Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes, 38959-38964 [2018-16736]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 153 / Wednesday, August 8, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
potential for an uncontrolled fire below the
passenger compartment floor and other
locations outside the areas covered by smoke
detection and fire protection systems. We are
issuing this AD to detect and replace BMS 8–
39 flexible urethane foam in certain areas,
which, if exposed to an ignition source,
could cause an uncontrolled fire leading to
loss of control of the airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(g) Required Actions
Within 72 months after the effective date
of this AD, do all actions identified as ‘‘RC’’
(required for compliance) in, and in
accordance with, the Accomplishment
Instructions of the applicable service
information identified in paragraphs (g)(1),
(g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD.
(1) For airplanes identified in paragraph
(c)(1) of this AD: Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 747–53–2877, dated August
5, 2014.
(2) For airplanes identified in paragraph
(c)(2) of this AD: Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 747–25–3646, Revision 1,
dated August 2, 2017.
(3) For airplanes identified in paragraph
(c)(3) of this AD: Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 747–25–3692, dated June 22,
2016.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
(h) Credit for Previous Actions
This paragraph provides credit for the
actions specified in paragraph (g)(2) of this
AD, if those actions were performed before
the effective date of this AD using Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 747–25–
3646, dated June 19, 2015.
(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO 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
certification office, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (j)(1) of
this AD. Information may be emailed to:
9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@
faa.gov.
(2) 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.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable
level of safety may be used for any repair,
modification, or alteration required by this
AD if it is approved by the Boeing
Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has
been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO
Branch, to make those findings. To be
approved, the repair method, modification
deviation, or alteration deviation must meet
the certification basis of the airplane, and the
approval must specifically refer to this AD.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Aug 07, 2018
Jkt 244001
38959
(4) For service information that contains
steps that are labeled as Required for
Compliance (RC), the provisions of
paragraphs (i)(4)(i) and (i)(4)(ii) of this AD
apply.
(i) The steps labeled as RC, including
substeps under an RC step and any figures
identified in an RC step, must be done to
comply with the AD. If a step or substep is
labeled ‘‘RC Exempt,’’ then the RC
requirement is removed from that step or
substep. An AMOC is required for any
deviations to RC steps, including substeps
and identified figures.
(ii) Steps not labeled 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 RC steps,
including substeps and identified figures, can
still be done as specified, and the airplane
can be put back in an airworthy condition.
Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on July
23, 2018.
James Cashdollar,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division,
Aircraft Certification Service.
(j) Related Information
AGENCY:
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Scott Craig, Aerospace Engineer,
Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems
Section, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206–231–
3566; email: Michael.S.Craig@faa.gov.
(2) Service information identified in this
AD that is not incorporated by reference is
available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (k)(3) and (k)(4) of this AD.
(k) 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 the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 747–25–3646, Revision 1, dated
August 2, 2017.
(ii) Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 747–25–3692, dated June 22, 2016.
(iii) Boeing Special Attention Service
Bulletin 747–53–2877, dated August 5, 2014.
(3) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd.,
MC 110–SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740–5600;
telephone 562–797–1717; internet https://
www.myboeingfleet.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/ibrlocations.html.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
[FR Doc. 2018–16509 Filed 8–7–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2018–0077; Product
Identifier 2017–NM–126–AD; Amendment
39–19352; AD 2018–16–12]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
We are adopting a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Airbus Model A319 and A320 series
airplanes; and A321–111, –112, –131,
–211, –212, –213, –231, and –232
airplanes. This AD was prompted by
reports of battery retaining rod failures
due to quality defects of the material
used during parts manufacturing. This
AD requires a detailed inspection of the
battery support assemblies to identify
the battery retaining rod manufacturer,
replacement of the battery retaining rods
with serviceable battery retaining rods if
necessary, and the addition of the
applicable service information label on
each battery retaining rod if necessary.
We are issuing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.
DATES: This AD is effective September
12, 2018.
The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference
of certain publications listed in this AD
as of September 12, 2018.
ADDRESSES: For service information
identified in this final rule, contact
Airbus, Airworthiness Office—EIAS, 2
Rond Point Emile Dewoitine, 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 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
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\08AUR1.SGM
08AUR1
38960
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 153 / Wednesday, August 8, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
and locating Docket No. FAA–2018–
0077.
