Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes, 33809-33817 [2018-13802]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 18, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
coverage level for that crop in that
county; or
(2) For a NAP eligible crop:
(i) NAP coverage with a coverage level
of 60 percent, if available for the
applicable crop year, or NAP
catastrophic coverage if NAP coverage is
not offered at a 60 percent coverage
level for that crop year.
(ii) Participants who exceed the
average adjusted gross income
limitation for NAP payment eligibility 1
for the applicable crop year may meet
the purchase requirement specified in
paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section by
purchasing Whole-Farm Revenue
Protection crop insurance coverage, if
eligible, or paying the NAP service fee
and premium even though the
participant will not be eligible to receive
a NAP payment due to the average
adjusted gross income limit but will be
eligible for the WHIP payment.
(b) For the first 2 consecutive
insurance years for which crop
insurance is available after the
enrollment period for 2017 WHIP ends,
but no later than the 2021 crop year, any
participant who receives 2017 WHIP
payments for a tree, bush, or vine loss
must purchase a plan of insurance for
the tree, bush, or vine with at least a 60
percent coverage level.
(c) If a producer fails to obtain crop
insurance or NAP coverage as required
in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section,
the producer must reimburse FSA for
the full amount of 2017 WHIP payment
plus interest that the producer received
for that crop, tree, bush, or vine loss. A
producer will only be considered to
have obtained NAP coverage for the
purposes of this section if the
participant applied and payed the
requisite NAP service fee and paid any
applicable premium by the applicable
deadline and completed all program
requirements, including filing an
acreage report as may be required under
such coverage agreement.
Richard Fordyce,
Administrator, Farm Service Agency.
[FR Doc. 2018–15346 Filed 7–16–18; 8:45 am]
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
BILLING CODE 3410–05–P
1 See
§§ 1400.500(a) and 1400.1(a)(4) of this title.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Jul 17, 2018
Jkt 244001
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2017–1102; Product
Identifier 2017–NM–078–AD; Amendment
39–19320; AD 2018–13–08]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are superseding
Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2016–01–
11, which applied to certain Airbus
Model A320–211, –212, and –231
airplanes. AD 2016–01–11 required
repetitive inspections for cracking of the
radius of the front spar vertical stringers
and the horizontal floor beam on frame
(FR) 36, repetitive inspections for
cracking of the fastener holes of the
front spar vertical stringers on FR 36,
and repair if necessary. This AD adds
new thresholds and intervals for the
repetitive inspections; requires, for
certain airplanes, a potential
terminating action modification of the
center wing box area; and expands the
applicability. This AD was prompted by
a report that, during a center fuselage
certification full-scale fatigue test,
cracks were found on the front spar
vertical stringer at a certain frame. This
AD was also prompted by a
determination that, during further
investigations of the frame as part of the
widespread fatigue damage (WFD)
campaign, certain inspection
compliance times have to be revised and
new inspections and a new potential
terminating action modification have to
be introduced. We are issuing this AD
to address the unsafe condition on these
products.
DATES: This AD is effective August 22,
2018.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of certain publications listed in this AD
as of August 22, 2018.
ADDRESSES: For service information
identified in this final rule, contact
Airbus, Airworthiness Office–EIAS,
Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine No: 2,
31700 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 Standards Branch, 2200
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
33809
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 206–231–3195.
It is also available on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA–2017–
1102.
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–2017–
1102; 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 AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the
Docket Office (telephone 800–647–5527)
is Docket Management Facility, U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M–30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport
Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone and fax 206–231–3223.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to supersede AD 2016–01–11,
Amendment 39–18370 (81 FR 3316,
January 21, 2016) (‘‘AD 2016–01–11’’).
AD 2016–01–11 applied to certain
Airbus Model A320–211, –212, and
–231 airplanes. The NPRM published in
the Federal Register on December 13,
2017 (82 FR 58566). The NPRM was
prompted by a report that, during a
center fuselage certification full-scale
fatigue test, cracks were found on the
front spar vertical stringer at a certain
frame. The NPRM proposed to continue
to require repetitive inspections for
cracking of the radius of the front spar
vertical stringers and the horizontal
floor beam on FR 36, repetitive
inspections for cracking of the fastener
holes of the front spar vertical stringers
on FR 36, and repair if necessary. The
NPRM also proposed to add new
thresholds and intervals for the
repetitive inspections; require, for
certain airplanes, a potential
terminating action modification of the
center wing box area; and expand the
applicability. We are issuing this AD to
address fatigue cracking of the front spar
vertical stringers on the wings, which
E:\FR\FM\18JYR1.SGM
18JYR1
33810
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 18, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
could result in the reduced structural
integrity of the airplane.
The European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA), which is the Technical Agent
for the Member States of the European
Union, has issued EASA AD 2017–0099,
dated June 8, 2017 (referred to after this
as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the
MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition
for certain Airbus Model A318 series
airplanes; Model A319 series airplanes;
Model A320–211, –212, –214, –216,
–231, –232, and –233 airplanes; and
Model A321 series airplanes. The MCAI
states:
During centre fuselage certification fullscale fatigue test, cracks were found on the
front vertical stringer at frame (FR) 36.
Analysis of these findings indicated that a
number of in-service aeroplanes could be
similarly affected.
This condition, if not detected and
corrected, could lead to crack propagation
and consequent deterioration of the
structural integrity of the aeroplane.
To address this potential unsafe condition,
Airbus issued Airbus Service Bulletin (SB)
A320–57–1016 to provide inspection
instructions, and, consequently, [Direction
´ ´
Generale de l’Aviation Civile] DGAC France
issued AD 97–311–105 [which corresponded
to FAA AD 98–18–26, Amendment 39–10742
(63 FR 47423, September 8, 1998)] to require
those repetitive [high frequency eddy current
(HFEC)] inspections [for cracking]. At the
same time, modification in accordance with
Airbus SB A320–57–1017 was introduced as
(optional) terminating action for the
repetitive inspections * * *.
After that [French] AD was issued, and
following new analysis, modification per
Airbus SB A320–57–1017 was no longer
considered to be terminating action for the
repetitive inspections as required by DGAC
France AD 97–311–105. Aeroplanes with
[manufacturer serial number] MSN 0080 up
to MSN 0155 inclusive were delivered with
the addition of a 5 [millimeter] mm thick
light alloy shim under the heads of 2
fasteners at the top end of the front spar
vertical stringers (Airbus mod 21290P1546,
which is the production line equivalent to inservice modification through Airbus SB
A320–57–1017). Aeroplanes with MSN 0156
or higher are delivered with vertical
stiffeners of the forward wing spar upper end
with stiffener cap thickness increased from 4
to 6 mm (Airbus mod 21290P1547).
Prompted by these findings, Airbus issued
SB A320–57–1178 Revision 01 to introduce
new repetitive inspections and,
consequently, EASA issued AD 2014–0069
[which corresponds to FAA AD 2016–01–11],
superseding DGAC France AD 97–311–105 to
require the new repetitive inspections, and,
depending on findings, accomplishment of
applicable corrective action(s).
