Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes, 27444-27448 [2017-11826]

Download as PDF 27444 Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 82, No. 114 Thursday, June 15, 2017 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–2016–0451; Directorate Identifier 2013–NM–253–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM); reopening of comment period. AGENCY: We are revising an earlier notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2004–23–20. AD 2004–23–20 applies to certain Airbus Model A300 B2–1A, A300 B2–1C, A300 B2K–3C, A300 B2–203, A300 B4–2C, A300 B4– 103, and A300 B4–203 airplanes; and Model A300 B4–601, A300 B4–603, A300 B4–620, A300 B4–622, A300 B4– 605R, A300 B4–622R, A300 F4–605R and A300 C4–605R Variant F airplanes. This action revises the NPRM by reducing certain compliance times, among other changes. We are proposing this airworthiness directive (AD) to address the unsafe condition on these products. Since these actions impose an additional burden over those proposed in the NPRM we are reopening the comment period to allow the public the chance to comment on these proposed changes. DATES: The comment period for the NPRM published in the Federal Register on February 1, 2016 (81 FR 5056), is reopened. We must receive comments on this SNPRM by July 31, 2017. ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:02 Jun 14, 2017 Jkt 241001 • 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 SNPRM, 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– 0451; 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 SNPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket 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, 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–2016–0451; Directorate Identifier 2013–NM–253–AD’’ at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this SNPRM. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this SNPRM 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 SNPRM. Discussion On November 10, 2004, we issued AD 2004–23–20, Amendment 39–13875 (69 FR 68779, November 26, 2004) (‘‘AD 2004–23–20’’). AD 2004–23–20 requires actions intended to address an unsafe condition on certain Airbus Model A300 B2–1A, B2–1C, B2K–3C, B2–203, B4– 2C, B4–103, and B4–203 airplanes; and Model A300 B4–601, A300 B4–603, A300 B4–620, A300 B4–622, A300 B4– 605R, A300 B4–622R, A300 F4–605R and A300 C4–605R Variant F airplanes. We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD to supersede AD 2004–23–20 that would apply to certain Airbus Model A300 B2–1A, B2– 1C, B2K–3C, B2–203, B4–2C, B4–103, and B4–203 airplanes; and Model A300 B4–601, A300 B4–603, A300 B4–620, A300 B4–622, A300 B4–605R, A300 B4– 622R, A300 F4–605R and A300 C4– 605R Variant F airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on February 1, 2016 (81 FR 5056) (‘‘the NPRM’’). The NPRM was prompted by a report indicating that the material used to manufacture the upper frame feet was changed and negatively affected the fatigue life of the frame feet. The NPRM proposed to reduce the compliance times for the initial inspection and the inspection intervals. The NPRM also proposed to expand the applicability and require an additional repair on certain airplanes that have been modified. Actions Since the NPRM Was Issued Since we issued the NPRM, we have determined the compliance times for the proposed modification must be reduced and an additional modification must be done. In addition, we have determined that the repetitive inspections are no longer necessary. Therefore, certain requirements identified as ‘‘retained’’ in the proposed AD (in the NPRM) have been removed from this proposed AD. E:\FR\FM\15JNP1.SGM 15JNP1 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 114 / Thursday, June 15, 2017 / Proposed Rules pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2016–0249, dated December 14, 2016; corrected January 10, 2017 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the MCAI’’); to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Model A300 B4–603, A300 B4–620, A300 B4–622, A300 B4– 605R, A300 B4–622R, A300 F4–605R, A300 F4–622R, and A300 C4–605R Variant F airplanes. The MCAI states: During an inspection in accordance with Airworthiness Limitation Item (ALI) 53–15– 54 on an A300–600 aeroplane, Frames (FR) 43, FR44, FR45 and FR46 were found cracked between stringer (STGR) 24 and STGR30 on the aeroplane right hand side. FR45 was also found cracked on the aeroplane left hand side. This condition, if not detected and corrected, could reduce the structural integrity of the fuselage. To address this potential unsafe condition and improve the fatigue life of the upper frame feet fittings, Airbus issued Service Bulletin (SB) A300–53–6125 to provide instructions for expansion of the most sensitive fastener holes between FR41 and ´ ´ FR46. DGAC [Direction Generale de l’Aviation Civile] France issued AD F–2004– 002 (EASA approval 2003–2108) [which corresponds to FAA AD 2004–23–20] to require the structural modification defined in SB A300–53–6125 Revision 03 (Airbus modification 12168). [DGAC] AD F–2004–002 was subsequently superseded by EASA AD 2013–0295 to amend the inspection programme in this area as provided in SB A300–53–6122 (which is now obsolete and replaced by ALI task 531558, published in the [Airworthiness Limitation Section] ALS Part 2 Revision 01 dated 07 August 2015). Since EASA AD 2013–0295 was issued, a new investigation was conducted in the frame of the Widespread Fatigue Damage study. Airbus revised the thresholds for the accomplishment of the instructions defined in SB A300–53–6125 and issued SB A300– 53–6178 to provide modification instructions to improve the fatigue life of upper frame feet fittings on aeroplane on which Airbus modification (mod) 12168 or Airbus SB A300–53–6125 was embodied. For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD retains some requirements of EASA AD 2013–0295, which is superseded, and requires modification of the upper frame feet fittings from FR41 to FR46 [repetitive inspections are not retained]. This [EASA] AD is republished to correct a typographical error in the compliance time * * *. We have also removed Model A300 B2–1A, B2–1C, B2K–3C, B2–203, B4– 2C, B4–103, and B4–203 airplanes from the applicability of this proposed AD. We have issued AD 2017–05–01, Amendment 39–18811 (82 FR 12401, March 3, 2017), which addresses the VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:02 Jun 14, 2017 Jkt 241001 identified unsafe condition on all Model A300 series airplanes. In addition, we have removed Model A300 B4–601 airplanes from the applicability of this proposed AD. The airplane manufacturer stated that all serial numbers for this airplane model have been removed from service. Also, we have added Model A300 F4–622R airplanes to the applicability of this proposed AD to correspond with the applicability in the MCAI. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at https:// www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA–2016– 0451. Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51 Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A300–53–6125, Revision 04, dated March 17, 2015; and Service Bulletin A300–53–6178, dated March 17, 2015. The service information describes procedures for the modification of certain upper frame feet fittings. These documents are distinct since they apply to airplanes in different configurations. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section. Comments We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this proposed AD. We considered the comments received. Request To Specify That Reporting Is Optional FedEx requested that the reporting action specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6122 be identified as an optional action in the NPRM. The commenter stated that the NPRM does not include a statement that the reporting requirements specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6122 are not required by the NPRM. The commenter stated that Airbus has received these reports in the past and has not provided statistics or benefits to operators. We agree with the commenter that reporting should not be required. All references to Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6122 have been omitted from this proposed AD. Since the NPRM was issued, Airbus has included the inspections specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6122 in appropriate airworthiness limitations. Since this proposed AD does not include any references to Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6122, we have not revised this proposed AD in regard to this issue. PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 27445 Request To Extend the Grace Period in Paragraph (n)(1) of the Proposed AD FedEx requested that the grace period in paragraph (n)(1) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM) be extended from 1,000 flight cycles to 2,000 flight cycles. The commenter noted that this would permit scheduling this inspection and modification at the next major maintenance check and would not impose any additional scheduling burden on operators. The commenter stated that this would only affect seven airplanes in its fleet that are currently awaiting the initial threshold for the inspection. The commenter also mentioned that its experience to date has not shown wide spread fatigue cracking in this area under the existing 15,000-flight-cycle threshold. As stated previously, certain inspections, including those specified in paragraph (m)(1) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM), are not included in this proposed AD. Therefore, it is not necessary to extend the grace period for the initial rotating probe inspection (which corresponds to paragraph (n)(1) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM)). We have not changed this proposed AD regarding this issue. Request To Revise the Compliance Times in Paragraph (o) of the Proposed AD United Parcel Service (UPS) requested that the NPRM be revised to simplify the compliance requirements in paragraph (o) of the proposed AD to reflect the current service experience of the fleet. UPS noted that almost 12 years have passed between the issuance of AD 2004–23–20 and the NPRM. UPS pointed out that during this time new information regarding structural fatigue has been developed and this information is not reflected in the NPRM. In addition, UPS stated that, while it is the FAA’s standard practice to supersede an AD but retain information from the AD being superseded in an NPRM, in this NPRM, the compliance times in paragraph (o) of the proposed AD are confusing and difficult to interpret. We agree with the commenter’s request to clarify and simplify the compliance times in paragraph (g)(1) of this proposed AD (which corresponds to paragraphs (o)(1)(i) and (o)(1)(ii) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM)), for the reasons provided by the commenter. We have revised the compliance times in paragraph (g)(1) of this proposed AD to correspond with the compliance times specified in the MCAI. E:\FR\FM\15JNP1.SGM 15JNP1 27446 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 114 / Thursday, June 15, 2017 / Proposed Rules Request To Include Inspection in One Location UPS requested that we either include the inspection specified in paragraph (n)(1)(i) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM) as an AD requirement or as an airworthiness limitation. UPS stated that the inspection specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6125, which is mandated by paragraph (n)(1)(i) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM), is a duplicate of ALI task 53–15–58. UPS noted that the NPRM and airworthiness limitation documents have different inspection interval requirements and there is the potential for duplicate and conflicting requirements if either document is revised. We agree with the commenter’s observation regarding duplicate inspection requirements. ALI task 53– 15–58 was revised in Airbus ALS Part 2, Variation 13.2, to include the inspection in ALI task 53–15–58–03. The inspection is required for airplanes that have not incorporated the actions specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6125 and is no longer required for airplanes that have incorporated the actions specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6125. The FAA issued Alternative Method of Compliance (AMOC) ANM–116–15–387 to AD 2013–13–13, Amendment 39– 17501 (79 FR 48957, August 19, 2014), that allows operators to revise their maintenance or inspection programs by incorporating Airbus ALS Part 2, Variation 13.2. We are working on proposed rulemaking that would require operators to incorporate the latest version of Airbus ALS Part 2, which includes the inspection mentioned previously by the commenter. The inspections in paragraph (m)(1) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM), along with the associated compliance times