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–2018–
0077; 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 street 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
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
We issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would
apply to certain Airbus Model A319 and
A320 series airplanes; and Model A321–
111, –112, –131, –211, –212, –213, –231,
and –232 airplanes. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on
February 12, 2018 (83 FR 5960) (‘‘the
NPRM’’).
The European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA), which is the Technical Agent
for the Member States of the European
Union, has issued EASA AD 2017–
0161R1, dated September 19, 2017;
corrected September 20, 2017 (referred
to after this as the Mandatory
Continuing Airworthiness Information,
or ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe
condition for certain Airbus Model
A319 and A320 series airplanes; and
Model A321–111, –112, –131, –211,
–212, –213, –231, and –232 airplanes.
The MCAI states:
Several occurrences have been reported of
battery rod failures on certain Airbus
aeroplanes. Subsequent examination of
broken rod parts determined that these
failures were due to quality defects of the
material used during parts manufacturing.
Each battery is secured on an aeroplane by
two rods. Failure of one rod, in case of severe
turbulence during flight or hard landing,
could lead to battery displacement, or roll on
the remaining rod side, up to a point where
the remaining rod could be disengaged. The
battery could ultimately detach from its
housing and damage relays, connectors,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Aug 07, 2018
Jkt 244001
contactor boxes, air ducts and surrounding
structure.
This condition, if not detected and
corrected, could lead to the loss of the
normal electrical generation not followed by
an automatic recovery of essential network.
To address this potential unsafe condition,
Airbus issued Alert Operators Transmission
(AOT) A92N001–16 (later revised) and EASA
issued AD 2016–0204 [which corresponds to
FAA AD 2016–25–24 (81 FR 90958,
December 16, 2016) (‘‘AD 2016–25–24’’)]
requiring repetitive general visual
inspections (GVI) of the four battery rods
(two per battery), and, in case of findings,
replacement of battery rods.
Since that [EASA] AD was issued, the
manufacturer of the broken battery retaining
rods has been identified, which allows
proper identification of the affected parts and
their withdrawal from service. Consequently,
Airbus issued [service bulletin] SB A320–92–
1116 and SB A320–92–1118 to provide the
necessary instructions to the affected
operators. No rods delivered as spare parts
are affected by the manufacturing issue.
For the reason described above, this
[EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA
AD 2016–0204, which is superseded, and
requires replacement of battery retaining rods
depending on manufacturer identification.
This [EASA] AD also provides a terminating
action for the repetitive inspections.
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–2018–
0077.
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.
Request To Revise the Compliance
Time
Air Line Pilots Association,
International (ALPA) requested that we
revise the compliance time. ALPA
stated that the proposed AD specifies a
compliance time of within 24 months
after the AD effective date. ALPA
commented that because the proposed
AD is related to quality, it believes this
compliance time is insufficient. ALPA
also commented that since the issuance
of the manufacturer’s service
information, operators have had over 12
months to comply with the required
corrective actions. ALPA stated that,
additionally, the time estimated to
complete the inspections and
replacement of the affected parts is
minimal. ALPA recommended that we
consider a compliance time of within 12
months after the AD effective date.
We disagree with the commenter.
While some U.S. operators have had
time to plan and schedule the work
contained in the Airbus service
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
information, there is no obligation for
any U.S. operator to perform those
actions without a regulatory
requirement. Therefore, we agree with
EASA’s decision to allow a 24-month
compliance time to plan, schedule, and
accomplish the actions necessary to
remove the unsafe condition. If
additional data are presented that would
justify a shorter compliance time, we
may consider further rulemaking on this
issue. We have not changed this AD in
this regard.
Request To Revise the Definition of
Serviceable Rod
Delta Airlines (DAL) requested that
we revise the definition of a serviceable
rod in paragraph (g) of the proposed AD.
DAL stated to add an additional
paragraph that specifies:
A battery retaining rod with an ISB
[inspection service bulletin] label installed in
accordance with the accomplishment
instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320–
92–1116, Revision 00, dated January 31, 2017
(for Airbus Model A319 and A320 series
airplanes; and A321–111, –112, –131, –211,
–212, –213, –231, and –232 airplanes); or
Airbus Service Bulletin A320–92–1118,
Revision 00, dated January 31, 2017 (for
Airbus Model A320–251N and –271N
airplanes).
We partially agree with revising the
definition of a serviceable rod in
paragraph (g) of this AD. We have
determined that the installation of the
ISB label does not affect the unsafe
condition and have removed the
requirement from this AD. We have
coordinated this changed with EASA.