Since [EASA] AD 2014–0069 was issued,
further investigations in the frame of the
Widespread Fatigue Damage (WFD)
campaign identified that some repetitive
inspection thresholds and intervals have to
be revised or introduced, and a new
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Jul 17, 2018
Jkt 244001
[potential] terminating action modification
has been designed.
For the reasons described above, this
[EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA
AD 2014–0069, which is superseded, revises
and introduces thresholds and intervals for
the repetitive inspections, [introduces a
potential terminating action modification,]
and expands the Applicability.
Required actions also include
reporting. Although this AD does not
explicitly restate the requirements of AD
2016–01–11, it retains certain
requirements of AD 2016–01–11. Those
requirements are referenced in Airbus
Service Bulletin A320–57–1178,
Revision 03, including only Appendix
03, both dated November 29, 2016.
This service information is identified
in ‘‘Related Service Information under 1
CFR part 51,’’ in this preamble and in
paragraph (i)(1) of this AD. 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–2017–
1102.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to
participate in developing this AD. The
following presents the comments
received on the NPRM and the FAA’s
response to each comment.
Support for the NPRM
United Airlines (UAL) stated that it
agrees with the intent of the NPRM.
Request To Change Costs of Compliance
Section
Delta Airlines (DAL) requested that
the Costs of Compliance section of the
proposed AD be revised to include the
costs for reporting inspection findings
and for modifying the airplane as
specified in Airbus Service Bulletin
A320–57–1200. DAL stated that the cost
of reporting, in addition to the cost for
the modification has been significantly
underestimated in the cost section of the
proposed AD. DAL noted that it takes 2
work-hours per airplane to do the steps
for reporting, in addition to numerous
work-hours for setup time. DAL pointed
out that the proposed AD mandates two
service bulletins, and the cost of both
should be included in the proposed AD.
DAL explained that the kit cost for the
modification is $55,360 (depending on
configuration), and the labor is
approximately 137 work-hours. DAL
stated that the cost does not reflect lost
revenue due to removing the airplane
from service outside of the normal
maintenance schedule. Given all of
these factors, DAL asserted that the true
cost of the proposed AD on operators
should be as follows.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
• For the inspection provided in
Airbus Service Bulletin A320–57–1178:
$1,947,850 + $232,275 for reporting.
• For the modification provided in
Airbus Service bulletin A320–57–1200:
$54,609,075 + $232,275 for reporting.
• Total cost to industry is:
$57,021,475.
We partially agree. We do not agree to
increase the work-hours for reporting;
however. We estimate only the time
necessary to submit a report (per each
response), since the reporting
information would be obtained when
accomplishing the inspection(s) in the
service bulletin(s). However, we do
agree to include the costs for the
modification for certain airplanes
specified in Airbus Service Bulletin
A320–57–1200, dated November 20,
2015, which will result in a total fleet
cost of $1,107,050 or $110,705 per
product, for the basic requirement of
this AD. We have changed the ‘‘Costs of
Compliance’’ section of this final rule
accordingly.
Request To Clarify Certain
Requirements in Table 1 to Paragraphs
(g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of the Proposed AD
UAL asked that we revise table 1 to
paragraphs (g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of the
proposed AD to clarify that Airbus
modification (Mod) 21290P1546 is
limited to airplanes with manufacturer
serial numbers (MSN) 0080 up to MSN
0155 inclusive. UAL also asked that
another clarification be added to table 1
to specify that Mod 21290P1547 is
effective for airplanes with MSN 0156 or
higher, which were delivered with
vertical stiffeners of the forward wing
spar upper end with stiffener cap
thickness increased from 4 to 6 mm.
UAL stated that those airplanes were
delivered with the addition of a 5
millimeter (mm) thick light alloy shim
under the heads of two fasteners at the
top end of the front spar vertical
stringers. UAL added that Mod
21290P1546 is the production line
equivalent to in-service modifications
through Airbus Service Bulletin A320–
57–1017.
We do not agree with the commenter’s
requests. Figure 1 to paragraphs (g), (h),
(i)(1), and (j) of this AD (table 1 to
paragraphs (g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of the
proposed AD) defines configurations by
whether or not certain modifications
were done and certain service bulletins
were embodied. Airbus Service Bulletin
A320–57–1017 provides information
regarding Mod 21290P1546 and Mod
21290P1547 that identifies the specific
configuration of the airplanes. The
definitions in figure 1 to paragraphs (g),
(h), (i)(1), and (j) of this AD and figure
2 to paragraphs (g) and (i)(1) of this AD
E:\FR\FM\18JYR1.SGM
18JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 18, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
correspond to the airplane configuration
definitions provided in Appendix 1 of
EASA AD 2017–0099, dated June 8,
2017. Therefore, we have not changed
this AD in this regard.
Request To Extend Compliance Times
for Configuration 003 Airplanes
DAL asked that we extend the
proposed initial compliance time for
Configuration 003 airplanes identified
in figure 3 to paragraph (i)(1) of the
proposed AD. DAL asked that the initial
inspection be extended to 24 months, or
at a minimum, that the flight-hour limit
be increased to 1,500 flight hours, since
the initial inspection is dependent on
flight cycles, not flight hours. DAL
provided the following options for the
proposed compliance time: (1) Next
scheduled . . ., (2) 12-month . . ., or (3)
4-months. . . . DAL stated that it
currently operates five airplanes, which
are Configuration 003 on which the
threshold of ‘‘Before exceeding 32,000
flight cycles or 64,000 flight hours since
airplane first flight’’ for the initial
inspection has been exceeded. DAL
added that, at current fleet utilization
rates, it will require the inspections be
done within approximately 85 days after
the effective date of the AD, due to the
flight-hour limit. DAL noted that this
will necessitate a special maintenance
visit. DAL also stated that its
maintenance program requires a
maintenance visit every 24 months, and
added that most, if not all, of the
airplanes will not visit a hangar within
the next 3 months.
DAL asked that the compliance time
be extended to 6 years after the effective
date of the AD, with supplemental
inspections for accomplishing the
modification required by paragraph (j)
of the proposed AD. At a minimum,
DAL requested relief by allowing for an
inspection, as specified in Airbus
Service Bulletin A320–57–1178,
Revision 03, dated November 29, 2016,
at 2-year intervals until the heavy ‘‘H’’
check can be reached. DAL stated that
modifications to Configuration 003
airplanes require incorporation of
Airbus Service Bulletin A320–57–1200,
dated November 20, 2015, prior to
reaching 48,000 flight cycles or 96,000
flight hours, whichever occurs first.
DAL stated that, at its current utilization
rate, this modification would be
required in approximately 4 years;
however, its current heavy maintenance
‘‘H’’ checks are scheduled at 6-year
intervals. DAL noted that this is a
minimal risk, since Configuration 003
airplanes will receive supplemental
inspections within a short time after the
effective date specified in paragraph
(i)(1) of the proposed AD.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Jul 17, 2018
Jkt 244001
We do not agree with the commenter’s
requests to extend the specified
compliance times. The compliance
times for the actions specified in this
AD for addressing widespread fatigue
damage (WFD) were established to
ensure that affected structure is replaced
before WFD develops. Standard
inspection techniques cannot be relied
on to detect WFD before it becomes a
hazard to flight. We will not grant any
extensions of the compliance time to
complete any AD-mandated service
bulletin related to WFD without
extensive new data that would
substantiate and clearly warrant such an
extension. Therefore, we have not
changed this AD in this regard.
