Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Industrie Model A300 Series Airplanes

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 91-NM-23-AD; Amendment 39-9015; AD 94-18-02]

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Industrie Model A300 Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to Airbus Industrie Model A300 series airplanes, that

requires the implementation of a corrosion prevention and control

program, either by revising the maintenance program or by accomplishing

specific inspection procedures. This amendment is prompted by reports

of incidents involving corrosion and fatigue cracking in transport

category airplanes that are approaching or have exceeded their economic

design goal; these incidents have jeopardized the airworthiness of the

affected airplanes. The actions specified by this AD are intended to

prevent degradation of the structural capabilities of the airplane due

to the problems associated with corrosion.

DATES: Effective October 11, 1994.

The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in

the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as

of October 11, 1994.

ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be

obtained from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707

Blagnac Cedex, France. This information may be examined at the Federal

Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules

Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of

the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Slotte, Aerospace Engineer,

Standardization Branch, ANM-113, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (206)

227-2797; fax (206) 227-1320.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness

directive (AD) that is applicable to Airbus Model A300 series airplanes

was published as a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in

the Federal Register on May 27, 1993 (58 FR 30722). That action

proposed to require the implementation of a corrosion prevention and

control program, either by revising the maintenance program or by

accomplishing specific inspection procedures.

Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate

in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to

the comments received.

One commenter supports the proposal.

Several commenters request that the proposed rule specify whether

or not the proposed requirements are applicable to Airbus Model A300-

600 series airplanes. These commenters consider that the rule should

not be applicable to the Model A300-600, since the rule is intended to

address problems associated with structural failure of aging airplanes,

and the Model A300-600 fleet is not close to reaching its economic

design goal. The FAA acknowledges that some clarification of the

applicability of the rule is warranted. The FAA did not intend for the

rule to be applicable to the Model A300-600. Therefore, to eliminate

any confusion that may arise among affected operators, the FAA has

revised the applicability of the final rule to indicate clearly that

the requirements of the rule are not applicable to Model A300-600

series airplanes.

Another commenter requests that NOTE 2 of the proposal be expanded

to explain the extent of FAA involvement in paragraphs (c), (d), (e),

and (f). The FAA does not consider that any additional explanation is

necessary. NOTE 2 specifically defines the term ``FAA'' for affected

operators conducting their operations under various parts of the

Federal Aviation Regulations. The information presented in NOTE 2 is

valid for each use of the term ``FAA'' throughout the AD.

This same commenter requests that, in order to ensure consistent

implementation of the program and to provide a reliable statistical

data base, the proposal be revised to indicate that credit for

completion of the initial task is limited to only those inspections

that are accomplished at a time beyond the implementation age (IA) for

the particular area. In support of this request, the commenter refers

to NOTE 7 of the proposal, which states that paragraph (a) does not

require inspection of any area that has not exceeded the implementation

age for that area. The FAA does not agree. If an operator elects to

perform an inspection prior to the IA for a certain area, that

inspection must then be repeated at the appropriate repeat interval

(RI). The FAA considers that this will ensure a consistent

implementation of the program.

In its comments to the notice, the manufacturer requests that the

FAA clarify the fact that the issuance of the revised Airbus Industrie

Document, ``A300 Corrosion Prevention and Control Program,'' was

intended only to help improve the understanding and handling of the

inspection procedures described in the baseline corrosion prevention

and control program (CPCP). However, the baseline program itself, as

detailed in the original issuance of that Document, was not changed in

the revised version. The FAA acknowledges this information.

The manufacturer also notes that the economic impact information

contained in the preamble to the notice presented the CPCP as if it

were a program separate from the affected operators' current

maintenance programs, and that the calculated costs would be

supplemental to those costs currently incurred through regular

maintenance practices. The commenter points out that many of the tasks

listed in the CPCP existed as part of operators' maintenance programs

prior to the issuance of the Airbus CPCP document (and, thus, prior to

the issuance of this AD). Therefore, the commenter considers that the

economic impact of the rule should be adjusted accordingly. The FAA

acknowledges this information, and has revised the economic impact

information, below, to clarify this aspect.

After careful review of the available data, including the comments

noted above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public

interest require the adoption of the rule with the changes previously

described. The FAA has determined that these changes will neither

increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of

the AD.

Economic Impact

The FAA estimates that 54 airplanes of U.S. registry will be

affected by this AD.

There are 50 corrosion inspection areas called out in the Airbus

Industrie Document, and it will take approximately 16 work hours per

area to accomplish the required actions. The average labor rate is

approximately $55 per work hour. Based on these figures, the total

impact of this AD on U.S. operators is approximately $2,376,000, or

$44,000 per airplane, for the initial 6-year inspection cycle. This

total cost impact figure is based on assumptions that no operator has

yet accomplished any of the requirements of this AD action, and that no

operator would accomplish those actions in the future if this AD were

not adopted.

