Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes, 44232-44235 [2016-15910]
Download as PDF
44232
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 81, No. 130
Thursday, July 7, 2016
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.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2016–7425; Directorate
Identifier 2014–NM–244–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
We propose to supersede
Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2011–17–
05, for certain Airbus Model A300 B2–
1C, A300 B2–203, A300 B2K–3C, A300–
B4–103, A300 B4–203, and A300 B4–2C
airplanes. AD 2011–17–05 currently
requires repetitive inspections in
sections 13 through 18 of the fuselage
between rivets of the longitudinal lap
joints between frames (FR) 18 and 80 for
cracking, and repair or modification if
necessary. Since we issued AD 2011–
17–05, we have determined that a
revised inspection program is necessary.
This proposed AD would include a
revised repetitive inspection program of
all longitudinal lap joints and repairs
between frames 18 and 80 to address
this widespread fatigue damage (WFD).
We are proposing this AD to detect and
correct fatigue cracking of the
longitudinal lap joints of the fuselage,
which could result in reduced structural
integrity of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by August 22, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments by
any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: (202) 493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:03 Jul 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
For service information identified in
this NPRM, contact Airbus SAS,
Airworthiness Office—EAW, 1 Rond
Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac
Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36
96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email
account.airworth-eas@airbus.com;
Internet https://www.airbus.com. You
may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue
SW., Renton, WA. For information on
the availability of this material at the
FAA, call 425–227–1221.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2016–
7425; or in person at the Docket
Management Facility between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Operations
office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is in
the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.
Dan
Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM–116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA
98057–3356; telephone 425–227–2125;
fax 425- 227–1149.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written
relevant data, views, or arguments about
this proposed AD. Send your comments
to an address listed under the
ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No.
FAA–2016–7425; Directorate Identifier
2014–NM–244–AD’’ at the beginning of
your comments. We specifically invite
comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy
aspects of this proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
closing date and may amend this
proposed AD based on those comments.
We will post all comments we
receive, without change, to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact we receive
about this proposed AD.
Discussion
On September 23, 2011, we issued AD
2011–17–05, Amendment 39–16769 (76
FR 63177, October 12, 2011) (‘‘AD
2011–17–05’’). AD 2011–17–05 requires
actions intended to address an unsafe
condition on certain Airbus Model A300
B2–1C, A300 B2–203, A300 B2K–3C,
A300–B4–103, A300 B4–203, and A300
B4–2C airplanes.
Since we issued AD 2011–17–05, we
have determined it is necessary to
require a revised inspection program for
the longitudinal lap joints and repairs
between FR 18 and FR 80 because
additional cracking was found in an
expanded area.
The European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA), which is the Technical Agent
for the Member States of the European
Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness
Directive 2014–0265, dated December 9,
2014 (referred to after this as the
Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness
Information, or ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct
an unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states:
Cracks were found on in-service aeroplanes
in sections 13 to 18 of the fuselage between
rivets of longitudinal lap joints between
frames (FR) 18 and FR80.
This condition, if not detected and
corrected, could affect the structural integrity
of the aeroplane.
To address this unsafe condition, Airbus
developed an inspection programme for the
longitudinal lap joints and repairs between
FR18 and FR80, and EASA issued AD 2007–
0091 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2011–
17–05] to require the implementation of that
programme.
Since EASA AD 2007–0091 was issued, [a]
new Widespread Fatigue Damage regulation
has been issued. This new regulation led to
the revision of the maintenance programme
for the longitudinal lap joints and repairs
between FR18 and FR80.
For the reasons described above, this
[EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA
AD 2007–0091, which is superseded, and
requires implementation of the revised
inspection programme.
Required actions include repetitive
inspections of the bonded inner
E:\FR\FM\07JYP1.SGM
07JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 130 / Thursday, July 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules
doublers of the longitudinal lap joints in
sections 13 through 18 for disbonding or
corrosion, and repairing any disbonding
and corrosion; a follow-on rototest or
ultrasonic inspection to verify cracking,
and repair of any cracking. The
repetitive inspection interval ranges
from 3,000 flight cycles up to 8,000
flight cycles, depending on airplane
configuration. You may examine the
MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet
at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating it in Docket
No. FAA–2016–7425.
Widespread Fatigue Damage
Fatigue damage can occur locally, in
small areas or structural design details,
or globally, in widespread areas.
Multiple-site damage is widespread
damage that occurs in a large structural
element such as a single rivet line of a
lap splice joining two large skin panels.