Request To Allow Alternative Method
of Compliance (AMOC) in Lieu of
Contacting the Manufacturer for Repair
Instructions
DAL asked that an allowance be made
under the provisions of paragraph (o)(2)
of the proposed AD (and future ADs) for
contacting Airbus for any deviations to
the instructions contained within the
service bulletins required in paragraphs
(i) and (j) of the proposed AD, and to be
able to use their EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA) approvals
without seeking separate and redundant
FAA AMOCs. DAL stated that as
airplanes are scheduled for maintenance
to comply with the proposed AD, the
operator may discover that the Airbus
service information contains errors that
can affect compliance with the actions
in the proposed AD. DAL did not state
there are any known errors in the
service information required in
paragraphs (i) and (j) of the proposed
AD. DAL added that, although the
proposed AD provides an option to
receive approval from the Manager,
International Section, Transport
Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA, or
Airbus’s EASA DOA; as specified in
paragraph (o)(2) of the proposed AD, no
such allowance is provided for receiving
approval for deviations from the service
information. DAL noted that past
experience has shown that the FAA is
unable to provide AMOC approvals
within 2 days after receiving the
request, which could result in
grounding of airplanes. DAL suggested
using the language in paragraph (6) of
the MCAI.
We do not agree with the commenter’s
request. Paragraph (o)(2) of this AD,
‘‘Contacting the Manufacturer,’’ only
addresses the requirement to contact the
manufacturer for corrective actions for
the identified unsafe condition and does
not cover deviations from the
requirements of AD-mandated actions.
We do not agree to expand paragraph
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
33811
(o)(2) of this AD to include such
deviations because we need to ensure
that any deviations from the
requirements of AD-mandated actions
are properly reviewed to adequately
address the unsafe condition. Regarding
paragraph (6) of the MCAI, if an
operator is not able to comply with
service information that is required by
an AD, then the operator must request
an AMOC in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (o)(1)
of this AD.
We also note that, although we cannot
guarantee AMOC approvals within 2
business days, we have provided AMOC
approvals to U.S. operators, including
DAL, within 24 hours of receiving the
request, provided operators submit a
complete AMOC package with
substantiation and explanation of the
urgency, such as, but not limited to, a
disruption in operation. Guidance for
submitting AMOCs is available in FAA
Advisory Circular (AC) 39–10. We also
recommend that operators work with
the original equipment manufacturers to
address errors in service information as
part of AD planning, in addition to
submitting comments to the NPRM
denoting any errors in the service
information, so that corrections to
methods of compliance (MOC) can be
addressed in the FAA final rule.
Additional guidance for operators on
AD management can be found in FAA
AC 39–9. We have not changed this AD
in this regard.
Requests To Change or Delete Reporting
Requirement
DAL and UAL asked that the
reporting of findings (positive or
negative), as specified in the reporting
requirement in paragraphs (n) and (o)(4)
of the proposed AD, be limited to
positive findings only, or be removed
entirely. DAL stated that it will require
a significant amount of work to collect,
collate, and disseminate the requested
data to Airbus, resulting in little or no
benefit to the airworthiness of the
airplane. DAL added that any findings
will require transmission of findings to
engineering from maintenance prior to
submission to Airbus, which could
result in a time lag and opportunities for
error. DAL and UAL asserted that all
positive findings are already reported to
Airbus as part of the repair process and
Airbus has the means to determine
negative findings, so reporting is a
duplicative burden on operators.
Further, DAL argued that the Paperwork
Reduction Act (https://www.gpo.gov/
fdsys/pkg/PLAW-104publ13/html/
PLAW-104publ13.htm) is meant to
reduce the burden placed on public
entities from government agencies when
E:\FR\FM\18JYR1.SGM
18JYR1
33812
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 18, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
the information is obtainable from other
sources, especially for the convenience
of a foreign business. Additionally, DAL
notes that only individuals that have the
required access—controlled by Airbus—
may submit reports, and provided data
about what is required in order to
submit a report (i.e., work-hours for the
various steps in the process). DAL
asserted that the cost of reporting on its
operation would be $518,710, and that
Airbus, EASA, nor the FAA have
demonstrated in any of the service
documents why the reporting
requirement in this AD is necessary.
We agree to limit the reporting
requirement to positive findings only for
the reasons provided by the
commenters. We have changed
paragraph (n) of this AD accordingly.
We do not agree to remove the
reporting requirement in this AD
because the inspection reports will
enable the manufacturer to obtain better
insight into the nature, cause, and
extent of the cracking, and eventually to
develop final corrective action to
address the unsafe condition. Once final
corrective action has been identified, we
might consider further rulemaking.
Clarification of Actions That Prompted
This AD
We have revised the SUMMARY section
of this final rule and paragraph (e) of
this AD to clarify what prompted this
AD. In addition to the report of cracks
on the front spar vertical stringer at a
certain frame, this AD was prompted by
a determination that, during further
investigations of the frame as part of the
WFD campaign, certain inspection
compliance times have to be revised and
new inspections and a new potential
terminating action modification have to
be introduced.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
Conclusion
We reviewed the available data,
including the comments received, and
determined that air safety and the
public interest require adopting this AD
with the changes described previously
and minor editorial changes. We have
determined that these changes:
• Are consistent with the intent that
was proposed in the NPRM for
correcting the unsafe condition; and
• Do not add any additional burden
upon the public than was already
proposed in the NPRM.
We also determined that these
changes will not increase the economic
burden on any operator or increase the
scope of this AD.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Jul 17, 2018
Jkt 244001
Related Service Information Under 1
CFR Part 51
Airbus has issued the following
service information.
• Service Bulletin A320–57–1178,
Revision 03, including only Appendix
03, both dated November 29, 2016. The
service information describes
procedures for a rototest inspection for
cracking of the radius of the front spar
vertical stringers on FR 36, a HFEC for
cracking of the horizontal floor beam on
FR 36, and an HFEC inspection for
cracking of the fastener holes of the
front spar vertical stringers on FR 36.
• Service Bulletin A320–57–1200,
dated November 20, 2015. The service
information describes procedures for
modifying the center wing box area,
which includes related investigative and
corrective actions. Related investigative
actions include an HFEC inspection on
the radius of the rib flanges, a rototest
inspection of the fastener holes, detailed
and HFEC inspections for cracking on
the cut edges, detailed and rototest
inspections on all open fastener holes,
and an inspection to determine if
secondary structure brackets are
installed. Corrective action includes
reworking the secondary structure
bracket and repair.
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.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD affects 815
airplanes of U.S. registry.
The actions required by AD 2016–01–
11, take about 24 work-hours per
inspection cycle per product, at an
average labor rate of $85 per work-hour.
Based on these figures, the estimated
cost of the actions that are required by
AD 2016–01–11 is $2,040 per inspection
cycle per product.
We also estimate that it takes about
273 work-hours per product to comply
with the basic requirements of this AD
and 1 work-hour for reporting per
response. The average labor rate is $85
per work-hour. Required parts cost
about $87,500 per product. Based on
these figures, we estimate the cost of
this AD on affected U.S. operators of
certain airplanes specified in the service
information to be $1,107,050 or
$110,705 per product.