Furthermore, we have revised paragraph
(g) of this AD to clarify that the battery
retaining rod used for replacement must
be positively identified as a serviceable
battery retaining rod.
Request for Clarification Regarding
Manufacturer Serial Numbers
United Airlines (UAL) requested
clarification regarding manufacturer
serial numbers in the proposed AD.
UAL stated that the manufacturer serial
numbers are not applicable to the
proposed AD as identified in Airbus
Service Bulletin A320–92–1116,
Revision 00, dated January 31, 2017,
and Airbus Service Bulletin A320–92–
1118, Revision 00, dated January 31,
2017. UAL stated that, although the
machining that caused the failure mode
is identified in the service information,
the same battery retaining rod part
number used in pre- and post-service
information remains unchanged. UAL
commented that it is unclear whether a
serial number, batch number, or date
exists for those battery retaining rods.
UAL also asked how were the battery
E:\FR\FM\08AUR1.SGM
08AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 153 / Wednesday, August 8, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
retaining rod spares deemed to be
serviceable in paragraph (g)(1) of the
proposed AD?
We agree to provide clarification for
the commenter. According to EASA AD
2017–0161R1, dated September 19,
2017; corrected September 20, 2017; no
spares with manufacturing defects were
delivered by Airbus. Only a certain
batch of defective parts were installed in
production on certain manufacturer
serial numbers as specified in Airbus
Service Bulletin A320–92–1116,
Revision 00, dated January 31, 2017;
and Airbus Service Bulletin A320–92–
1118, Revision 00, dated January 31,
2017. If an operator does not have an
airplane affected as specified in the
service information, then there is no
concern relative to defective spare parts.
We have not changed this AD in this
regard.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
Request To Clarify the Identification of
Affected Parts
DAL requested that we clarify the
identification of the affected parts in
paragraph (h) of the proposed AD. DAL
stated that the detailed inspection to
identify the battery retaining rod
manufacturer should be of the battery
support assemblies and not the battery
retaining rods.
We agree with the commenter’s
request. We have revised paragraph (h)
of this AD to require a detailed
inspection of the battery support
assemblies to identify the manufacturer
of the battery retaining rods.
Request To Include an Additional
Method of Compliance to the AD
Requirements
DAL requested that we add an
additional method of compliance for
paragraphs (h), (i), and (j) of the
proposed AD. DAL stated that the
language, ‘‘or using a method approved
by the Manager, International Section,
Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or
EASA; or Airbus’s EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA),’’ should
be included as an option to using the
service information. DAL also stated
that this language should be considered
standard wording for future ADs as
applicable.
We disagree with the commenter’s
request. We have already provided a
method of compliance (MOC) for
paragraphs (h), (i), and (j) of this AD in
accordance with the applicable service
information. Any deviations from the
required MOC would need an
evaluation in form of an AMOC. DAL’s
proposed option is generally utilized in
cases where no MOC has been
established or we have known
information that the MOC may not be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Aug 07, 2018
Jkt 244001
applicable for all airplanes in the U.S
fleet. We have not changed the AD in
this regard.
Request To Not Require Certain Service
Information Labels on the Battery Rod
DAL and American Airlines (AA)
requested that we not mandate that a
service information label be attached to
each battery retaining rod as required by
the Airbus service information specified
in paragraphs (j) and (l) of the proposed
AD. AA also requested that we not
mandate attachments of a service
information label as part of the
replacement required by paragraph (i) of
the proposed AD. DAL stated that it has
7 affected airplanes that would have a
different final configuration than the
current and future fleet of 348 airplanes
in its A320FAM fleet.
AA stated that all battery retaining
rods provided by Airbus post August
2016 are marked and stamped with
manufactures part number (MPN)
D8241023700000. AA commented that
this marking of the new battery
retaining rods can be used in lieu of the
information service bulletin (ISB) label.
AA also commented that it plans to
replace all existing battery retaining
rods with the new battery retaining rods
that are marked with MPN
D8241023700000.
In addition, AA stated that installing
the ISB label on the battery retaining
rods on 128 of its A319/A320 airplanes
does not add a safety value, but will put
a burden on AA to maintain two
different configurations of battery
retaining rod installation between 128
airplanes that are effected by the service
information in the proposed AD and 265
airplanes that are not affected by the
service information in the proposed AD.