in paragraph (n)(1) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM), are not included in the requirements of this proposed AD. Therefore, no changes to this proposed AD are necessary regarding this issue. pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS FAA’s Determination and Requirements of This SNPRM 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:02 Jun 14, 2017 Jkt 241001 develop on other products of these same type designs. Certain changes described above expand the scope of the rulemaking. As a result, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment period to provide additional opportunity for the public to comment on this SNPRM. Differences Between This SNPRM and the MCAI There is a difference between this SNPRM and the MCAI regarding how the compliance time is stated for the post-modification actions specified in paragraph (h) of this proposed AD. The MCAI states that the post-modification actions should be accomplished ‘‘no later than 6 months (estimated by projection of airplane usage) prior to exceeding 24,500 flight cycles or 42,700 flight hours, whichever occurs first after Airbus SB A300–53–6178 embodiment.’’ Paragraph (h) of this proposed AD specifies that the postmodification actions should be done ‘‘Prior to exceeding 24,100 total flight cycles or 42,000 total flight hours, whichever occurs first after doing the modification required by paragraph (g)(2) of this AD.’’ The compliance time in paragraph (h) of this proposed AD is based upon the average annual utilization of the Airbus airplanes identified in paragraph (c) of this proposed AD, which is 790 flight cycles and 1,463 flight hours (or 395 flight cycles and 732 flight hours over 6 months). We have rounded the compliance time in paragraph (h) of this proposed AD accordingly. Costs of Compliance We estimate that this SNPRM affects 65 airplanes of U.S. registry. The actions that are required by AD 2004–23–20 and retained in this SNPRM take about 90 work-hours per product, at an average labor rate of $85 per work-hour. Required parts cost about $4,000 per product. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the actions that were required by AD 2004– 23–20 is $11,650 per product. We also estimate that it would take up to 109 work-hours per product to comply with the new basic requirements of this SNPRM. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts would cost up to $6,070 per product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this SNPRM on U.S. operators to be $996,775, or $15,335 per product. We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed AD. PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 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. 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. E:\FR\FM\15JNP1.SGM 15JNP1 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 114 / Thursday, June 15, 2017 / Proposed Rules § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2004–23–20, Amendment 39–13875 (69 FR 68779, November 26, 2004), and adding the following new AD: ■ Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2016–0451; Directorate Identifier 2013–NM–253–AD. (a) Comments Due Date We must receive comments by July 31, 2017. (b) Affected ADs This AD replaces AD 2004–23–20, Amendment 39–13875 (69 FR 68779, November 26, 2004) (‘‘AD 2004–23–20’’). (c) Applicability This AD applies to Airbus Model A300 B4– 603, A300 B4–620, A300 B4–622, A300 B4– 605R, A300 B4–622R, A300 F4–605R, A300 F4–622R, and A300 C4–605R Variant F 27447 airplanes; certificated in any category; all manufacturer serial numbers. (g) Modification of the Upper Frame Feet Fittings (d) Subject (1) Except for airplanes identified in table 2 to paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD: At the times specified in table 1 to paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, depending on the average flight time (AFT), as defined in paragraph (i) of this AD, modify the upper frame feet fittings, including doing all applicable related investigative and corrective actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300– 53–6125, Revision 04, dated March 17, 2015 (‘‘SB A300–53–6125, Revision 04’’). Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Where Airbus SB A300–53–6125, Revision 04, specifies to contact Airbus for appropriate action, and specifies that action as ‘‘RC’’ (Required for Compliance): Before further flight, accomplish corrective actions in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (l)(2) of this AD. Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage. (e) Reason This AD was prompted by a report indicating that the material used to manufacture the upper frame feet was changed and negatively affected the fatigue life of the frame feet. We are issuing this AD to prevent cracking of the center section of the fuselage, which could result in a ruptured frame foot and reduced structural integrity of the airplane. (f) Compliance Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done. TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (g)(1) OF THIS AD—MODIFICATION SB A300–53–6125, REVISION 04 Initial compliance time (flight cycles or flight hours, whichever occurs first since first flight) Airplane usage AFT greater than 1.5 ...................... AFT equal to or less than 1.5 ......... Within 10,200 flight cycles or 22,100 flight hours. Within 11,000 flight cycles or 16,600 flight hours. TABLE 2 TO PARAGRAPHS (g)(1) AND (g)(2) OF THIS AD—MODIFICATION SB A300–53–6178 Airplane configuration Initial compliance time Post-modification 12168 ................. Post-SB A300–53–6125 ................. Within 27,100 flight cycles or 47,300 flight hours since the airplane’s first flight, whichever occurs first. Within 27,100 flight cycles or 47,300 flight hours after embodiment of SB A300–53–6125, whichever occurs first. (2) For airplanes identified in table 2 to paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD: At the applicable compliance time specified in table 2 to paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD, modify the upper frame feet fittings, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300– 53–6178, dated March 17, 2015. Where Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6178, dated March 17, 2015, specifies to contact Airbus for appropriate action, and specifies that action as ‘‘RC’’: Before further flight, accomplish corrective actions in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (l)(2) of this