We have received no definitive data
that would enable us to provide cost
estimates for the repair of cracking
specified in this AD.
Paperwork Reduction Act
A federal agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
respond to, nor shall a person be subject
to penalty for failure to comply with a
collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork
Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a current valid
OMB control number. The control
number for the collection of information
required by this AD is 2120–0056. The
paperwork cost associated with this AD
has been detailed in the Costs of
Compliance section of this document
and includes time for reviewing
instructions, as well as completing and
reviewing the collection of information.
Therefore, all reporting associated with
this AD is mandatory. Comments
concerning the accuracy of this burden
and suggestions for reducing the burden
should be directed to the FAA at 800
Independence Ave. SW, Washington,
DC 20591, ATTN: Information
Collection Clearance Officer, AES–200.
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.
This AD is issued in accordance with
authority delegated by the Executive
Director, Aircraft Certification Service,
as authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C.
In accordance with that order, issuance
of ADs is normally a function of the
Compliance and Airworthiness
Division, but during this transition
period, the Executive Director has
delegated the authority to issue ADs
applicable to transport category
airplanes to the Director of the System
Oversight Division.
Regulatory Findings
We determined that this AD will not
have federalism implications under
Executive Order 13132. This AD will
not have a substantial direct effect on
the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States,
E:\FR\FM\18JYR1.SGM
18JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 18, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as
follows:
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
■
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Jul 17, 2018
Jkt 244001
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by
removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2016–01–11, Amendment 39–18370 (81
FR 3316, January 21, 2016), and adding
the following new AD:
■
2018–13–08 Airbus: Amendment 39–19320;
Docket No. FAA–2017–1102; Product
Identifier 2017–NM–078–AD.
(a) Effective Date
This AD is effective August 22, 2018.
(b) Affected ADs
This AD replaces AD 2016–01–11,
Amendment 39–18370 (81 FR 3316, January
21, 2016) (‘‘AD 2016–01–11’’).
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to Airbus Model A318–
111, –112, –121, and –122 airplanes; Model
A319–111, –112, –113, –114, –115, –131,
–132, and –133 airplanes; Model A320–211,
–212, –214, –216, –231, –232, and –233
airplanes; and Model A321–111, –112, –131,
–211, –212, –213, –231, and –232 airplanes;
certificated in any category; all manufacturer
serial numbers, except airplanes specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD.
(1) Model A319 and A320 series airplanes
on which Airbus Modification 160000
(structural reinforcement for sharklet
installation) has been embodied in
production.
(2) Model A321 series airplanes on which
Airbus Modification 160021 (structural
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4725
reinforcement for sharklet installation) has
been embodied in production.
(d) Subject
Air Transport Association (ATA) of
America Code 57, Wings.
(e) Reason
This AD was prompted by a report that,
during a center fuselage certification fullscale fatigue test, cracks were found on the
front spar vertical stringer at frame (FR) 36.
This AD was also prompted by a
determination that, during further
investigations of the frame as part of the
widespread fatigue damage (WFD) campaign,
certain inspection compliance times have to
be revised and new inspections and a new
potential terminating action modification
have to be introduced. We are issuing this
AD to address fatigue cracking of the front
spar vertical stringers on the wings, which
could result in the reduced structural
integrity of the airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(g) Definition of Airplane Configurations
For the purposes of this AD, airplane
configurations are defined in figure 1 to
paragraphs (g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of this AD
and figure 2 to paragraphs (g) and (i)(1) of
this AD.
E:\FR\FM\18JYR1.SGM
18JYR1
ER18JY18.001</GPH>
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify that this AD:
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.
33813
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 18, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
(h) Actions Required for Previously
Inspected Airplanes
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
For Configuration 001, 002, or 003
airplanes, as identified in figure 1 to
paragraphs (g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of this AD,
on which the inspections specified in Airbus
Service Bulletin A320–57–1178, dated
October 29, 2013, have been accomplished
before the effective date of this AD; but the
additional work specified in Airbus Service
Bulletin A320–57–1178, Revision 01, dated
May 28, 2014, including Appendix 01, dated
May 28, 2014, has not been accomplished
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Jul 17, 2018
Jkt 244001
before the effective date of this AD: Before
accomplishing the initial inspection required
by paragraph (i)(1) of this AD, contact the
Manager, International Section, Transport
Standards Branch, FAA; or the European
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus’s
EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA)
for further instructions and accomplish those
instructions accordingly.
(i) Repetitive Inspections
(1) Within the compliance time defined in
figure 3 to paragraph (i)(1) of this AD, as
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
applicable to airplane configuration as
identified in figure 1 to paragraphs (g), (h),
(i)(1), and (j) of this AD and figure 2 to
paragraphs (g) and (i)(1) of this AD,
accomplish a special detailed inspection
(SDI) for cracking of the radius of the front
spar vertical stringers and the horizontal
floor beam and the fastener holes on FR 36,
in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320–
57–1178, Revision 03, including only
Appendix 03, both dated November 29, 2016.
E:\FR\FM\18JYR1.SGM
18JYR1
ER18JY18.002</GPH>
33814
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 18, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Jul 17, 2018
Jkt 244001
paragraph (i)(1) of this AD thereafter at
intervals not to exceed the inspection
interval values defined in figure 4 to
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
paragraphs (i)(2) and (l) of this AD, except as
provided by paragraph (l) of this AD.
E:\FR\FM\18JYR1.SGM
18JYR1
ER18JY18.003</GPH>
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
(2) If no cracking is found during any
inspection required by paragraph (i)(1) of this
AD, repeat the inspection required by
33815
33816
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 18, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
authorized signature. Where Airbus Service
Bulletin A320–57–1178, Revision 03,
including only Appendix 03, both dated
November 29, 2016; and Airbus Service
Bulletin A320–57–1200, dated November 20,
2015; specify to contact Airbus for
appropriate action, and specify that action as
‘‘RC’’ (Required for Compliance), accomplish
corrective actions in accordance with this
paragraph.
If any crack is found during any inspection
required by this AD: Before further flight,
repair using a method approved by the
Manager, International Section, Transport
Standards Branch, FAA; or the EASA; or
Airbus’s EASA DOA. If approved by the
DOA, the approval must include the DOA-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Jul 17, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(l) Previous Repairs
For airplanes that have been repaired in
the inspection area specified in paragraph
(i)(1) of this AD before the effective date of
this AD using a method approved by the
E:\FR\FM\18JYR1.SGM
18JYR1
ER18JY18.005</GPH>
Service Bulletin A320–57–1200, dated
November 20, 2015, except as required by
paragraph (k) of this AD. Do all applicable
related investigative and corrective actions
before further flight.
ER18JY18.004</GPH>
5 to paragraph (j) of this AD, as applicable,
modify the center wing box area, including
doing all applicable related investigative and
corrective actions, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus
(k) Corrective Action
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
(j) Modification
For A320 series airplanes, Configuration
001, 002, or 003 as identified in figure 1 to
paragraphs (g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of this AD:
Within the compliance time defined in figure
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 18, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Manager, International Section, Transport
Standards Branch, FAA; or the EASA; or
Airbus’s EASA DOA: Accomplish repetitive
SDIs within the compliance time defined in
those repair instructions for repetitive SDIs.