Widespread damage can also occur in
multiple elements such as adjacent
frames or stringers. Multiple-site
damage and multiple-element damage
cracks are typically too small initially to
be reliably detected with normal
inspection methods. Without
intervention, these cracks will grow,
and eventually compromise the
structural integrity of the airplane. This
condition is known as widespread
fatigue damage. It is associated with
general degradation of large areas of
structure with similar structural details
and stress levels. As an airplane ages,
WFD will likely occur, and will
certainly occur if the airplane is
operated long enough without any
intervention.
The FAA’s WFD final rule (75 FR
69746, November 15, 2010) became
effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD
rule requires certain actions to prevent
structural failure due to WFD
throughout the operational life of
certain existing transport category
airplanes and all of these airplanes that
will be certificated in the future. For
existing and future airplanes subject to
the WFD rule, the rule requires that
DAHs establish a limit of validity (LOV)
of the engineering data that support the
structural maintenance program.
Operators affected by the WFD rule may
not fly an airplane beyond its LOV,
unless an extended LOV is approved.
The WFD rule (75 FR 69746,
November 15, 2010) does not require
identifying and developing maintenance
actions if the DAHs can show that such
actions are not necessary to prevent
WFD before the airplane reaches the
LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend
on accomplishment of future
maintenance actions. As stated in the
WFD rule, any maintenance actions
necessary to reach the LOV will be
mandated by airworthiness directives
through separate rulemaking actions.
In the context of WFD, this action is
necessary to enable DAHs to propose
LOVs that allow operators the longest
operational lives for their airplanes, and
still ensure that WFD will not occur.
This approach allows for an
implementation strategy that provides
flexibility to DAHs in determining the
timing of service information
development (with FAA approval),
while providing operators with certainty
regarding the LOV applicable to their
airplanes.
We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct fatigue cracking of the
longitudinal lap joints of the fuselage,
which could result in reduced structural
integrity of the airplane.
FAA’s Determination and Requirements
of This Proposed AD
This product has been approved by
the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation
in the United States. Pursuant to our
bilateral agreement with the State of
44233
Design Authority, we have been notified
of the unsafe condition described in the
MCAI and service information
referenced above. We are proposing this
AD because we evaluated all pertinent
information and determined an unsafe
condition exists and is likely to exist or
develop on other products of the same
type design.
Differences Between This Proposed AD
and the MCAI or Service Information
Unlike the procedures described in
the service information, this proposed
AD would not permit further flight if
cracks are detected. We have
determined that, because of the safety
implications and consequences
associated with that cracking, any
cracked upper shell structure must be
repaired before further flight.
The MCAI refers to Airbus Service
Bulletin A300–53–0211, Revision 08,
dated November 26, 2013, for
compliance times and for the new
inspections. However, paragraph (l) of
this proposed AD would require
operators to do the initial inspections
within 180 days after the effective date
of this AD, in a method approved by the
Manager, International Branch, ANM–
116, Transport Airplane Directorate,
FAA; or the European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA); or Airbus’s EASA
Design Organization Approval (DOA);
and thereafter at intervals approved by
the Manager, International Branch,
ANM–116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus’s
EASA DOA. We find that 180 days is an
appropriate amount of time to
accomplish the initial inspections and
address the unsafe condition.
These differences have been
coordinated with the EASA and Airbus.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD
affects 4 airplanes of U.S. registry.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Cost per
product
Labor cost
Retained actions from AD 2011–17–05 (5 airplanes) ..
New proposed inspections (4 airplanes) ......................
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
Action
3,735 work-hours × $85 per hour = $317,475 .............
140 work-hours × $85 per hour = $11,900 ..................
We have received no definitive data
that would enable us to provide cost
estimates for the on-condition actions
specified in this proposed AD.
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code
specifies the FAA’s authority to issue
rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I,
section 106, describes the authority of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:03 Jul 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII:
Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more
detail the scope of the Agency’s
authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under
the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII,
Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701:
General requirements.’’ Under that
section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
$317,475
11,900
Cost on U.S.
operators
$1,587,375
47,600
air commerce by prescribing regulations
for practices, methods, and procedures
the Administrator finds necessary for
safety in air commerce. This regulation
is within the scope of that authority
because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on
products identified in this rulemaking
action.