AD. pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS (h) Additional Post-Modification Actions Prior to exceeding 24,100 total flight cycles or 42,000 total flight hours, whichever occurs first after doing the modification required by paragraph (g)(2) of this AD: Contact 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); for instructions to do additional actions, and do those actions at the compliance times stated therein. (i) Definition of AFT For the purpose of this AD, to establish the applicable AFT for the actions required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, divide the total VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:02 Jun 14, 2017 Jkt 241001 accumulated flight hours counted from takeoff to touch-down by the total accumulated flight cycles as of the effective date of this AD. (j) Credit for Previous Actions This paragraph provides credit for the modification required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if the modification was performed before the effective date of this AD using the service information specified in paragraph (j)(1), (j)(2), (j)(3), or (j)(4) of this AD. (1) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6125, dated November 8, 2000. (2) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6125, Revision 01, dated June 13, 2003. (3) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6125, Revision 02, dated February 25, 2005. (4) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6125, Revision 03, dated September 13, 2011. (k) Exempt Airplanes For airplanes on which Airbus Modification 12168 has been embodied in production: The modification required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD is not required by this AD. (l) Other FAA AD Provisions The following provisions also apply to this AD: (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 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 the attention of the person identified in paragraph (m)(2) of this AD. 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. (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 EASA; or Airbus’s EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature. (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD: If any service information contains procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those procedures and tests must be done to E:\FR\FM\15JNP1.SGM 15JNP1 27448 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 114 / Thursday, June 15, 2017 / Proposed Rules comply with this AD; any procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended. Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the operator’s maintenance or inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests identified as RC require approval of an AMOC. AGENCY: positioning system (GPS) standard instrument approach procedures (SIAPs) serving Forrest General Hospital Heliport. Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at the heliport. DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 31, 2017. ADDRESSES: Send comments on this rule to: U. S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Bldg Ground Floor Rm W12–140, Washington, DC 20590; Telephone: 1–800–647–5527, or (202) 366–9826. You must identify the Docket No. FAA–2017–0321; Airspace Docket No. 17–ASO–11, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit and review received comments through the Internet at https:// www.regulations.gov. You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed on line at https://www.faa.gov/air_ traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC, 20591; telephone: (202) 267–8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11A at NARA, call (202) 741–6030, or go to https:// www.archives.gov/federal_register/ code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_ locations.html. FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O. Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone (404) 305–6364. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited Interested persons are invited to comment on this proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. Communications should identify both docket numbers(FAA Docket No. FAA– 2017–0321 and Airspace Docket No. 17– ASO–11) and be submitted in triplicate to DOT Docket Operations (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the Internet at https:// www.regulations.gov. Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ‘‘Comments to Docket No. FAA–2017–0321; Airspace Docket No. 17–ASO–11.’’ The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter. All communications received on or before the specified closing date for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket. This action proposes to establish Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Forrest General Hospital Heliport in Hattiesburg, MS, to accommodate new area navigation (RNAV) global Authority for This Rulemaking The FAA’s authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This proposed Availability of NPRMs An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the internet at https://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA’s Web page at https:// www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/ airspace_amendments/. (m) Related Information (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2016–0249, dated December 14, 2016; corrected January 10, 2017; 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– 2016–0451. (2) For more information about this AD, contact Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; telephone 425– 227–2125; fax 425–227–1149. (3) 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 May 31, 2017. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 2017–11826 Filed 6–14–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 71 [Docket No. FAA–2017–0321; Airspace Docket No. 17–ASO–11] pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Hattiesburg, MS Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:02 Jun 14, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would establish Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Forrest General Hospital Heliport, Hattiesburg, MS, to support IFR operations in standard instrument approach procedures at the heliport. E:\FR\FM\15JNP1.SGM 15JNP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 114 (Thursday, June 15, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27444-27448]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11826]