If no compliance time is identified in the
repair instructions for repetitive SDIs,
accomplish the repetitive SDIs required by
paragraph (i)(2) of this AD at the compliance
times defined in figure 4 to paragraphs (i)(2)
and (l) of this AD.
(m) No Terminating Action
Modification or repair of an airplane, as
specified in paragraph (j) or (k) of this AD,
does not constitute terminating action for the
repetitive inspections required by this AD,
unless it is specified otherwise in a repair
method approved by the Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA; or the EASA; or Airbus’s EASA
DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
(n) Reporting Requirement
Submit a report of the positive findings of
the inspections required by paragraphs (i)
and (j) of this AD to ‘‘Airbus Service Bulletin
Reporting Online Application’’ on Airbus
World (https://w3.airbus.com/), at the
applicable time specified in paragraph (n)(1)
or (n)(2) of this AD.
(1) If the inspection was done on or after
the effective date of this AD: Report within
30 days after that inspection.
(2) If the inspection was done before the
effective date of this AD: Report within 30
days after the effective date of this AD.
(o) Other FAA AD Provisions
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs): The Manager, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, 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 manager of the International
Section, send it to the attention of the person
identified in paragraph (p)(2) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-116AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. Before using
any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal
inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
(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 Section, Transport
Standards Branch, FAA; or the EASA; or
Airbus’s EASA DOA. If approved by the
DOA, the approval must include the DOAauthorized signature.
(3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except
as specified in paragraph (k) of this AD, if
any service information contains procedures
or tests that are identified as RC, those
procedures and tests must be done to comply
with this AD; any procedures or tests that are
not identified as RC are recommended. Those
procedures and tests that are not identified
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Jul 17, 2018
Jkt 244001
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.
(4) Reporting Requirements: A federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a
person is not required to respond to, nor
shall a person be subject to a penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of
information subject to the requirements of
the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that
collection of information displays a current
valid OMB Control Number. The OMB
Control Number for this information
collection is 2120–0056. Public reporting for
this collection of information is estimated to
be approximately 1 work-hour per response,
including the time for reviewing instructions,
completing and reviewing the collection of
information. All responses to this collection
of information are mandatory. Comments
concerning the accuracy of this burden and
suggestions for reducing the burden should
be directed to the FAA at 800 Independence
Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591, Attn:
Information Collection Clearance Officer,
AES–200.
(p) Related Information
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD
2017–0099, dated June 8, 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–2017–1102.
(2) For more information about this AD,
contact Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206–
231–3223.
(3) Service information identified in this
AD that is not incorporated by reference is
available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (q)(3) and (q)(4) of this AD.
(q) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
(IBR) of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51.
(2) You must use this service information
as applicable to do the actions required by
this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Airbus Service Bulletin A320–57–1178,
Revision 03, including only Appendix 03,
both dated November 29, 2016.
(ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A320–57–1200,
dated November 20, 2015.
(3) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Airbus, Airworthiness
Office—EIAS, Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine
No: 2, 31700 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.
(4) You may view this service information
at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch,
2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
33817
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 206–231–3195.
(5) You may view this service information
that is incorporated by reference at the
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at NARA, call
202–741–6030, or go to: https://
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html.
Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on June
12, 2018.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2018–13802 Filed 7–17–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2018–0073; Product
Identifier 2017–NM–100–AD; Amendment
39–19318; AD 2018–13–06]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing
Company Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
The Boeing Company Model 767–300
and –300F series airplanes. This AD was
prompted by reports of fatigue cracking
in the lower outboard wing skin at the
farthest outboard fastener of the inboard
segment of a certain stringer. This AD
requires repetitive high frequency eddy
current (HFEC) inspections for cracking
of the lower outboard wing skin at the
inboard segment of a certain stringer,
and repair if necessary. We are issuing
this AD to address the unsafe condition
on these products.
DATES: This AD is effective August 22,
2018.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of a certain publication listed in this AD
as of August 22, 2018.
ADDRESSES: For service information
identified in this final rule, contact
Aviation Partners Boeing, 2811 S 102nd
Street, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98168;
telephone 206–762–1171; internet
https://www.aviationpartners
boeing.com. You may view this service
information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St.,
Des Moines, WA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA,
call 206–231–3195. It is also available
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\18JYR1.SGM
18JYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 18, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33809-33817]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13802]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2017-1102; Product Identifier 2017-NM-078-AD; Amendment
39-19320; AD 2018-13-08]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2016-01-11,
which applied to certain Airbus Model A320-211, -212, and -231
airplanes. AD 2016-01-11 required repetitive inspections for cracking
of the radius of the front spar vertical stringers and the horizontal
floor beam on frame (FR) 36, repetitive inspections for cracking of the
fastener holes of the front spar vertical stringers on FR 36, and
repair if necessary. This AD adds new thresholds and intervals for the
repetitive inspections; requires, for certain airplanes, a potential
terminating action modification of the center wing box area; and
expands the applicability. This AD was prompted by a report that,
during a center fuselage certification full-scale fatigue test, cracks
were found on the front spar vertical stringer at a certain frame. This
AD was also prompted by a determination that, during further
investigations of the frame as part of the widespread fatigue damage
(WFD) campaign, certain inspection compliance times have to be revised
and new inspections and a new potential terminating action modification
have to be introduced. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.
DATES: This AD is effective August 22, 2018.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of August 22,
2018.
ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Airbus, Airworthiness Office-EIAS, Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine
No: 2, 31700 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax
+33 5 61 93 44 51; email [email protected]; internet
https://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call 206-231-3195. It is also available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
1102.
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-2017-
1102; 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 AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-
647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3223.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Discussion
We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to supersede AD 2016-01-11, Amendment 39-18370 (81 FR 3316,
January 21, 2016) (``AD 2016-01-11''). AD 2016-01-11 applied to certain
Airbus Model A320-211, -212, and -231 airplanes. The NPRM published in
the Federal Register on December 13, 2017 (82 FR 58566). The NPRM was
prompted by a report that, during a center fuselage certification full-
scale fatigue test, cracks were found on the front spar vertical
stringer at a certain frame. The NPRM proposed to continue to require
repetitive inspections for cracking of the radius of the front spar
vertical stringers and the horizontal floor beam on FR 36, repetitive
inspections for cracking of the fastener holes of the front spar
vertical stringers on FR 36, and repair if necessary. The NPRM also
proposed to add new thresholds and intervals for the repetitive
inspections; require, for certain airplanes, a potential terminating
action modification of the center wing box area; and expand the
applicability. We are issuing this AD to address fatigue cracking of
the front spar vertical stringers on the wings, which
[[Page 33810]]
could result in the reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD
2017-0099, dated June 8, 2017 (referred to after this as the Mandatory
Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an
unsafe condition for certain Airbus Model A318 series airplanes; Model
A319 series airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232,
and -233 airplanes; and Model A321 series airplanes. The MCAI states:
During centre fuselage certification full-scale fatigue test,
cracks were found on the front vertical stringer at frame (FR) 36.
Analysis of these findings indicated that a number of in-service
aeroplanes could be similarly affected.