E:\FR\FM\07JYP1.SGM
07JYP1
44234
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 130 / Thursday, July 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Regulatory Findings
We determined that this proposed AD
would not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This
proposed AD 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify 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);
3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in
Alaska; and
4. 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.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA proposes to amend 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. The FAA amends § 39.13 by
removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2011–17–05, Amendment 39–16769 (76
FR 63177, October 12, 2011), and
adding the following new AD:
■
Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2016–7425;
Directorate Identifier 2014–NM–244–AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by August 22,
2016.
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
(b) Affected ADs
This AD replaces AD 2011–17–05,
Amendment 39–16769 (76 FR 63177, October
12, 2011) (‘‘AD 2011–17–05’’).
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to Airbus Model A300 B2–
1C, A300 B2–203, A300 B2K–3C, A300–B4–
103, A300 B4–203, and A300 B4–2C
airplanes; certificated in any category; all
manufacturer serial numbers, except those on
which Airbus Modification 2611 has been
embodied in production.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:03 Jul 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
(d) Subject
Air Transport Association (ATA) of
America Code 53, Fuselage.
(e) Reason
This AD was prompted by an evaluation
done by the design approval holder
indicating that certain sections of the
longitudinal lap joints are subject to
widespread fatigue damage. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking
of the longitudinal lap joints of the fuselage,
which could result in reduced structural
integrity of the airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(g) Retained Fuselage Inner Doubler
Inspections and Repair, With Revised
Formatting
This paragraph restates the requirements of
paragraph (l) of AD 2011–17–05, with revised
formatting. For airplanes on which any
inspections of the fuselage bonded inner
doublers of the longitudinal lap joints in
Sections 13 through 18 (except Sections 16
and 17 at Stringer 31 left-hand and righthand) for disbonding and cracking have not
been done as of November 16, 2011 (the
effective date of AD 2011–17–05), as
specified by Airbus Service Bulletin A300–
53–229: Prior to the accumulation of 24,000
total flight cycles or within 15 years since
new, whichever occurs first; or within 60
days after November 16, 2011; whichever
occurs later; do a detailed inspection of the
fuselage bonded inner doublers of the
longitudinal lap joints in Sections 13 through
18 (except Sections 16 and 17 at Stringer 31
left-hand and right-hand) for disbonding and
cracking, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus
Service Bulletin A300–53–229, Revision 5,
dated April 8, 1997. If no disbonding and no
cracking are found, repeat the inspection
thereafter at the applicable intervals specified
in paragraph (h) of this AD.
(1) If no cracking is found, and ‘‘minor’’
disbonding, as defined in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300–53–229, Revision 5, dated
April 8, 1997, is found: Repeat the inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1 year for
areas below stringer 22, and at intervals not
to exceed 2 years for areas above and
including stringer 22.
(2) If no cracking is found, and ‘‘major’’
disbonding, as defined in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300–53–229, Revision 5, dated
April 8, 1997, is found: Within 1,000 flight
cycles after doing the inspection, repair, in
accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300–
53–229, Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997.
(3) If any cracking is found, repair prior to
further flight, in accordance with Airbus
Service Bulletin A300–53–229, Revision 5,
dated April 8, 1997.
(h) Retained Repetitive Intervals for
Inspections for Disbonding and Cracking
This paragraph restates the repetitive
intervals specified in table 1 of AD 2011–17–
05. At the applicable time specified in
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD, repeat
the inspection required by paragraph (g) of
this AD.
(1) For Sections 13 and 14 as specified in
Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–229,
Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997: Repeat the
inspection at intervals not to exceed 7 years
or 12,000 flight cycles, whichever occurs
first.
(2) For Sections 15 through 18 as specified
in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–229,
Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997: Repeat the
inspection within 8.5 years or 12,000 flight
cycles, whichever occurs first.
(i) Retained Fuselage Inner Doubler
Inspections and Repair
This paragraph restates the requirements of
paragraph (m) of AD 2011–17–05. For
airplanes on which any inspections of the
fuselage bonded inner doublers of the
longitudinal lap joints in Sections 13 through
18 (except Sections 16 and 17 at Stringer 31
left-hand and right-hand) for disbonding and
cracking have been done as of November 16,
2011 (the effective date of AD 2011–17–05),
as specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–
53–229; except for airplanes on which a
repair of that area has been done as specified
in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–229:
Within 7 years or 12,000 flight cycles (for
Sections 13 and 14), or within 8.5 years or
12,000 flight cycles (for Sections 15 and 18),
after doing the inspection, whichever occurs
first; or within 60 days after November 16,
2011, whichever occurs later, do a detailed
inspection of the fuselage bonded inner
doublers of the longitudinal lap joints in
Sections 13 through 18 (except Sections 16
and 17 at Stringer 31 left-hand and righthand) for disbonding and cracking, in
accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300–
53–229, Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997. If no
disbonding and no cracking are found, repeat
the inspection at the applicable time
specified in paragraph (h) of this AD.