========================================================================
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. 82, No. 114 / Thursday, June 15, 2017 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 27444]]



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-0451; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-253-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM); reopening 
of comment period.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2004-23-20. AD 2004-
23-20 applies to certain Airbus Model A300 B2-1A, A300 B2-1C, A300 B2K-
3C, A300 B2-203, A300 B4-2C, A300 B4-103, and A300 B4-203 airplanes; 
and Model A300 B4-601, A300 B4-603, A300 B4-620, A300 B4-622, A300 B4-
605R, A300 B4-622R, A300 F4-605R and A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes. 
This action revises the NPRM by reducing certain compliance times, 
among other changes. We are proposing this airworthiness directive (AD) 
to address the unsafe condition on these products. Since these actions 
impose an additional burden over those proposed in the NPRM we are 
reopening the comment period to allow the public the chance to comment 
on these proposed changes.

DATES: The comment period for the NPRM published in the Federal 
Register on February 1, 2016 (81 FR 5056), is reopened.
    We must receive comments on this SNPRM by July 31, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 
11.43 and 11.45, 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 SNPRM, 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-
0451; 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 SNPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, 
and other information. The street address for the Docket 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, 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-2016-0451; 
Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-253-AD'' at the beginning of your 
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this SNPRM. We will 
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this 
SNPRM 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 SNPRM.

Discussion

    On November 10, 2004, we issued AD 2004-23-20, Amendment 39-13875 
(69 FR 68779, November 26, 2004) (``AD 2004-23-20''). AD 2004-23-20 
requires actions intended to address an unsafe condition on certain 
Airbus Model A300 B2-1A, B2-1C, B2K-3C, B2-203, B4-2C, B4-103, and B4-
203 airplanes; and Model A300 B4-601, A300 B4-603, A300 B4-620, A300 
B4-622, A300 B4-605R, A300 B4-622R, A300 F4-605R and A300 C4-605R 
Variant F airplanes.
    We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD to 
supersede AD 2004-23-20 that would apply to certain Airbus Model A300 
B2-1A, B2-1C, B2K-3C, B2-203, B4-2C, B4-103, and B4-203 airplanes; and 
Model A300 B4-601, A300 B4-603, A300 B4-620, A300 B4-622, A300 B4-605R, 
A300 B4-622R, A300 F4-605R and A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes. The 
NPRM published in the Federal Register on February 1, 2016 (81 FR 5056) 
(``the NPRM''). The NPRM was prompted by a report indicating that the 
material used to manufacture the upper frame feet was changed and 
negatively affected the fatigue life of the frame feet. The NPRM 
proposed to reduce the compliance times for the initial inspection and 
the inspection intervals. The NPRM also proposed to expand the 
applicability and require an additional repair on certain airplanes 
that have been modified.

Actions Since the NPRM Was Issued

    Since we issued the NPRM, we have determined the compliance times 
for the proposed modification must be reduced and an additional 
modification must be done. In addition, we have determined that the 
repetitive inspections are no longer necessary. Therefore, certain 
requirements identified as ``retained'' in the proposed AD (in the 
NPRM) have been removed from this proposed AD.

[[Page 27445]]

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical 
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 
2016-0249, dated December 14, 2016; corrected January 10, 2017 
(referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness 
Information, or ``the MCAI''); to correct an unsafe condition for all 
Airbus Model A300 B4-603, A300 B4-620, A300 B4-622, A300 B4-605R, A300 
B4-622R, A300 F4-605R, A300 F4-622R, and A300 C4-605R Variant F 
airplanes. The MCAI states:

    During an inspection in accordance with Airworthiness Limitation 
Item (ALI) 53-15-54 on an A300-600 aeroplane, Frames (FR) 43, FR44, 
FR45 and FR46 were found cracked between stringer (STGR) 24 and 
STGR30 on the aeroplane right hand side. FR45 was also found cracked 
on the aeroplane left hand side.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could reduce the 
structural integrity of the fuselage.
    To address this potential unsafe condition and improve the 
fatigue life of the upper frame feet fittings, Airbus issued Service 
Bulletin (SB) A300-53-6125 to provide instructions for expansion of 
the most sensitive fastener holes between FR41 and FR46. DGAC 
[Direction G[eacute]n[eacute]rale de l'Aviation Civile] France 
issued AD F-2004-002 (EASA approval 2003-2108) [which corresponds to 
FAA AD 2004-23-20] to require the structural modification defined in 
SB A300-53-6125 Revision 03 (Airbus modification 12168).
    [DGAC] AD F-2004-002 was subsequently superseded by EASA AD 
2013-0295 to amend the inspection programme in this area as provided 
in SB A300-53-6122 (which is now obsolete and replaced by ALI task 
531558, published in the [Airworthiness Limitation Section] ALS Part 
2 Revision 01 dated 07 August 2015).
    Since EASA AD 2013-0295 was issued, a new investigation was 
conducted in the frame of the Widespread Fatigue Damage study. 
Airbus revised the thresholds for the accomplishment of the 
instructions defined in SB A300-53-6125 and issued SB A300-53-6178 
to provide modification instructions to improve the fatigue life of 
upper frame feet fittings on aeroplane on which Airbus modification 
(mod) 12168 or Airbus SB A300-53-6125 was embodied.
    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD retains some 
requirements of EASA AD 2013-0295, which is superseded, and requires 
modification of the upper frame feet fittings from FR41 to FR46 
[repetitive inspections are not retained].
    This [EASA] AD is republished to correct a typographical error 
in the compliance time * * *.

    We have also removed Model A300 B2-1A, B2-1C, B2K-3C, B2-203, B4-
2C, B4-103, and B4-203 airplanes from the applicability of this 
proposed AD. We have issued AD 2017-05-01, Amendment 39-18811 (82 FR 
12401, March 3, 2017), which addresses the identified unsafe condition 
on all Model A300 series airplanes.
    In addition, we have removed Model A300 B4-601 airplanes from the 
applicability of this proposed AD. The airplane manufacturer stated 
that all serial numbers for this airplane model have been removed from 
service. Also, we have added Model A300 F4-622R airplanes to the 
applicability of this proposed AD to correspond with the applicability 
in the MCAI.
    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
0451.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A300-53-6125, Revision 04, dated 
March 17, 2015; and Service Bulletin A300-53-6178, dated March 17, 
2015. The service information describes procedures for the modification 
of certain upper frame feet fittings. These documents are distinct 
since they apply to airplanes in different configurations.
    This service information is reasonably available because the 
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of 
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing 
this proposed AD. We considered the comments received.

Request To Specify That Reporting Is Optional

    FedEx requested that the reporting action specified in Airbus 
Service Bulletin A300-53-6122 be identified as an optional action in 
the NPRM. The commenter stated that the NPRM does not include a 
statement that the reporting requirements specified in Airbus Service 
Bulletin A300-53-6122 are not required by the NPRM. The commenter 
stated that Airbus has received these reports in the past and has not 
provided statistics or benefits to operators.
    We agree with the commenter that reporting should not be required. 
All references to Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6122 have been 
omitted from this proposed AD. Since the NPRM was issued, Airbus has 
included the inspections specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-
6122 in appropriate airworthiness limitations. Since this proposed AD 
does not include any references to Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-
6122, we have not revised this proposed AD in regard to this issue.

Request To Extend the Grace Period in Paragraph (n)(1) of the Proposed 
AD

    FedEx requested that the grace period in paragraph (n)(1) of the 
proposed AD (in the NPRM) be extended from 1,000 flight cycles to 2,000 
flight cycles. The commenter noted that this would permit scheduling 
this inspection and modification at the next major maintenance check 
and would not impose any additional scheduling burden on operators. The 
commenter stated that this would only affect seven airplanes in its 
fleet that are currently awaiting the initial threshold for the 
inspection. The commenter also mentioned that its experience to date 
has not shown wide spread fatigue cracking in this area under the 
existing 15,000-flight-cycle threshold.
    As stated previously, certain inspections, including those 
specified in paragraph (m)(1) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM), are not 
included in this proposed AD. Therefore, it is not necessary to extend 
the grace period for the initial rotating probe inspection (which 
corresponds to paragraph (n)(1) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM)). We 
have not changed this proposed AD regarding this issue.