We agree with the commenters’
request. We agree that the ISB label is
not necessary to mitigate the risk
addressed in this AD. Therefore, we
have determined that the installation of
ISB label should be optional and not a
required for compliance (RC) step.
However, 14 CFR 39.9, specifies that
operators have a continuing obligation
to maintain compliance with an AD,
and the installation of the ISB label or
an equivalent method to identify a
serviceable battery retaining rod
provides the operators with a simplified
way to demonstrate compliance with
the AD requirements. We have removed
paragraph (j) of the proposed AD and
revised paragraph (l) of this AD to revise
the terminating action requirements. We
have also added paragraph (j) of this AD
to provide an exception to paragraph (i)
of this AD, which specifies that
installing the ISB label is not a
requirement in this AD.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
38961
Request To Revise the Terminating
Action Paragraph
DAL requested that paragraph (l) of
the proposed AD, ‘‘Terminating
Action,’’ be revised to read,
‘‘Replacement of all battery retaining
rods,’’ and not, ‘‘Replacement of all
battery retaining rods marked
‘SA. . . .’ ’’ DAL stated that the battery
retaining rods are not marked with
‘‘SA,’’ only the battery support
assemblies.
We agree with the commenter’s
request and have revised the AD
accordingly.
Request To Use Alternate Part Numbers
Spirit Airlines requested that either
the service information or the proposed
AD be revised to provide the use of
alternate materials to label part number
(P/N) ASNE0248A1–4H9. Spirit Airlines
stated that P/N ASNE0248A1–4H9 is no
longer available, and that alternate P/N
E0248A1–4H9P and P/N ASNE0248A1–
4H9T may be obtained from Airbus.
Spirit Airlines believes that use of these
alternate part numbers would provide
an equivalent level of safety as
referenced in Airbus Dossier Reference
80403684/003, dated January 8, 2018,
and Airbus Retrofit Information Letter
SA92M16012714 R00, dated February 1,
2017.
DAL requested that a previously
approved AMOC be used in the
proposed AD. DAL stated that in
paragraph (h) and (j) of the proposed
AD, Airbus Service Bulletin A320–92–
1116, Revision 00, dated January 31,
2017, calls out a non-procurable part
number for the identification label.
Therefore, DAL proposed that
recognition of AMOC AIR–676–18–152,
issued against AD 2016–25–24, which
allows an alternate label part number,
be added to paragraph (m) of the
proposed AD as an acceptable method
of compliance to the proposed AD.
We partially agree with the
commenters request. As we stated
previously, we have determined that
installation of an ISB label is not an RC
step. Therefore, a previously issued
AMOC for allowing alternate label part
numbers is unnecessary. However, we
would like to remind operators that 14
CFR 39.9 specifies an operator’s
continuing obligation to maintain
compliance with an AD, and installation
of an ISB label or an equivalent method
provides operators with a method to
demonstrate the affected battery
retaining rods have been removed and
replaced with serviceable retaining rods
in compliance with the AD
requirements.
E:\FR\FM\08AUR1.SGM
08AUR1
38962
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 153 / Wednesday, August 8, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Differences Between This AD and the
MCAI
The MCAI includes a requirement to
install an ISB label. This AD does not
include that requirement. We have
determined that the ISB label is not
necessary to mitigate the risk addressed
in this AD. However, 14 CFR 39.9,
specifies that operators have a
continuing obligation to maintain
compliance with an AD, and the
installation of the ISB label or an
equivalent method to identify a
serviceable battery retaining rod
provides the operators with a simplified
way to demonstrate compliance with
the AD requirements.
Conclusion
We reviewed the relevant data,
considered 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 minor 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 Service Bulletin
A320–92–1116, Revision 00, dated
January 31, 2017; and Service Bulletin
A320–92–1118, Revision 00, dated
January 31, 2017. This service
information describes a detailed
inspection of the battery support
assemblies to identify the battery
retaining rod manufacturer, replacement
of the battery retaining rods with
serviceable battery retaining rods if
necessary, and adding the applicable
service information label on each
battery retaining rod if necessary. These
documents are distinct since they apply
to different airplane models. 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 330
airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to
comply with this AD:
ESTIMATED COSTS
Action
Labor cost
Inspection ................................
1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 .........................................