(1) If no cracking is found, and ‘‘minor’’
disbonding, as defined in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300–53–229, Revision 5, dated
April 8, 1997, is found: Repeat the inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1 year for
areas below stringer 22, and at intervals not
to exceed 2 years for areas above and
including stringer 22.
(2) If no cracking is found, and ‘‘major’’
disbonding, as defined in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300–53–229, Revision 5, dated
April 8, 1997, is found: Within 1,000 flight
cycles after doing the inspection, repair, in
accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300–
53–229, Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997.
(3) If any cracking is found, repair prior to
further flight, in accordance with Airbus
Service Bulletin A300–53–229, Revision 5,
dated April 8, 1997.
(j) Retained Fuselage Inner Doubler
Inspections and Repair, With No Changes
This paragraph restates the requirements of
paragraph (n) of AD 2011–17–05, with no
changes. For airplanes on which any
inspections of the fuselage bonded inner
doublers of the longitudinal lap joints in
Sections 16 and 17 at Stringer 31 left-hand
E:\FR\FM\07JYP1.SGM
07JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 130 / Thursday, July 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
and right-hand for disbonding and cracking
have not been done as of November 16, 2011
(the effective date of AD 2011–17–05), as
specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–
53–229: Prior to the accumulation of 24,000
total flight cycles or within 12 years since
new, whichever occurs first; or within 60
days after November 16, 2011, whichever
occurs later, do a detailed inspection of the
fuselage bonded inner doubles of the
longitudinal lap joints in Sections 16 and 17
at Stringer 31 left-hand and right-hand for
disbonding and cracking, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus
Service Bulletin A300–53–229, Revision 5,
dated April 8, 1997. If no disbonding and no
cracking are found, repeat the inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 7 years
or 12,000 flight cycles, whichever occurs
first.
(1) If no cracking is found, and ‘‘minor’’
disbonding, as defined in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300–53–229, Revision 5, dated
April 8, 1997, is found: Repeat the inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1 year for
areas below stringer 22, and at intervals not
to exceed 2 years for areas above and
including stringer 22. Doing a repair in
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin
A300–53–229, Revision 5, dated April 8,
1997, terminates the repetitive inspections
required by this paragraph for that area.
(2) If no cracking is found, and ‘‘major’’
disbonding, as defined in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300–53–229, Revision 5, dated
April 8, 1997, is found: Within 1,000 flight
cycles after doing the inspection, repair, in
accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300–
53–229, Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997.
(3) If any cracking is found, repair prior to
further flight, in accordance with Airbus
Service Bulletin A300–53–229, Revision 5,
dated April 8, 1997.
Bulletin A300–53–229, Revision 5, dated
April 8, 1997, is found: Repeat the inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1 year for
areas below stringer 22, and at intervals not
to exceed 2 years for areas above and
including stringer 22. Doing a repair, in
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin
A300–53–229, Revision 5, dated April 8,
1997, terminates the repetitive inspections
required by this paragraph for that area.
(2) If no cracking is found, and ‘‘major’’
disbonding, as defined in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300–53–229, Revision 5, dated
April 8, 1997, is found: Within 1,000 flight
cycles after doing the inspection, repair, in
accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300–
53–229, Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997.
(3) If any cracking is found, repair prior to
further flight, in accordance with Airbus
Service Bulletin A300–53–229, Revision 5,
dated April 8, 1997.
(k) Retained Fuselage Inner Doubler
Inspections and Repair, With No Changes
This paragraph restates the requirements of
paragraph (o) of AD 2011–17–05, with no
changes. For airplanes on which any
inspections of the fuselage bonded inner
doublers of the longitudinal lap joints in
Sections 16 and 17 at Stringer 31 left-hand
and right-hand for disbonding and cracking
have been done as of November 16, 2011, as
specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–
53–229; except airplanes on which a repair
of that area has been done as specified in
Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–229:
Within 7 years or 12,000 flight cycles after
doing the inspection, whichever occurs first;
or within 60 days after November 16, 2011;
whichever occurs later; do a detailed
inspection of the fuselage bonded inner
doubles of the longitudinal lap joints in
Sections 16 and 17 at Stringer 31 left-hand
and right-hand for disbonding and cracking,
in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300–
53–229, Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997. If no
disbonding and no corrosion are found,
repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals
not to exceed 7 years or 12,000 flight cycles,
whichever occurs first.