Request To Revise the Compliance Times in Paragraph (o) of the Proposed 
AD

    United Parcel Service (UPS) requested that the NPRM be revised to 
simplify the compliance requirements in paragraph (o) of the proposed 
AD to reflect the current service experience of the fleet. UPS noted 
that almost 12 years have passed between the issuance of AD 2004-23-20 
and the NPRM. UPS pointed out that during this time new information 
regarding structural fatigue has been developed and this information is 
not reflected in the NPRM. In addition, UPS stated that, while it is 
the FAA's standard practice to supersede an AD but retain information 
from the AD being superseded in an NPRM, in this NPRM, the compliance 
times in paragraph (o) of the proposed AD are confusing and difficult 
to interpret.
    We agree with the commenter's request to clarify and simplify the 
compliance times in paragraph (g)(1) of this proposed AD (which 
corresponds to paragraphs (o)(1)(i) and (o)(1)(ii) of the proposed AD 
(in the NPRM)), for the reasons provided by the commenter. We have 
revised the compliance times in paragraph (g)(1) of this proposed AD to 
correspond with the compliance times specified in the MCAI.

[[Page 27446]]

Request To Include Inspection in One Location

    UPS requested that we either include the inspection specified in 
paragraph (n)(1)(i) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM) as an AD 
requirement or as an airworthiness limitation. UPS stated that the 
inspection specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6125, which is 
mandated by paragraph (n)(1)(i) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM), is a 
duplicate of ALI task 53-15-58. UPS noted that the NPRM and 
airworthiness limitation documents have different inspection interval 
requirements and there is the potential for duplicate and conflicting 
requirements if either document is revised.
    We agree with the commenter's observation regarding duplicate 
inspection requirements. ALI task 53-15-58 was revised in Airbus ALS 
Part 2, Variation 13.2, to include the inspection in ALI task 53-15-58-
03. The inspection is required for airplanes that have not incorporated 
the actions specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6125 and is no 
longer required for airplanes that have incorporated the actions 
specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6125. The FAA issued 
Alternative Method of Compliance (AMOC) ANM-116-15-387 to AD 2013-13-
13, Amendment 39-17501 (79 FR 48957, August 19, 2014), that allows 
operators to revise their maintenance or inspection programs by 
incorporating Airbus ALS Part 2, Variation 13.2. We are working on 
proposed rulemaking that would require operators to incorporate the 
latest version of Airbus ALS Part 2, which includes the inspection 
mentioned previously by the commenter. The inspections in paragraph 
(m)(1) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM), along with the associated 
compliance times in paragraph (n)(1) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM), 
are not included in the requirements of this proposed AD. Therefore, no 
changes to this proposed AD are necessary regarding this issue.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This SNPRM

    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 these 
same type designs.
    Certain changes described above expand the scope of the rulemaking. 
As a result, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the 
comment period to provide additional opportunity for the public to 
comment on this SNPRM.

Differences Between This SNPRM and the MCAI

    There is a difference between this SNPRM and the MCAI regarding how 
the compliance time is stated for the post-modification actions 
specified in paragraph (h) of this proposed AD. The MCAI states that 
the post-modification actions should be accomplished ``no later than 6 
months (estimated by projection of airplane usage) prior to exceeding 
24,500 flight cycles or 42,700 flight hours, whichever occurs first 
after Airbus SB A300-53-6178 embodiment.'' Paragraph (h) of this 
proposed AD specifies that the post-modification actions should be done 
``Prior to exceeding 24,100 total flight cycles or 42,000 total flight 
hours, whichever occurs first after doing the modification required by 
paragraph (g)(2) of this AD.'' The compliance time in paragraph (h) of 
this proposed AD is based upon the average annual utilization of the 
Airbus airplanes identified in paragraph (c) of this proposed AD, which 
is 790 flight cycles and 1,463 flight hours (or 395 flight cycles and 
732 flight hours over 6 months). We have rounded the compliance time in 
paragraph (h) of this proposed AD accordingly.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this SNPRM affects 65 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    The actions that are required by AD 2004-23-20 and retained in this 
SNPRM take about 90 work-hours per product, at an average labor rate of 
$85 per work-hour. Required parts cost about $4,000 per product. Based 
on these figures, the estimated cost of the actions that were required 
by AD 2004-23-20 is $11,650 per product.
    We also estimate that it would take up to 109 work-hours per 
product to comply with the new basic requirements of this SNPRM. The 
average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts would cost up 
to $6,070 per product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of 
this SNPRM on U.S. operators to be $996,775, or $15,335 per product.
    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.

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.