We estimate the following costs to do
any necessary replacement that would
Cost per
product
Parts cost
be required based on the results of the
inspection. We have no way of
$0
Cost on U.S.
operators
$85
$28,050
determining the number of aircraft that
might need this replacement:
ON-CONDITION COSTS
Labor cost
Replacement ....................................
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
Action
1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 ............................................................
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,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Aug 07, 2018
Jkt 244001
Cost per
product
Parts cost
$0
$85
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.
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.
Regulatory Findings
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
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,
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,
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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:
■
E:\FR\FM\08AUR1.SGM
08AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 153 / Wednesday, August 8, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
■
2018–16–12 Airbus: Amendment 39–19352;
Docket No. FAA–2018–0077; Product
Identifier 2017–NM–126–AD.
(a) Effective Date
This AD is effective September 12, 2018.
(b) Affected ADs
This AD affects AD 2016–25–24,
Amendment 39–18750 (81 FR 90958,
December 16, 2016) (‘‘AD 2016–25–24’’).
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to Airbus Model A319–
111, –112, –113, –114, –115, –131, –132, and
–133 airplanes; Model A320–211, –212, –214,
–216, –231, –232, –233, –251N, and –271N
airplanes; and Model A321–111, –112, –131,
–211, –212, –213, –231, and –232 airplanes,
certificated in any category, as identified in
Airbus Service Bulletin A320–92–1116,
Revision 00, dated January 31, 2017; or
Airbus Service Bulletin A320–92–1118,
Revision 00, dated January 31, 2017.
(d) Subject
Air Transport Association (ATA) of
America Code 92, Electrical system
installation.
(e) Reason
This AD was prompted by reports of
battery retaining rod failures due to quality
defects of the material used during parts
manufacturing. We are issuing this AD to
detect and correct broken battery retaining
rods, which, in the event of a hard landing
or severe turbulence, could cause the battery
to detach from its housing, resulting in
damage to other electrical equipment and
surrounding structure. This condition could
lead to loss of normal electrical power
generation and subsequent inability to restore
electrical power to essential airplane
systems.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(g) Definition of a Serviceable Rod
For the purpose of this AD, a serviceable
battery retaining rod is defined in paragraphs
(g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD.
(1) A battery retaining rod provided as a
spare part by Airbus.
(2) A battery retaining rod previously fitted
on a battery support assembly installed on an
airplane manufacturer serial number that is
not specified in Airbus Service Bulletin
A320–92–1116, Revision 00, dated January
31, 2017 (for Airbus Model A319 and A320
series airplanes; and Model A321–111, –112,
–131, –211, –212, –213, –231, and –232
airplanes); or Airbus Service Bulletin A320–
92–1118, Revision 00, dated January 31, 2017
(for Airbus Model A320–251N and –271N
airplanes), provided the battery retaining rod
used for replacement can be positively
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Aug 07, 2018
Jkt 244001
identified as a serviceable battery retaining
rod.
(h) Identification of Affected Parts
Within 24 months after the effective date
of this AD: Accomplish a detailed inspection
of the battery support assemblies to identify
the battery retaining rod manufacturer, in
accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of the Airbus Service Bulletin
A320–92–1116, Revision 00, dated January
31, 2017 (for Airbus Model A319 and A320
series airplanes, and Model A321–111, –112,
–131, –211, –212, –213, –231, and –232
airplanes); or Airbus Service Bulletin A320–
92–1118, Revision 00, dated January 31, 2017
(for Airbus Model A320–251N and –271N
airplanes).
(i) Replacement of Affected Parts if Marking
Is Found on Battery Support Assembly
If, during the inspection specified in
paragraph (h) of this AD, the quality stamp
on any battery support assemblies are found
marked with an ‘‘SA’’ manufacturer
identification, before further flight, replace
the battery retaining rods with serviceable
battery retaining rods, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of the Airbus
Service Bulletin A320–92–1116, Revision 00,
dated January 31, 2017 (for Airbus Model
A319 and A320 series airplanes; and Model
A321–111, –112, –131, –211, –212, –213,
–231, and –232 airplanes); or Airbus Service
Bulletin A320–92–1118, Revision 00, dated
January 31, 2017 (for Airbus Model A320–
251N and –271N airplanes); except as
provided by paragraph (j) of this AD.
(j) Exception to the Service Information
Although Airbus Service Bulletin A320–
92–1116, Revision 00, dated January 31,
2017; and Airbus Service Bulletin A320–92–
1118, Revision 00, dated January 31, 2017;
specify to install inspection service bulletin
(ISB) labels, this AD does not include that
requirement.