(1) If no cracking is found, and ‘‘minor’’
disbonding, as defined in Airbus Service
(m) Other FAA AD Provisions
The following provisions also apply to this
AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs): The Manager, International
Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your
request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the International Branch, send it to ATTN:
Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM–116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356;
telephone 425–227–2125; fax 425–227–1149.
Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-116AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. Before using
any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal
inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding
district office. The AMOC approval letter
must specifically reference this AD.
(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: As of the
effective date of this AD, for any requirement
in this AD to obtain corrective actions from
a manufacturer, the action must be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:03 Jul 06, 2016
Jkt 238001
(l) New Repetitive Inspections and Repair
Within 180 days after the effective date of
this AD, do rototest and ultrasonic
inspections, as applicable, for cracking of all
longitudinal lap joints and repairs between
frames 18 and 80; and repair any cracking
before further flight; using a method
approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus’s EASA
Design Organization Approval (DOA). Repeat
the applicable inspection, including postrepair inspections, thereafter at intervals
approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus’s EASA
DOA. Accomplishing the initial inspection
and applicable repairs required by this
paragraph terminates the actions required by
paragraphs (g) through (k) of this AD.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44235
accomplished using a method approved by
the Manager, International Branch, ANM–
116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or
the EASA; or Airbus’s EASA DOA. If
approved by the DOA, the approval must
include the DOA-authorized signature.
(n) Related Information
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2014–0265, dated
December 9, 2014, for related information.
This MCAI may be found in the AD docket
on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA–2016–7425.
(2) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness
Office—EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France;
telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61
93 44 51; email account.airworth-eas@
airbus.com; Internet https://www.airbus.com.
You may view this service information at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 23,
2016.
Dorr M. Anderson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–15910 Filed 7–6–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2016–7424; Directorate
Identifier 2015–NM–173–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
We propose to adopt a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus Model A330–200, –200
Freighter, and –300 series airplanes; and
Model A340–200, –300, –500, and –600
series airplanes. This proposed AD was
prompted by a determination that, due
to significant differences among all
airspeed sources, the flight controls will
revert to alternate law, the autopilot
(AP) and the auto-thrust (A/THR) will
automatically disconnect, and the flight
director (FD) bars will be automatically
removed. Then, if two airspeed sources
become similar while still erroneous,
the flight guidance computers will
display the FD bars again, and enable
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\07JYP1.SGM
07JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 130 (Thursday, July 7, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44232-44235]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15910]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
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.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 130 / Thursday, July 7, 2016 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 44232]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2016-7425; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-244-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2011-17-
05, for certain Airbus Model A300 B2-1C, A300 B2-203, A300 B2K-3C,
A300-B4-103, A300 B4-203, and A300 B4-2C airplanes. AD 2011-17-05
currently requires repetitive inspections in sections 13 through 18 of
the fuselage between rivets of the longitudinal lap joints between
frames (FR) 18 and 80 for cracking, and repair or modification if
necessary. Since we issued AD 2011-17-05, we have determined that a
revised inspection program is necessary. This proposed AD would include
a revised repetitive inspection program of all longitudinal lap joints
and repairs between frames 18 and 80 to address this widespread fatigue
damage (WFD). We are proposing this AD to detect and correct fatigue
cracking of the longitudinal lap joints of the fuselage, which could
result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 22, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Airbus
SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707
Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44
51; email account.airworth-eas@airbus.com; Internet https://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
7425; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Operations office (telephone (800) 647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-2125;
fax 425- 227-1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2016-7425;
Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-244-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.
Discussion
On September 23, 2011, we issued AD 2011-17-05, Amendment 39-16769
(76 FR 63177, October 12, 2011) (``AD 2011-17-05''). AD 2011-17-05
requires actions intended to address an unsafe condition on certain
Airbus Model A300 B2-1C, A300 B2-203, A300 B2K-3C, A300-B4-103, A300
B4-203, and A300 B4-2C airplanes.
Since we issued AD 2011-17-05, we have determined it is necessary
to require a revised inspection program for the longitudinal lap joints
and repairs between FR 18 and FR 80 because additional cracking was
found in an expanded area.