This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to
crack propagation and consequent deterioration of the structural
integrity of the aeroplane.
To address this potential unsafe condition, Airbus issued Airbus
Service Bulletin (SB) A320-57-1016 to provide inspection
instructions, and, consequently, [Direction G[eacute]n[eacute]rale
de l'Aviation Civile] DGAC France issued AD 97-311-105 [which
corresponded to FAA AD 98-18-26, Amendment 39-10742 (63 FR 47423,
September 8, 1998)] to require those repetitive [high frequency eddy
current (HFEC)] inspections [for cracking]. At the same time,
modification in accordance with Airbus SB A320-57-1017 was
introduced as (optional) terminating action for the repetitive
inspections * * *.
After that [French] AD was issued, and following new analysis,
modification per Airbus SB A320-57-1017 was no longer considered to
be terminating action for the repetitive inspections as required by
DGAC France AD 97-311-105. Aeroplanes with [manufacturer serial
number] MSN 0080 up to MSN 0155 inclusive were delivered with the
addition of a 5 [millimeter] mm thick light alloy shim under the
heads of 2 fasteners at the top end of the front spar vertical
stringers (Airbus mod 21290P1546, which is the production line
equivalent to in-service modification through Airbus SB A320-57-
1017). Aeroplanes with MSN 0156 or higher are delivered with
vertical stiffeners of the forward wing spar upper end with
stiffener cap thickness increased from 4 to 6 mm (Airbus mod
21290P1547).
Prompted by these findings, Airbus issued SB A320-57-1178
Revision 01 to introduce new repetitive inspections and,
consequently, EASA issued AD 2014-0069 [which corresponds to FAA AD
2016-01-11], superseding DGAC France AD 97-311-105 to require the
new repetitive inspections, and, depending on findings,
accomplishment of applicable corrective action(s).
Since [EASA] AD 2014-0069 was issued, further investigations in
the frame of the Widespread Fatigue Damage (WFD) campaign identified
that some repetitive inspection thresholds and intervals have to be
revised or introduced, and a new [potential] terminating action
modification has been designed.
For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD retains the
requirements of EASA AD 2014-0069, which is superseded, revises and
introduces thresholds and intervals for the repetitive inspections,
[introduces a potential terminating action modification,] and
expands the Applicability.
Required actions also include reporting. Although this AD does not
explicitly restate the requirements of AD 2016-01-11, it retains
certain requirements of AD 2016-01-11. Those requirements are
referenced in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1178, Revision 03,
including only Appendix 03, both dated November 29, 2016.
This service information is identified in ``Related Service
Information under 1 CFR part 51,'' in this preamble and in paragraph
(i)(1) of this AD. 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-2017-1102.
Comments
We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and
the FAA's response to each comment.
Support for the NPRM
United Airlines (UAL) stated that it agrees with the intent of the
NPRM.
Request To Change Costs of Compliance Section
Delta Airlines (DAL) requested that the Costs of Compliance section
of the proposed AD be revised to include the costs for reporting
inspection findings and for modifying the airplane as specified in
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1200. DAL stated that the cost of
reporting, in addition to the cost for the modification has been
significantly underestimated in the cost section of the proposed AD.
DAL noted that it takes 2 work-hours per airplane to do the steps for
reporting, in addition to numerous work-hours for setup time. DAL
pointed out that the proposed AD mandates two service bulletins, and
the cost of both should be included in the proposed AD. DAL explained
that the kit cost for the modification is $55,360 (depending on
configuration), and the labor is approximately 137 work-hours. DAL
stated that the cost does not reflect lost revenue due to removing the
airplane from service outside of the normal maintenance schedule. Given
all of these factors, DAL asserted that the true cost of the proposed
AD on operators should be as follows.
For the inspection provided in Airbus Service Bulletin
A320-57-1178: $1,947,850 + $232,275 for reporting.
For the modification provided in Airbus Service bulletin
A320-57-1200: $54,609,075 + $232,275 for reporting.
Total cost to industry is: $57,021,475.
We partially agree. We do not agree to increase the work-hours for
reporting; however. We estimate only the time necessary to submit a
report (per each response), since the reporting information would be
obtained when accomplishing the inspection(s) in the service
bulletin(s). However, we do agree to include the costs for the
modification for certain airplanes specified in Airbus Service Bulletin
A320-57-1200, dated November 20, 2015, which will result in a total
fleet cost of $1,107,050 or $110,705 per product, for the basic
requirement of this AD. We have changed the ``Costs of Compliance''
section of this final rule accordingly.
Request To Clarify Certain Requirements in Table 1 to Paragraphs (g),
(h), (i)(1), and (j) of the Proposed AD
UAL asked that we revise table 1 to paragraphs (g), (h), (i)(1),
and (j) of the proposed AD to clarify that Airbus modification (Mod)
21290P1546 is limited to airplanes with manufacturer serial numbers
(MSN) 0080 up to MSN 0155 inclusive. UAL also asked that another
clarification be added to table 1 to specify that Mod 21290P1547 is
effective for airplanes with MSN 0156 or higher, which were delivered
with vertical stiffeners of the forward wing spar upper end with
stiffener cap thickness increased from 4 to 6 mm. UAL stated that those
airplanes were delivered with the addition of a 5 millimeter (mm) thick
light alloy shim under the heads of two fasteners at the top end of the
front spar vertical stringers. UAL added that Mod 21290P1546 is the
production line equivalent to in-service modifications through Airbus
Service Bulletin A320-57-1017.
We do not agree with the commenter's requests. Figure 1 to
paragraphs (g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of this AD (table 1 to paragraphs
(g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of the proposed AD) defines configurations by
whether or not certain modifications were done and certain service
bulletins were embodied. Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1017 provides
information regarding Mod 21290P1546 and Mod 21290P1547 that identifies
the specific configuration of the airplanes. The definitions in figure
1 to paragraphs (g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of this AD and figure 2 to
paragraphs (g) and (i)(1) of this AD
[[Page 33811]]
correspond to the airplane configuration definitions provided in
Appendix 1 of EASA AD 2017-0099, dated June 8, 2017. Therefore, we have
not changed this AD in this regard.
Request To Extend Compliance Times for Configuration 003 Airplanes
DAL asked that we extend the proposed initial compliance time for
Configuration 003 airplanes identified in figure 3 to paragraph (i)(1)
of the proposed AD. DAL asked that the initial inspection be extended
to 24 months, or at a minimum, that the flight-hour limit be increased
to 1,500 flight hours, since the initial inspection is dependent on
flight cycles, not flight hours. DAL provided the following options for
the proposed compliance time: (1) Next scheduled . . ., (2) 12-month .
. ., or (3) 4-months. . . . DAL stated that it currently operates five
airplanes, which are Configuration 003 on which the threshold of
``Before exceeding 32,000 flight cycles or 64,000 flight hours since
airplane first flight'' for the initial inspection has been exceeded.
DAL added that, at current fleet utilization rates, it will require the
inspections be done within approximately 85 days after the effective
date of the AD, due to the flight-hour limit. DAL noted that this will
necessitate a special maintenance visit. DAL also stated that its
maintenance program requires a maintenance visit every 24 months, and
added that most, if not all, of the airplanes will not visit a hangar
within the next 3 months.
