# AD 2002-11-04: Attachment Holes on Left and Right Internal Angles of Wing Center Box - Type: Airworthiness directive - Status: Historical - Products: Airbus A300 B4-600 Series (all), A300 B4-600R Series (all) and A300F4-605R - Effective: July 8, 2002 - Published: June 3, 2002, 67 FR 38193–38195 - Issued: May 22, 2002 - Issued as: Final rule - Supersedes: [AD 97-16-06](https://openairdocs.org/ad/97-16-06) - Superseded by: [AD 2005-23-08](https://openairdocs.org/ad/2005-23-08) - Product type: Aircraft, Large airplane - Amendment: 39-12765 - Docket: 99-NM-322-AD - Registered aircraft: 42 may be affected, by airframe or engine model (OpenAirDocs) - Official PDF: https://openairdocs.org/files/sha256/ab/05/ab0548a2249aa631b01349d66c8dc869a82c298f32307431f90723867399f61c (from https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2002-06-03/pdf/02-13422.pdf) - Federal Register: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2002/06/03/02-13422/airworthiness-directives-airbus-model-a300-b4-600-and-a300-b4-600r-series-airplanes-and-model-a300 - FAA DRS: https://drs.faa.gov/browse/excelExternalWindow/9E127F58C8765CB986256BCD004C2A42.0001 - DRS record last changed: August 7, 2025 - Page: https://openairdocs.org/ad/2002-11-04 ## Summary This amendment supersedes an existing airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to all Airbus Model A300 B4-600, A300 B4-600R, and A300 F4-600R series airplanes (A300-600), that currently requires an inspection to detect cracks of certain attachment holes; and installation of new fasteners and follow-on inspections or repair if necessary. This amendment requires repetitive inspections to detect cracks of certain attachment holes, installation of new fasteners, follow-on inspections or repair if necessary, and modification of the angle fittings of frame FR47. This amendment revises the applicability of the existing AD. The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent fatigue cracking of the forward fitting of fuselage frame FR47, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the frame. ## The airworthiness directive ### 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: 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: ## Rule preamble ### Dates Effective July 8, 2002. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of July 8, 2002. ### 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 Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 227-2125; fax (425) 227-1149. ### SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) by superseding AD 97-16-06, amendment 39-10097 (62 FR 44888, August 25, 1997), which is applicable to all Airbus Model A300 B4-600, A300 B4-600R, and A300 F4-600R series airplanes (A300-600), was published as a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register on November 19, 2001 (66 FR 57896). The supplemental NPRM proposed to require repetitive inspections to detect cracks of certain attachment holes, installation of new fasteners, follow-on inspections or repair if necessary, and modification of the angle fittings of frame FR47. ### Comments Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to the comments received from the single commenter on the supplemental NPRM. The commenter generally supports the proposal. ### Request To Allow Use of Alternative Fasteners The commenter requests that the supplemental NPRM be revised to approve the use of alternative fasteners listed in the Airbus A300 Structural Repair Manual (SRM), Chapter 51-40-32 (“Fastener Alternative—Metallic Structure”). This would relieve operators of initiating, and the FAA of approving, requests for alternative methods of compliance to use fasteners not specified by the AD. We do not concur with this request. Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6049, Revision 4, dated July 27, 2000, is cited in paragraph (a) of the supplemental NPRM (and this final rule) as the appropriate source of service information for the rotating probe inspection of the internal angles of the wing center box. In consonance with the parallel French airworthiness directive, this AD requires operators to follow the specifications of that service bulletin. SRM Chapter 51-40-32 is not listed as a reference in the service bulletin; therefore, this AD does not provide credit for the use of fasteners identified in that SRM chapter. However, under the provisions of paragraph (f)(1) of this final rule, as the commenter suggests, the FAA may approve requests to use alternative fasteners if data are submitted to substantiate that such alternative fasteners would provide an acceptable level of safety. Operators should note that SRM Chapter 51-40-31, which is listed as a reference in Service Bulletin A300-57-6049, does allow different, oversized fasteners to be installed, which will provide operators some additional flexibility in accomplishing the requirements of this AD. Because SRM Chapter 51-40-31 is cited in the service bulletin, use of the fasteners identified in that chapter is implicitly allowed by this AD; therefore, no change to the final rule is necessary in this regard. ### Coordination of Global Review The commenter suggests that the FAA, Airbus, and the DGAC perform a global review of other areas of the A300-600 wing box area that are also subject to the inspection requirements of existing ADs. According to the commenter, reviewing