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2014-0265, dated December 9, 2014 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified
products. The MCAI states:
Cracks were found on in-service aeroplanes in sections 13 to 18
of the fuselage between rivets of longitudinal lap joints between
frames (FR) 18 and FR80.
This condition, if not detected and corrected, could affect the
structural integrity of the aeroplane.
To address this unsafe condition, Airbus developed an inspection
programme for the longitudinal lap joints and repairs between FR18
and FR80, and EASA issued AD 2007-0091 [which corresponds to FAA AD
2011-17-05] to require the implementation of that programme.
Since EASA AD 2007-0091 was issued, [a] new Widespread Fatigue
Damage regulation has been issued. This new regulation led to the
revision of the maintenance programme for the longitudinal lap
joints and repairs between FR18 and FR80.
For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD retains the
requirements of EASA AD 2007-0091, which is superseded, and requires
implementation of the revised inspection programme.
Required actions include repetitive inspections of the bonded inner
[[Page 44233]]
doublers of the longitudinal lap joints in sections 13 through 18 for
disbonding or corrosion, and repairing any disbonding and corrosion; a
follow-on rototest or ultrasonic inspection to verify cracking, and
repair of any cracking. The repetitive inspection interval ranges from
3,000 flight cycles up to 8,000 flight cycles, depending on airplane
configuration. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating it
in Docket No. FAA-2016-7425.
Widespread Fatigue Damage
Fatigue damage can occur locally, in small areas or structural
design details, or globally, in widespread areas. Multiple-site damage
is widespread damage that occurs in a large structural element such as
a single rivet line of a lap splice joining two large skin panels.
Widespread damage can also occur in multiple elements such as adjacent
frames or stringers. Multiple-site damage and multiple-element damage
cracks are typically too small initially to be reliably detected with
normal inspection methods. Without intervention, these cracks will
grow, and eventually compromise the structural integrity of the
airplane. This condition is known as widespread fatigue damage. It is
associated with general degradation of large areas of structure with
similar structural details and stress levels. As an airplane ages, WFD
will likely occur, and will certainly occur if the airplane is operated
long enough without any intervention.
The FAA's WFD final rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) became
effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD rule requires certain actions to
prevent structural failure due to WFD throughout the operational life
of certain existing transport category airplanes and all of these
airplanes that will be certificated in the future. For existing and
future airplanes subject to the WFD rule, the rule requires that DAHs
establish a limit of validity (LOV) of the engineering data that
support the structural maintenance program. Operators affected by the
WFD rule may not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, unless an extended LOV
is approved.
The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) does not require
identifying and developing maintenance actions if the DAHs can show
that such actions are not necessary to prevent WFD before the airplane
reaches the LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend on accomplishment of
future maintenance actions. As stated in the WFD rule, any maintenance
actions necessary to reach the LOV will be mandated by airworthiness
directives through separate rulemaking actions.
In the context of WFD, this action is necessary to enable DAHs to
propose LOVs that allow operators the longest operational lives for
their airplanes, and still ensure that WFD will not occur. This
approach allows for an implementation strategy that provides
flexibility to DAHs in determining the timing of service information
development (with FAA approval), while providing operators with
certainty regarding the LOV applicable to their airplanes.
We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of
the longitudinal lap joints of the fuselage, which could result in
reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD
This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.
Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service
Information
Unlike the procedures described in the service information, this
proposed AD would not permit further flight if cracks are detected. We
have determined that, because of the safety implications and
consequences associated with that cracking, any cracked upper shell
structure must be repaired before further flight.
The MCAI refers to Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0211, Revision
08, dated November 26, 2013, for compliance times and for the new
inspections. However, paragraph (l) of this proposed AD would require
operators to do the initial inspections within 180 days after the
effective date of this AD, in a method approved by the Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or
the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA); and thereafter at intervals approved by
the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. We find that 180 days
is an appropriate amount of time to accomplish the initial inspections
and address the unsafe condition.
These differences have been coordinated with the EASA and Airbus.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD affects 4 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost per Cost on U.S.
Action Labor cost product operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Retained actions from AD 2011-17-05 (5 3,735 work-hours x $85 per hour $317,475 $1,587,375
airplanes). = $317,475.
New proposed inspections (4 airplanes)........ 140 work-hours x $85 per hour = 11,900 47,600
$11,900.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed
AD.