(k) Parts Installation Prohibition
As of the effective date of this AD, no
person may install, on any airplane, a nonserviceable battery retaining rod.
(l) Terminating Action
Replacement of all battery retaining rods
with a serviceable battery retaining rod as
required by paragraph (i) of this AD
constitutes terminating action for all
requirements of AD 2016–25–24 for that
airplane.
(m) Other FAA AD Provisions
The following provisions also apply to this
AD:
(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 International Section, send it
to the attention of the person identified in
paragraph (n)(2) of this AD. Information may
be emailed to: 9-ANM-116-AMOC-
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
38963
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: 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
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or
Airbus’s EASA Design Organization
Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA,
the approval must include the DOAauthorized signature.
(3) Required for Compliance (RC): 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.
(n) Related Information
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD
2017–0161R1, dated September 19, 2017;
corrected September 20, 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–2018–0077.
(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.
(o) 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 A320–92–1116,
Revision 00, dated January 31, 2017.
(ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A320–92–1118,
Revision 00, dated January 31, 2017.
(3) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Airbus, Airworthiness
Office—EIAS, 2 Rond Point Emile Dewoitine,
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
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
E:\FR\FM\08AUR1.SGM
08AUR1
38964
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 153 / Wednesday, August 8, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
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 July
27, 2018.
James Cashdollar,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2018–16736 Filed 8–7–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
18 CFR Parts 154, 260, and 284
[Docket Nos. RM18–11–000, RP18–415–000;
Order No. 849]
Interstate and Intrastate Natural Gas
Pipelines; Rate Changes Relating to
Federal Income Tax Rate; American
Forest & Paper Association
Correction
In rule document 2018–15786
appearing on pages 36672–36717 in the
issue of July 30, 2018, make the
following correction:
§ 260.402
[Corrected]
On page 36715, in § 260.402, in the
second column, under Amendatory
Instruction 4, in the first line,
‘‘§ 60.402’’ should read ‘‘§ 260.402’’.
■
[FR Doc. C1–2018–15786 Filed 8–7–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1301–00–D
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R06–OAR–2017–0699; FRL–9981–
41—Region 6]
Air Plan Approval; Arkansas
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
Pursuant to the Federal Clean
Air Act (CAA or the Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
is approving portions of the revisions to
the Arkansas State Implementation Plan
(SIP) submitted by the Arkansas
Department of Environmental Quality
(ADEQ) on March 24, 2017. Most of the
revisions are administrative in nature
and make the SIP current with Federal
rules. The EPA is also making
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Aug 07, 2018
Jkt 244001
ministerial changes to the Code of
Federal Register (CFR) to reflect SIP
actions pertaining to the Arkansas
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD) program.
DATES: This rule is effective on
November 6, 2018 without further
notice, unless the EPA receives relevant
adverse comment by September 7, 2018.
If the EPA receives such comment, the
EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in
the Federal Register informing the
public that this rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket No. EPA–R06–
OAR–2017–0699, at https://
www.regulations.gov or via email to
paige.carrie@epa.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
The EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information
you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact Carrie Paige, 214–665–6521,
paige.carrie@epa.gov. For the full EPA
public comment policy, information
about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making
effective comments, please visit https://
www2.epa.gov/dockets/commentingepa-dockets.
Docket: The index to the docket for
this action is available electronically at
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
at EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. While all
documents in the docket are listed in
the index, some information may be
publicly available only at the hard copy
location (e.g., copyrighted material), and
some may not be publicly available at
either location (e.g., CBI).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Carrie Paige, 214–665–6521,
paige.carrie@epa.gov. To inspect the
hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment with Ms. Paige or Mr. Bill
Deese at 214–665–7253.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ means the EPA.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
I. Background
The SIP is a set of air pollution
regulations, control strategies, and
technical analyses developed by the
state to ensure that the state meets the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS). These ambient standards are
established under section 109 of the Act
and they currently address six criteria
pollutants: Carbon monoxide, lead,
nitrogen dioxide, ozone, particulate
matter, and sulfur dioxide. The SIP is
required by Section 110 of the Act and
can be extensive, containing state
regulations or other enforceable
documents and supporting information
such as emission inventories,
monitoring networks, and modeling
demonstrations.