DAL asked that the compliance time be extended to 6 years after the
effective date of the AD, with supplemental inspections for
accomplishing the modification required by paragraph (j) of the
proposed AD. At a minimum, DAL requested relief by allowing for an
inspection, as specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1178,
Revision 03, dated November 29, 2016, at 2-year intervals until the
heavy ``H'' check can be reached. DAL stated that modifications to
Configuration 003 airplanes require incorporation of Airbus Service
Bulletin A320-57-1200, dated November 20, 2015, prior to reaching
48,000 flight cycles or 96,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first.
DAL stated that, at its current utilization rate, this modification
would be required in approximately 4 years; however, its current heavy
maintenance ``H'' checks are scheduled at 6-year intervals. DAL noted
that this is a minimal risk, since Configuration 003 airplanes will
receive supplemental inspections within a short time after the
effective date specified in paragraph (i)(1) of the proposed AD.
We do not agree with the commenter's requests to extend the
specified compliance times. The compliance times for the actions
specified in this AD for addressing widespread fatigue damage (WFD)
were established to ensure that affected structure is replaced before
WFD develops. Standard inspection techniques cannot be relied on to
detect WFD before it becomes a hazard to flight. We will not grant any
extensions of the compliance time to complete any AD-mandated service
bulletin related to WFD without extensive new data that would
substantiate and clearly warrant such an extension. Therefore, we have
not changed this AD in this regard.
Request To Allow Alternative Method of Compliance (AMOC) in Lieu of
Contacting the Manufacturer for Repair Instructions
DAL asked that an allowance be made under the provisions of
paragraph (o)(2) of the proposed AD (and future ADs) for contacting
Airbus for any deviations to the instructions contained within the
service bulletins required in paragraphs (i) and (j) of the proposed
AD, and to be able to use their EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA)
approvals without seeking separate and redundant FAA AMOCs. DAL stated
that as airplanes are scheduled for maintenance to comply with the
proposed AD, the operator may discover that the Airbus service
information contains errors that can affect compliance with the actions
in the proposed AD. DAL did not state there are any known errors in the
service information required in paragraphs (i) and (j) of the proposed
AD. DAL added that, although the proposed AD provides an option to
receive approval from the Manager, International Section, Transport
Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA, or Airbus's EASA DOA; as specified in
paragraph (o)(2) of the proposed AD, no such allowance is provided for
receiving approval for deviations from the service information. DAL
noted that past experience has shown that the FAA is unable to provide
AMOC approvals within 2 days after receiving the request, which could
result in grounding of airplanes. DAL suggested using the language in
paragraph (6) of the MCAI.
We do not agree with the commenter's request. Paragraph (o)(2) of
this AD, ``Contacting the Manufacturer,'' only addresses the
requirement to contact the manufacturer for corrective actions for the
identified unsafe condition and does not cover deviations from the
requirements of AD-mandated actions. We do not agree to expand
paragraph (o)(2) of this AD to include such deviations because we need
to ensure that any deviations from the requirements of AD-mandated
actions are properly reviewed to adequately address the unsafe
condition. Regarding paragraph (6) of the MCAI, if an operator is not
able to comply with service information that is required by an AD, then
the operator must request an AMOC in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (o)(1) of this AD.
We also note that, although we cannot guarantee AMOC approvals
within 2 business days, we have provided AMOC approvals to U.S.
operators, including DAL, within 24 hours of receiving the request,
provided operators submit a complete AMOC package with substantiation
and explanation of the urgency, such as, but not limited to, a
disruption in operation. Guidance for submitting AMOCs is available in
FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 39-10. We also recommend that operators work
with the original equipment manufacturers to address errors in service
information as part of AD planning, in addition to submitting comments
to the NPRM denoting any errors in the service information, so that
corrections to methods of compliance (MOC) can be addressed in the FAA
final rule. Additional guidance for operators on AD management can be
found in FAA AC 39-9. We have not changed this AD in this regard.
Requests To Change or Delete Reporting Requirement
DAL and UAL asked that the reporting of findings (positive or
negative), as specified in the reporting requirement in paragraphs (n)
and (o)(4) of the proposed AD, be limited to positive findings only, or
be removed entirely. DAL stated that it will require a significant
amount of work to collect, collate, and disseminate the requested data
to Airbus, resulting in little or no benefit to the airworthiness of
the airplane. DAL added that any findings will require transmission of
findings to engineering from maintenance prior to submission to Airbus,
which could result in a time lag and opportunities for error. DAL and
UAL asserted that all positive findings are already reported to Airbus
as part of the repair process and Airbus has the means to determine
negative findings, so reporting is a duplicative burden on operators.
Further, DAL argued that the Paperwork Reduction Act (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-104publ13/html/PLAW-104publ13.htm) is meant
to reduce the burden placed on public entities from government agencies
when
[[Page 33812]]
the information is obtainable from other sources, especially for the
convenience of a foreign business. Additionally, DAL notes that only
individuals that have the required access--controlled by Airbus--may
submit reports, and provided data about what is required in order to
submit a report (i.e., work-hours for the various steps in the
process). DAL asserted that the cost of reporting on its operation
would be $518,710, and that Airbus, EASA, nor the FAA have demonstrated
in any of the service documents why the reporting requirement in this
AD is necessary.
We agree to limit the reporting requirement to positive findings
only for the reasons provided by the commenters. We have changed
paragraph (n) of this AD accordingly.
We do not agree to remove the reporting requirement in this AD
because the inspection reports will enable the manufacturer to obtain
better insight into the nature, cause, and extent of the cracking, and
eventually to develop final corrective action to address the unsafe
condition. Once final corrective action has been identified, we might
consider further rulemaking.
Clarification of Actions That Prompted This AD
We have revised the SUMMARY section of this final rule and
paragraph (e) of this AD to clarify what prompted this AD. In addition
to the report of cracks on the front spar vertical stringer at a
certain frame, this AD was prompted by a determination that, during
further investigations of the frame as part of the WFD campaign,
certain inspection compliance times have to be revised and new
inspections and a new potential terminating action modification have to
be introduced.
Conclusion
We reviewed the available data, including the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these changes:
Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.
Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51
Airbus has issued the following service information.
Service Bulletin A320-57-1178, Revision 03, including only
Appendix 03, both dated November 29, 2016. The service information
describes procedures for a rototest inspection for cracking of the
radius of the front spar vertical stringers on FR 36, a HFEC for
cracking of the horizontal floor beam on FR 36, and an HFEC inspection
for cracking of the fastener holes of the front spar vertical stringers
on FR 36.
Service Bulletin A320-57-1200, dated November 20, 2015.
The service information describes procedures for modifying the center
wing box area, which includes related investigative and corrective
actions. Related investigative actions include an HFEC inspection on
the radius of the rib flanges, a rototest inspection of the fastener
holes, detailed and HFEC inspections for cracking on the cut edges,
detailed and rototest inspections on all open fastener holes, and an
inspection to determine if secondary structure brackets are installed.
Corrective action includes reworking the secondary structure bracket
and repair.
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.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD affects 815 airplanes of U.S. registry.