Authority for This Rulemaking
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
[[Page 44234]]
Regulatory Findings
We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD 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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify 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);
3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
4. 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.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
0
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2011-17-05, Amendment 39-16769 (76 FR 63177, October 12, 2011), and
adding the following new AD:
Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2016-7425; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-
244-AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by August 22, 2016.
(b) Affected ADs
This AD replaces AD 2011-17-05, Amendment 39-16769 (76 FR 63177,
October 12, 2011) (``AD 2011-17-05'').
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to Airbus Model A300 B2-1C, A300 B2-203, A300
B2K-3C, A300-B4-103, A300 B4-203, and A300 B4-2C airplanes;
certificated in any category; all manufacturer serial numbers,
except those on which Airbus Modification 2611 has been embodied in
production.
(d) Subject
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.
(e) Reason
This AD was prompted by an evaluation done by the design
approval holder indicating that certain sections of the longitudinal
lap joints are subject to widespread fatigue damage. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the longitudinal
lap joints of the fuselage, which could result in reduced structural
integrity of the airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
(g) Retained Fuselage Inner Doubler Inspections and Repair, With
Revised Formatting
This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (l) of AD
2011-17-05, with revised formatting. For airplanes on which any
inspections of the fuselage bonded inner doublers of the
longitudinal lap joints in Sections 13 through 18 (except Sections
16 and 17 at Stringer 31 left-hand and right-hand) for disbonding
and cracking have not been done as of November 16, 2011 (the
effective date of AD 2011-17-05), as specified by Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-229: Prior to the accumulation of 24,000 total
flight cycles or within 15 years since new, whichever occurs first;
or within 60 days after November 16, 2011; whichever occurs later;
do a detailed inspection of the fuselage bonded inner doublers of
the longitudinal lap joints in Sections 13 through 18 (except
Sections 16 and 17 at Stringer 31 left-hand and right-hand) for
disbonding and cracking, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5,
dated April 8, 1997. If no disbonding and no cracking are found,
repeat the inspection thereafter at the applicable intervals
specified in paragraph (h) of this AD.
(1) If no cracking is found, and ``minor'' disbonding, as
defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated
April 8, 1997, is found: Repeat the inspection thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 1 year for areas below stringer 22, and at
intervals not to exceed 2 years for areas above and including
stringer 22.
(2) If no cracking is found, and ``major'' disbonding, as
defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated
April 8, 1997, is found: Within 1,000 flight cycles after doing the
inspection, repair, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5,
dated April 8, 1997.
(3) If any cracking is found, repair prior to further flight, in
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5,
dated April 8, 1997.
(h) Retained Repetitive Intervals for Inspections for Disbonding and
Cracking
This paragraph restates the repetitive intervals specified in
table 1 of AD 2011-17-05. At the applicable time specified in
paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD, repeat the inspection
required by paragraph (g) of this AD.
(1) For Sections 13 and 14 as specified in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997: Repeat the
inspection at intervals not to exceed 7 years or 12,000 flight
cycles, whichever occurs first.
(2) For Sections 15 through 18 as specified in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997: Repeat the
inspection within 8.5 years or 12,000 flight cycles, whichever
occurs first.
(i) Retained Fuselage Inner Doubler Inspections and Repair
This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (m) of AD
2011-17-05. For airplanes on which any inspections of the fuselage
bonded inner doublers of the longitudinal lap joints in Sections 13
through 18 (except Sections 16 and 17 at Stringer 31 left-hand and
right-hand) for disbonding and cracking have been done as of
November 16, 2011 (the effective date of AD 2011-17-05), as
specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229; except for
airplanes on which a repair of that area has been done as specified
in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229: Within 7 years or 12,000
flight cycles (for Sections 13 and 14), or within 8.5 years or
12,000 flight cycles (for Sections 15 and 18), after doing the
inspection, whichever occurs first; or within 60 days after November
16, 2011, whichever occurs later, do a detailed inspection of the
fuselage bonded inner doublers of the longitudinal lap joints in
Sections 13 through 18 (except Sections 16 and 17 at Stringer 31
left-hand and right-hand) for disbonding and cracking, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin
A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997. If no disbonding and
no cracking are found, repeat the inspection at the applicable time
specified in paragraph (h) of this AD.
(1) If no cracking is found, and ``minor'' disbonding, as
defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated
April 8, 1997, is found: Repeat the inspection thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 1 year for areas below stringer 22, and at
intervals not to exceed 2 years for areas above and including
stringer 22.