The FAA points out that the total cost impact figure discussed

above is presented as if the actions required by this AD were to be

conducted as ``stand alone'' actions. However, in actual practice,

these actions will be accomplished coincidentally or in combination

with normally scheduled airplane inspections and other maintenance

program tasks. Some affected operators already have been performing

these actions as part of their regular maintenance program. Therefore,

the actual number of necessary ``additional'' work hours and associated

labor costs will be minimal in many instances. Additionally, any costs

associated with special airplane scheduling also will be minimal.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct

effects on the States, on the relationship between the national

government and the States, or on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in

accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final

rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (1) is

not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866;

(2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and

Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) will not have a

significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial

number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has been prepared for this action

and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained

from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by

reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of

the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. App. 1354(a), 1421 and 1423; 49 U.S.C.

106(g); and 14 CFR 11.89.

Sec. 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new

airworthiness directive:

94-18-02 Airbus: Amendment 39-9015. Docket 91-NM-23-AD.

Applicability: Model A300 series airplanes (excluding Model

A300-600 series), certificated in any category.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished

previously.

Note 1: This AD references Airbus Industrie Document, ``A300

Corrosion Prevention and Control Program,'' dated November 1992, for

corrosion instructions, compliance times, and reporting

requirements. In addition, this AD specifies inspection and

reporting requirements beyond those included in that Document. Where

there are differences between the AD and the Document, the AD

prevails.

Note 2: As used throughout this AD, the term ``the FAA'' is

defined differently for different operators, as follows: For those

operators complying with paragraph (a) of this AD, ``the FAA'' is

defined as ``the Manager of the Standardization Branch, ANM-113,

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate.'' For those operators operating

under Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) part 121 or 129 (14 CFR

part 121 or part 129), and complying with paragraph (b) of this AD,

``the FAA'' is defined as ``the cognizant Principal Maintenance

Inspector (PMI).'' For those operators operating under FAR part 91

or 125 (14 CFR part 91 or part 125), and complying with paragraph

(b) of this AD, ``the FAA'' is defined as ``the cognizant

Maintenance Inspector at the appropriate FAA Flight Standards

office.''

To prevent degradation of the structural capabilities of the

airplane due to the problems associated with corrosion damage,

accomplish the following:

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this AD, complete

each of the corrosion instructions specified in Section 5 of Airbus

Industrie Document, ``A300 Corrosion Prevention and Control

Program,'' dated November 1992 (hereinafter referred to as ``the

Document''), in accordance with the procedures of the Document, and

the schedule specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this AD.

Note 3: A ``corrosion instruction,'' as defined in Section 5 of

the Document, includes inspections; procedures for a corrective

action, including repairs, under identified circumstances;

application of corrosion inhibitors; and other follow-on actions.

Note 4: Corrosion instructions completed in accordance with the

Document before the effective date of this AD may be credited for

compliance with the initial corrosion instruction requirements of

paragraph (a)(1) of this AD.

Note 5: Where non-destructive inspection (NDI) methods are

employed, in accordance with Section 5 of the Document, the

standards and procedures used must be acceptable to the

Administrator in accordance with FAR section 43.13 (14 CFR 43.13).

Note 6: Procedures identified in the Document as ``informational

only'' are not required to be accomplished by this AD.

(1) Complete the initial corrosion instruction of each

``corrosion inspection area'' defined in Section 5 of the Document

as follows:

(i) For aircraft areas that have not yet reached the

``implementation age'' (IA) as of one year after the effective date

of this AD, initial compliance must occur no later than the IA plus

the ``repeat interval'' (RI).

(ii) For aircraft areas that have exceeded the IA as of one year

after the effective date of this AD, initial compliance must occur

within the RI for the area, measured from a date one year after the

effective date of this AD.

(iii) For airplanes that are 20 years old or older as of one

year after the effective date of this AD, initial compliance must

occur for all areas within one RI, or within six years, measured

from a date one year after the effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs first.

(iv) Notwithstanding paragraphs (a)(1)(i), (a)(1)(ii), and

(a)(1)(iii) of this AD, accomplish the initial task, for each area

that exceeds the IA for that area, at a minimum rate of one such

area per year, beginning one year after the effective date of this

AD.

-Note 7: This paragraph does not require inspection of any area

that has not exceeded the IA for that area.

Note 8: This minimum rate requirement may cause a hardship on

some small operators. In those circumstances, requests for

adjustments to the implementation rate will be evaluated on a case-

by-case basis under the provisions of paragraph (h) of this AD.

(2) Repeat each corrosion instruction at a time interval not to

exceed the RI specified in the Document for that task.