the whole box section, instead of concentrating on one area at a time, may enhance safety of flight. We recognize the potential value of a global approach in addressing multiple inspections of the same general area, and we will take the commenter's suggestion under advisement. However, in this case the identified unsafe condition is a more immediate concern that should be addressed in a unique AD. Coordinating a global review of related ADs would further delay issuance of this AD, which, in any event, is not the proper forum to address such a review. No change to the final rule is necessary in this regard. ### Request To Revise Compliance Times The commenter requests that a single threshold/interval be established for all of the inspections of the wing center section currently required by different ADs. These ADs have different inspection thresholds, and the required actions are labor-intensive. Coinciding compliance times would greatly reduce the downtime that would be required if the actions of each AD are performed separately. We do not concur with the request. The compliance times and requirements of each related AD are based on the manufacturer's case-by-case analysis of each individual structural condition. Operators are responsible for scheduling the actions required for each applicable AD. No change to the final rule is necessary in this regard. ### Conclusion 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 change described previously. The FAA has determined that this change will neither increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD. ### Interim Action This is considered to be interim action. The manufacturer is currently developing procedures for an inspection of the repaired and reinforced area on those airplanes on which the actions of Service Bulletin A300-57-6069 have been accomplished. If the FAA finds these actions appropriate to address the unsafe condition identified by this AD, the FAA may consider further rulemaking once these inspection procedures are developed, approved, and available. ### Cost Impact The FAA estimates that 74 airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected by this AD. The average labor rate is $60 per work hour. The FAA provides cost estimates for the actions specified by this AD, as follows: | Action | Work hours | Parts cost | Per-airplane cost | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Inspection per paragraph (a) | 7 or 13 (depending on configuration) | $0 | $420 or $780, per inspection. | | Inspection per paragraph (b) | 30 | $6,637 or $19,091, depending on kit required | $8,437 or $20,891, per inspection. | | Modification per paragraph (c) | 65 to 365 | $3,370 | $7,270 to $25,270. | The cost impact figures discussed above are 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 cost impact figures discussed in AD rulemaking actions represent only the time necessary to perform the specific actions actually required by the AD. These figures typically do not include incidental costs, such as the time required to gain access and close up, planning time, or time necessitated by other administrative actions. ### Regulatory Impact The regulations adopted herein will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, it is determined that this final rule does not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. 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. ## Affected data sheets (1) (OpenAirDocs) The type certificate data sheets whose models the AD names. - [TCDS A35EU](https://openairdocs.org/tcds/A35EU): Airbus SAS; names 1 of 17 models: A300 F4-605R ## Registered aircraft it may apply to (OpenAirDocs) Matched by airframe and engine model; the AD's applicability may narrow it by serial number, part number or equipment. - Aircraft: 42 (42 by airframe model, 0 by engine model) - Makers: Airbus Industrie 36, Airbus 6 Models with the most aircraft: - [Airbus Industrie A300 F4-605R](https://openairdocs.org/model/airbus-industrie-a300-f4-605r): 36 aircraft (airframe model) - [Airbus A300 F4-605R](https://openairdocs.org/model/airbus-a300-f4-605r): 6 aircraft (airframe model) All 2 models: https://openairdocs.org/ad/2002-11-04/models.md Every aircraft: https://openairdocs.org/ad/2002-11-04/aircraft.md ## Related documents - [AD 97-16-06](https://openairdocs.org/ad/97-16-06) (historical): Inspect Forward Fitting Of Frame 47 · Airbus Industrie A300 Model B4-600 Series, Industrie A300 Model B4-600R Series, Industrie A300 Model F4-600R Series and 7 more. Effective Sep 5, 1997. Replaced by this AD - [AD 2005-23-08](https://openairdocs.org/ad/2005-23-08) (historical): Angle fittings of fuselage frame FR47 · Airbus A300 B4-601, A300 B4-603, A300 B4-605R and 5 more. Effective Dec 19, 2005. Supersedes this AD - [Proposed rule 99-NM-322-AD](https://openairdocs.org/proposed/99-NM-322-AD): Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), published Jul 20, 2000 - [Proposed rule 99-NM-322-AD](https://openairdocs.org/proposed/99-NM-322-AD): Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking; reopening of comment period, published Nov 19, 2001 Its text cites no advisory circulars or STCs. --- OpenAirDocs.org is an independent research project of [Contrail Labs](https://contraillabs.com/). It is not affiliated with the FAA or the NTSB. Source documents are U.S. government works in the public domain.