The actions required by AD 2016-01-11, take about 24 work-hours per
inspection cycle per product, at an average labor rate of $85 per work-
hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the actions that
are required by AD 2016-01-11 is $2,040 per inspection cycle per
product.
We also estimate that it takes about 273 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD and 1 work-hour for
reporting per response. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
Required parts cost about $87,500 per product. Based on these figures,
we estimate the cost of this AD on affected U.S. operators of certain
airplanes specified in the service information to be $1,107,050 or
$110,705 per product.
We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the repair of cracking specified in this AD.
Paperwork Reduction Act
A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control
number for the collection of information required by this AD is 2120-
0056. The paperwork cost associated with this AD has been detailed in
the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for
reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the
collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with
this AD is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden
and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA
at 800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591, ATTN: Information
Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.
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.
This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to
the Director of the System Oversight Division.
Regulatory Findings
We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States,
[[Page 33813]]
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
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.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
0
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2016-01-11, Amendment 39-18370 (81 FR 3316, January 21, 2016), and
adding the following new AD:
2018-13-08 Airbus: Amendment 39-19320; Docket No. FAA-2017-1102;
Product Identifier 2017-NM-078-AD.
(a) Effective Date
This AD is effective August 22, 2018.
(b) Affected ADs
This AD replaces AD 2016-01-11, Amendment 39-18370 (81 FR 3316,
January 21, 2016) (``AD 2016-01-11'').
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to Airbus Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122
airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -
133 airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, and -
233 airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -
231, and -232 airplanes; certificated in any category; all
manufacturer serial numbers, except airplanes specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD.
(1) Model A319 and A320 series airplanes on which Airbus
Modification 160000 (structural reinforcement for sharklet
installation) has been embodied in production.
(2) Model A321 series airplanes on which Airbus Modification
160021 (structural reinforcement for sharklet installation) has been
embodied in production.
(d) Subject
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.
(e) Reason
This AD was prompted by a report that, during a center fuselage
certification full-scale fatigue test, cracks were found on the
front spar vertical stringer at frame (FR) 36. This AD was also
prompted by a determination that, during further investigations of
the frame as part of the widespread fatigue damage (WFD) campaign,
certain inspection compliance times have to be revised and new
inspections and a new potential terminating action modification have
to be introduced. We are issuing this AD to address fatigue cracking
of the front spar vertical stringers on the wings, which could
result in the reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
(g) Definition of Airplane Configurations
For the purposes of this AD, airplane configurations are defined
in figure 1 to paragraphs (g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of this AD and
figure 2 to paragraphs (g) and (i)(1) of this AD.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18JY18.001
[[Page 33814]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18JY18.002
(h) Actions Required for Previously Inspected Airplanes
For Configuration 001, 002, or 003 airplanes, as identified in
figure 1 to paragraphs (g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of this AD, on
which the inspections specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-
1178, dated October 29, 2013, have been accomplished before the
effective date of this AD; but the additional work specified in
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1178, Revision 01, dated May 28,
2014, including Appendix 01, dated May 28, 2014, has not been
accomplished before the effective date of this AD: Before
accomplishing the initial inspection required by paragraph (i)(1) of
this AD, contact the Manager, International Section, Transport
Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA) for
further instructions and accomplish those instructions accordingly.
(i) Repetitive Inspections
(1) Within the compliance time defined in figure 3 to paragraph
(i)(1) of this AD, as applicable to airplane configuration as
identified in figure 1 to paragraphs (g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of
this AD and figure 2 to paragraphs (g) and (i)(1) of this AD,
accomplish a special detailed inspection (SDI) for cracking of the
radius of the front spar vertical stringers and the horizontal floor
beam and the fastener holes on FR 36, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1178,
Revision 03, including only Appendix 03, both dated November 29,
2016.
[[Page 33815]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18JY18.003
(2) If no cracking is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (i)(1) of this AD, repeat the inspection required by
paragraph (i)(1) of this AD thereafter at intervals not to exceed
the inspection interval values defined in figure 4 to paragraphs
(i)(2) and (l) of this AD, except as provided by paragraph (l) of
this AD.
[[Page 33816]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18JY18.004
(j) Modification
For A320 series airplanes, Configuration 001, 002, or 003 as
identified in figure 1 to paragraphs (g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of
this AD: Within the compliance time defined in figure 5 to paragraph
(j) of this AD, as applicable, modify the center wing box area,
including doing all applicable related investigative and corrective
actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1200, dated November 20, 2015,
except as required by paragraph (k) of this AD. Do all applicable
related investigative and corrective actions before further flight.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18JY18.005
(k) Corrective Action
If any crack is found during any inspection required by this AD:
Before further flight, repair using a method approved by the
Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or
the EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature. Where Airbus Service
Bulletin A320-57-1178, Revision 03, including only Appendix 03, both
dated November 29, 2016; and Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1200,
dated November 20, 2015; specify to contact Airbus for appropriate
action, and specify that action as ``RC'' (Required for Compliance),
accomplish corrective actions in accordance with this paragraph.
(l) Previous Repairs
For airplanes that have been repaired in the inspection area
specified in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD before the effective date
of this AD using a method approved by the
[[Page 33817]]
Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or
the EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA: Accomplish repetitive SDIs within
the compliance time defined in those repair instructions for
repetitive SDIs. If no compliance time is identified in the repair
instructions for repetitive SDIs, accomplish the repetitive SDIs
required by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD at the compliance times
defined in figure 4 to paragraphs (i)(2) and (l) of this AD.
(m) No Terminating Action
Modification or repair of an airplane, as specified in paragraph
(j) or (k) of this AD, does not constitute terminating action for
the repetitive inspections required by this AD, unless it is
specified otherwise in a repair method approved by the Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the EASA;
or Airbus's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must
include the DOA-authorized signature.
(n) Reporting Requirement
Submit a report of the positive findings of the inspections
required by paragraphs (i) and (j) of this AD to ``Airbus Service
Bulletin Reporting Online Application'' on Airbus World (https://w3.airbus.com/), at the applicable time specified in paragraph
(n)(1) or (n)(2) of this AD.
(1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Report within 30 days after that inspection.
(2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this
AD: Report within 30 days after the effective date of this AD.
(o) Other FAA AD Provisions
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, 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 manager of the International Section, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (p)(2) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
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 Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA; or the 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 specified in
paragraph (k) of this AD, if any service information contains
procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those procedures and
tests must be done to 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.
(4) Reporting Requirements: A federal agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a
person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a
collection of information subject to the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information
displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number
for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for
this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 1
work-hour per response, including the time for reviewing
instructions, completing and reviewing the collection of
information. All responses to this collection of information are
mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden and
suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA at
800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information
Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.
(p) Related Information
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA AD 2017-0099, dated June 8, 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-2017-1102.
(2) For more information about this AD, contact Sanjay Ralhan,
Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax 206-231-3223.
(3) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (q)(3) and (q)(4) of this AD.
(q) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1178, Revision 03, including
only Appendix 03, both dated November 29, 2016.
(ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1200, dated November 20,
2015.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus, Airworthiness Office--EIAS, Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine No:
2, 31700 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33
5 61 93 44 51; email [email protected]; internet
https://www.airbus.com.
(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on June 12, 2018.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-13802 Filed 7-17-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