(b) As an alternative to the requirements of paragraph (a) of

this AD: Prior to one year after the effective date of this AD,

revise the FAA-approved maintenance/inspection program to include

the corrosion prevention and control program specified in the

Document; or to include an equivalent program that is approved by

the FAA. In all cases, the initial corrosion instruction for each

corrosion inspection area must be completed in accordance with the

compliance schedule specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this AD.

(1) Any operator complying with paragraph (b) of this AD may use

an alternative recordkeeping method to that otherwise required by

FAR section 91.417 (14 CFR 91.417) or section 121.380 (14 CFR

121.380) for the actions required by this AD, provided it is

approved by the FAA and is included in a revision to the FAA-

approved maintenance/inspection program.

(2) Subsequent to the accomplishment of the initial corrosion

instruction, extensions of RI's specified in the Document must be

approved by the FAA.

(c) To accommodate unanticipated scheduling requirements, it is

acceptable for an RI to be increased by up to 10%, but not to exceed

6 months. The FAA must be informed, in writing, of any such

extension within 30 days after such adjustment of the schedule.

(d)(1) If, as a result of any inspection conducted in accordance

with paragraph (a) or (b) of this AD, Level 3 corrosion is

determined to exist in any area, accomplish either paragraph

(d)(1)(i) or (d)(1)(ii) of this AD within 7 days after such

determination:

(i) Submit a report of that determination to the FAA and

complete the corrosion instruction in the affected areas on all

Model A300 series airplanes in the operator's fleet; or

(ii) Submit to the FAA for approval one of the following:

(A) A proposed schedule for performing the corrosion

instructions in the affected areas on the remaining Model A300

series airplanes in the operator's fleet, which is adequate to

ensure that any other Level 3 corrosion is detected in a timely

manner, along with substantiating data for that schedule; or

(B) Data substantiating that the Level 3 corrosion found is an

isolated occurrence.

Note 9: Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 2 of the

Document, which would permit corrosion that otherwise meets the

definition of Level 3 corrosion (i.e., which is determined to be a

potentially urgent airworthiness concern requiring expeditious

action) to be treated as Level 1 if the operator finds that it ``can

be attributed to an event not typical of the operator's usage of

other airplanes in the same fleet,'' this paragraph requires that

data substantiating any such finding be submitted to the FAA for

approval.

(2) The FAA may impose schedules other than those proposed, upon

finding that such changes are necessary to ensure that any other

Level 3 corrosion is detected in a timely manner.

(3) Within the time schedule approved under paragraph (d)(1) or

(d)(2) of this AD, accomplish the corrosion instructions in the

affected areas of the remaining Model A300 series airplanes in the

operator's fleet.

(e) If, as a result of any inspection, after the initial

inspection, conducted in accordance with paragraph (a) or (b) of

this AD, it is determined that corrosion findings exceed Level 1 in

any area, within 60 days after such determination a means approved

by the FAA must be implemented to reduce future findings of

corrosion in that area to Level 1 or better.

(f) Before any operator places into service any airplane subject

to the requirements of this AD, a schedule for the accomplishment of

corrosion instructions required by this AD must be established in

accordance with paragraph (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this AD, as

applicable:

(1) For airplanes previously maintained in accordance with this

AD, the first corrosion instruction in each area to be performed by

the new operator must be accomplished in accordance with the

previous operator's schedule or with the new operator's schedule,

whichever would result in the earlier accomplishment date for that

task. After each corrosion instruction has been performed once, each

subsequent task must be performed in accordance with the new

operator's schedule.

(2) For airplanes that have not been previously maintained in

accordance with this AD, the first corrosion instruction for each

area to be performed by the new operator must be accomplished prior

to further flight or in accordance with a schedule approved by the

FAA.

(g) Reports of Level 2 and Level 3 corrosion must be submitted

at least quarterly to Airbus in accordance with Section 6 of the

Document.

Note 10: Reporting of Level 2 and Level 3 corrosion found as a

result of any opportunity inspection is highly desirable.

(h) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the

compliance time, which provides an acceptable level of safety, may

be used when approved by the Manager, Standardization Branch, ANM-

113, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators shall submit

their requests through the cognizant Maintenance Inspector at the

appropriate FAA Flight Standards office, who may concur or comment

and then send it to the Manager, Los Angeles ACO.

Note 11: Information concerning the existence of approved

alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Standardization Branch, ANM-113.

(i) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with

Secs. 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where the

requirements of this AD can be accomplished.

(j) Reports of corrosion inspection results required by this AD

have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)

under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and have been assigned OMB Control Number 2120-

0056.

(k) The actions shall be done in accordance with Airbus

Industrie Document, ``A300 Corrosion Prevention and Control

Program,'' dated November 1992. This incorporation by reference was

approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with

5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from

Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac

Cedex, France. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or

at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street,

NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

(l) This amendment becomes effective on October 11, 1994.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 19, 1994.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification

Service.

[FR Doc. 94-20995 Filed 9-8-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-U