions actually required by the AD.

These figures typically do not include

incidental costs, such as the time

required to gain access and close up,

planning time, or time necessitated by

other administrative actions.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations proposed herein

would not have a substantial direct

effect on the States, on the relationship

between the national Government and

the States, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities among the

various levels of government. Therefore,

it is determined that this proposal

would not have federalism implications

under Executive Order 13132.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this proposed regulation (1)

Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

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

promulgated, will not have a significant

economic impact, positive or negative,

on a substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft

regulatory evaluation prepared for this

action is contained in the Rules Docket.

A copy of it may be obtained by

contacting the Rules Docket at the

location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

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

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding the following new airworthiness

directive:

Airbus Industrie: Docket 2000–NM–223–AD.

Applicability: Model A300 B4–620, A310–

203, A310–221, and A310–222 series

airplanes; certificated in any category; as

listed in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–

6120 or A310–53–2109, both dated May 5,

2000; excluding airplanes on which Airbus

Modification 3632 has been accomplished.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in

the area subject to the requirements of this

AD. For airplanes that have been modified,

altered, or repaired so that the performance

of the requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (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 detect and correct fatigue cracking of

fuselage frame 07 in the upper frame section

assembly of the lateral cockpit windows,

which could result in reduced structural

integrity of the airplane, accomplish the

following:

Inspection and Corrective Actions

(a) Before the accumulation of 25,000 total

flight cycles, or within 3,000 flight cycles

after the effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs later: Perform a detailed visual

inspection to detect cracking of fuselage

frame 07 in the left and right upper frame

section assemblies of the lateral cockpit

windows, in accordance with Airbus Service

Bulletin A300–53–6120 (for Model A300–600

series airplanes) or A310–53–2109 (for Model

A310 series airplanes), both dated May 5,

2000; as applicable.

Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a

detailed visual inspection is defined as: ‘‘An

intensive visual examination of a specific

structural area, system, installation, or

assembly to detect damage, failure, or

irregularity. Available lighting is normally

supplemented with a direct source of good

lighting at intensity deemed appropriate by

the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror,

magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface

cleaning and elaborate access procedures

may be required.’’

(1) If no cracking is found: Repeat the

inspection thereafter at least every 7,000

flight cycles.

(2) If any cracking is found and the

cracking is only in ‘‘area A,’’ as depicted in

1612 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 2001 / Proposed Rules

view B of Figure 4 of the service bulletin:

Before further flight, do the actions specified

by either paragraph (a)(2)(i) or (a)(2)(ii) of this

AD.

(i) Do a temporary repair per the applicable

service bulletin. Within 3,000 flight cycles

thereafter, do a permanent repair per the

applicable service bulletin. Within 32,000

flight cycles thereafter, except as required by

paragraph (b) of this AD, repeat the

inspection specified by paragraph (a) of this

AD.

(ii) Do a permanent repair per the

applicable service bulletin. Within 32,000

flight cycles thereafter, except as required by

paragraph (b) of this AD, repeat the

inspection specified by paragraph (a) of this

AD.

(3) If any cracking is in ‘‘area B,’’ or in both

‘‘area A’’ and ‘‘area B’’; as depicted in view

B of Figure 4 of the service bulletin: Before

further flight, do a permanent repair per the

applicable service bulletin. Within 32,000

flight cycles thereafter, except as required by

paragraph (b) of this AD, repeat the

inspection specified by paragraph (a) of this

AD.

(b) If the service bulletin specifies to

contact Airbus for further instructions for a

repair or inspection: Prior to further flight,

perform a repair or inspection per a method

approved by the Manager, International

Branch, ANM–116, FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate. For a repair or inspection

method to be approved by the Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, as required

by this paragraph, the Manager’s approval

letter must specifically reference this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(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,

International Branch, ANM–116. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, International Branch,

ANM–116.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the International Branch,

ANM–116.

Special Flight Permits

(d) 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.

Note 4: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French airworthiness directive 2000–263–

314(B), dated June 28, 2000.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January

3, 2001.

Dorenda D. Baker,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–510 Filed 1–8–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–NM–86–AD]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model

A300 B2 and A300 B4 Series Airplanes,

and Model A300 B4–600, A300 B4–

600R, and A300 F4–600R (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 B2 and A300 B4

series airplanes, and all A300 B4–600,

A300 B4–600R, and A300 F4–600R

(A300–600) series airplanes. For certain

airplanes, this proposal would require

modifying the frame 40 aft fittings. For

all airplanes, this proposal would

require repetitive nondestructive test

inspections to detect cracking of the

frame 40 aft fittings; a modification

would be required as corrective action

for cracking or provided as optional

terminating action for the repetitive

inspections. This proposal is prompted

by issuance of mandatory continuing

airworthiness information by a foreign

civil airworthiness authority. The

actions specified by the proposed AD

are intended to detect and correct

propagation of cracks on the frame 40

aft fittings due to local stress

concentrations at the frame 40 upper

flange runout, which could result in

reduced structural integrity of the

airplane.

DATES: Comments must be received by

February 8, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Transport

Airplane Directorate, ANM–114,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 99–NM–

86–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington 98055–4056.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, except Federal

holidays.

The service information referenced in

the proposed rule may be obtained from

Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice

Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France.

This information may be examined at

the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Norman B. Martenson, Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2110;

fax (425) 227–1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications shall

identify the Rules Docket number and

be submitted in triplicate to the address

specified above. All communications

received on or before the closing date

for comments, specified above, will be

considered before taking action on the

proposed rule. The proposals contained

in this action may be changed in light

of the comments received.

Submit comments using the following

format:

• Organize comments issue-by-issue;

e.g., discuss a request to change a

compliance time and a request to

change a service bulletin reference as

two issues.

• For each issue, state the specific

change requested to the proposed AD.

• Include justification (e.g., reasons or

data) for each request.

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 action

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket Number ++.’’ The postcard will

be date stamped and returned to the

commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

ANM–114, Attention: Rules Docket No.

99–NM–86–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,