[[Page 27447]]

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 
2004-23-20, Amendment 39-13875 (69 FR 68779, November 26, 2004), and 
adding the following new AD:

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2016-0451; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-
253-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by July 31, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2004-23-20, Amendment 39-13875 (69 FR 68779, 
November 26, 2004) (``AD 2004-23-20'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Model A300 B4-603, A300 B4-620, A300 
B4-622, A300 B4-605R, A300 B4-622R, A300 F4-605R, A300 F4-622R, and 
A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes; certificated in any category; all 
manufacturer serial numbers.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report indicating that the material 
used to manufacture the upper frame feet was changed and negatively 
affected the fatigue life of the frame feet. We are issuing this AD 
to prevent cracking of the center section of the fuselage, which 
could result in a ruptured frame foot and reduced structural 
integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, 
unless already done.

(g) Modification of the Upper Frame Feet Fittings

    (1) Except for airplanes identified in table 2 to paragraphs 
(g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD: At the times specified in table 1 to 
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, depending on the average flight time 
(AFT), as defined in paragraph (i) of this AD, modify the upper 
frame feet fittings, including doing all applicable related 
investigative and corrective actions, in accordance with the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6125, 
Revision 04, dated March 17, 2015 (``SB A300-53-6125, Revision 
04''). Do all applicable related investigative and corrective 
actions before further flight. Where Airbus SB A300-53-6125, 
Revision 04, specifies to contact Airbus for appropriate action, and 
specifies that action as ``RC'' (Required for Compliance): Before 
further flight, accomplish corrective actions in accordance with the 
procedures specified in paragraph (l)(2) of this AD.

  Table 1 to Paragraph (g)(1) of This AD--Modification SB A300-53-6125,
                               Revision 04
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Initial compliance time  (flight
          Airplane usage              cycles or flight hours, whichever
                                      occurs first since first flight)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFT greater than 1.5..............  Within 10,200 flight cycles or
                                     22,100 flight hours.
AFT equal to or less than 1.5.....  Within 11,000 flight cycles or
                                     16,600 flight hours.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


Table 2 to Paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of This AD--Modification SB A300-
                                 53-6178
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Airplane configuration               Initial compliance time
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post-modification 12168...........  Within 27,100 flight cycles or
                                     47,300 flight hours since the
                                     airplane's first flight, whichever
                                     occurs first.
Post-SB A300-53-6125..............  Within 27,100 flight cycles or
                                     47,300 flight hours after
                                     embodiment of SB A300-53-6125,
                                     whichever occurs first.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) For airplanes identified in table 2 to paragraphs (g)(1) and 
(g)(2) of this AD: At the applicable compliance time specified in 
table 2 to paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD, modify the upper 
frame feet fittings, in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6178, dated March 
17, 2015. Where Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6178, dated March 
17, 2015, specifies to contact Airbus for appropriate action, and 
specifies that action as ``RC'': Before further flight, accomplish 
corrective actions in accordance with the procedures specified in 
paragraph (l)(2) of this AD.

(h) Additional Post-Modification Actions

    Prior to exceeding 24,100 total flight cycles or 42,000 total 
flight hours, whichever occurs first after doing the modification 
required by paragraph (g)(2) of this AD: Contact 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); for instructions to do 
additional actions, and do those actions at the compliance times 
stated therein.

(i) Definition of AFT

    For the purpose of this AD, to establish the applicable AFT for 
the actions required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, divide the 
total accumulated flight hours counted from take-off to touch-down 
by the total accumulated flight cycles as of the effective date of 
this AD.

(j) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the modification required by 
paragraph (g) of this AD, if the modification was performed before 
the effective date of this AD using the service information 
specified in paragraph (j)(1), (j)(2), (j)(3), or (j)(4) of this AD.
    (1) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6125, dated November 8, 
2000.
    (2) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6125, Revision 01, dated 
June 13, 2003.
    (3) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6125, Revision 02, dated 
February 25, 2005.
    (4) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6125, Revision 03, dated 
September 13, 2011.

(k) Exempt Airplanes

    For airplanes on which Airbus Modification 12168 has been 
embodied in production: The modification required by paragraph 
(g)(1) of this AD is not required by this AD.

(l) 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 the attention of 
the person identified in paragraph (m)(2) of this AD. 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.
    (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 EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. If 
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized 
signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by 
paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD: If any service information 
contains procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those 
procedures and tests must be done to

[[Page 27448]]

comply with this AD; any procedures or tests that are not identified 
as RC are recommended. Those procedures and tests that are not 
identified as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in 
accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection program 
without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and 
tests identified as RC can be done and the airplane can be put back 
in an airworthy condition. Any substitutions or changes to 
procedures or tests identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

(m) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information 
(MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2016-0249, dated December 14, 
2016; corrected January 10, 2017; 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-
2016-0451.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Dan Rodina, 
Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport 
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; 
telephone 425-227-2125; fax 425-227-1149.
    (3) 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 May 31, 2017.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-11826 Filed 6-14-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.