(2) If no cracking is found, and ``major'' disbonding, as
defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated
April 8, 1997, is found: Within 1,000 flight cycles after doing the
inspection, repair, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5,
dated April 8, 1997.
(3) If any cracking is found, repair prior to further flight, in
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5,
dated April 8, 1997.
(j) Retained Fuselage Inner Doubler Inspections and Repair, With No
Changes
This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (n) of AD
2011-17-05, with no changes. For airplanes on which any inspections
of the fuselage bonded inner doublers of the longitudinal lap joints
in Sections 16 and 17 at Stringer 31 left-hand
[[Page 44235]]
and right-hand for disbonding and cracking have not been done as of
November 16, 2011 (the effective date of AD 2011-17-05), as
specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229: Prior to the
accumulation of 24,000 total flight cycles or within 12 years since
new, whichever occurs first; or within 60 days after November 16,
2011, whichever occurs later, do a detailed inspection of the
fuselage bonded inner doubles of the longitudinal lap joints in
Sections 16 and 17 at Stringer 31 left-hand and right-hand for
disbonding and cracking, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5,
dated April 8, 1997. If no disbonding and no cracking are found,
repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 7 years
or 12,000 flight cycles, whichever occurs first.
(1) If no cracking is found, and ``minor'' disbonding, as
defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated
April 8, 1997, is found: Repeat the inspection thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 1 year for areas below stringer 22, and at
intervals not to exceed 2 years for areas above and including
stringer 22. Doing a repair in accordance with Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997, terminates
the repetitive inspections required by this paragraph for that area.
(2) If no cracking is found, and ``major'' disbonding, as
defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated
April 8, 1997, is found: Within 1,000 flight cycles after doing the
inspection, repair, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5,
dated April 8, 1997.
(3) If any cracking is found, repair prior to further flight, in
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5,
dated April 8, 1997.
(k) Retained Fuselage Inner Doubler Inspections and Repair, With No
Changes
This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (o) of AD
2011-17-05, with no changes. For airplanes on which any inspections
of the fuselage bonded inner doublers of the longitudinal lap joints
in Sections 16 and 17 at Stringer 31 left-hand and right-hand for
disbonding and cracking have been done as of November 16, 2011, as
specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229; except airplanes
on which a repair of that area has been done as specified in Airbus
Service Bulletin A300-53-229: Within 7 years or 12,000 flight cycles
after doing the inspection, whichever occurs first; or within 60
days after November 16, 2011; whichever occurs later; do a detailed
inspection of the fuselage bonded inner doubles of the longitudinal
lap joints in Sections 16 and 17 at Stringer 31 left-hand and right-
hand for disbonding and cracking, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229,
Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997. If no disbonding and no corrosion
are found, repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 7 years or 12,000 flight cycles, whichever occurs first.
(1) If no cracking is found, and ``minor'' disbonding, as
defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated
April 8, 1997, is found: Repeat the inspection thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 1 year for areas below stringer 22, and at
intervals not to exceed 2 years for areas above and including
stringer 22. Doing a repair, in accordance with Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997, terminates
the repetitive inspections required by this paragraph for that area.
(2) If no cracking is found, and ``major'' disbonding, as
defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated
April 8, 1997, is found: Within 1,000 flight cycles after doing the
inspection, repair, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5,
dated April 8, 1997.
(3) If any cracking is found, repair prior to further flight, in
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5,
dated April 8, 1997.
(l) New Repetitive Inspections and Repair
Within 180 days after the effective date of this AD, do rototest
and ultrasonic inspections, as applicable, for cracking of all
longitudinal lap joints and repairs between frames 18 and 80; and
repair any cracking before further flight; using a method approved
by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or
Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). Repeat the
applicable inspection, including post-repair inspections, thereafter
at intervals approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA.
Accomplishing the initial inspection and applicable repairs required
by this paragraph terminates the actions required by paragraphs (g)
through (k) of this AD.
(m) Other FAA AD Provisions
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Dan Rodina,
Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; telephone 425-227-2125; fax 425-227-1149. Information may be
emailed to: 9-ANM-116-AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office. The
AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: As of the effective date of
this AD, for any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions
from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method
approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. If
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized
signature.
(n) Related Information
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0265, dated December 9,
2014, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD
docket on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-7425.
(2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email account.airworth-eas@airbus.com;
Internet https://www.airbus.com. You may view this service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 23, 2016.
Dorr M. Anderson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-15910 Filed 7-6-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P