On March 24, 2017, the Governor of
Arkansas submitted to the EPA
revisions to the Arkansas SIP. The
submittal includes revisions to the
Regulations of the Arkansas Plan of
Implementation for Air Pollution
Control enacted at Arkansas Annotated
Code (‘‘Ark. Code Ann.’’) Regulation 19
(‘‘Reg. 19’’), Chapters 1–5, 7, 9, 11, 13–
15, Appendix A, and Appendix B, and
the Infrastructure and NAAQS SIPs.
EPA has taken separate action on the
following portions of this submittal: (1)
On December 21, 2017, EPA approved
the revisions to Reg. 19, Chapter 2, that
address the definition of ‘‘Volatile
Organic Compounds’’ (see 82 FR 60517);
(2) On February 14, 2018, EPA approved
the Infrastructure portion (see 83 FR
6470); (3) On June 29, 2018, EPA
approved the revisions to Reg. 19,
Chapter 4, that address Minor New
Source Review (see 83 FR 30553); And,
(4) on June 29, 2018, EPA proposed to
approve the revisions that address
interstate transport requirements for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS and the revisions to
Reg. 19, Chapter 2 and Appendix B, that
address the definition of 2012 PM2.5 in
the definition of ‘‘NAAQS’’ and the
table for ‘‘Particle Pollution, PM2.5’’ (see
83 FR 30622). Because these prior EPA
actions did not address all the
submitted revisions to Reg. 19, Chapter
2 and Appendix B, today’s action
addresses the remaining submitted
revisions to Reg. 19, Chapter 2 and
Appendix B, and the submitted
revisions to Reg. 19, Chapters 1, 3, 5, 13,
14, and 15. For a detailed list of each
revision with our evaluation, please see
our Technical Support Document (TSD)
in the docket for this rulemaking.
II. Summary of Revisions to the
Arkansas SIP and EPA Evaluation
A. Non-Substantive Changes
Non-substantive changes were made
to Regulation 19, Chapter 1, Sections
E:\FR\FM\08AUR1.SGM
08AUR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 153 (Wednesday, August 8, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38959-38964]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16736]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2018-0077; Product Identifier 2017-NM-126-AD; Amendment
39-19352; AD 2018-16-12]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Airbus Model A319 and A320 series airplanes; and A321-111, -112, -131,
-211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. This AD was prompted by
reports of battery retaining rod failures due to quality defects of the
material used during parts manufacturing. This AD requires a detailed
inspection of the battery support assemblies to identify the battery
retaining rod manufacturer, replacement of the battery retaining rods
with serviceable battery retaining rods if necessary, and the addition
of the applicable service information label on each battery retaining
rod if necessary. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.
DATES: This AD is effective September 12, 2018.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of September 12,
2018.
ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Airbus, Airworthiness Office--EIAS, 2 Rond Point Emile
Dewoitine, 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
[[Page 38960]]
and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-0077.
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-2018-
0077; 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 street 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 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Airbus Model A319
and A320 series airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212,
-213, -231, and -232 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal
Register on February 12, 2018 (83 FR 5960) (``the NPRM'').
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD
2017-0161R1, dated September 19, 2017; corrected September 20, 2017
(referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness
Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for
certain Airbus Model A319 and A320 series airplanes; and Model A321-
111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. The MCAI
states:
Several occurrences have been reported of battery rod failures
on certain Airbus aeroplanes. Subsequent examination of broken rod
parts determined that these failures were due to quality defects of
the material used during parts manufacturing. Each battery is
secured on an aeroplane by two rods. Failure of one rod, in case of
severe turbulence during flight or hard landing, could lead to
battery displacement, or roll on the remaining rod side, up to a
point where the remaining rod could be disengaged. The battery could
ultimately detach from its housing and damage relays, connectors,
contactor boxes, air ducts and surrounding structure.
This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to the
loss of the normal electrical generation not followed by an
automatic recovery of essential network.
To address this potential unsafe condition, Airbus issued Alert
Operators Transmission (AOT) A92N001-16 (later revised) and EASA
issued AD 2016-0204 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2016-25-24 (81 FR
90958, December 16, 2016) (``AD 2016-25-24'')] requiring repetitive
general visual inspections (GVI) of the four battery rods (two per
battery), and, in case of findings, replacement of battery rods.
Since that [EASA] AD was issued, the manufacturer of the broken
battery retaining rods has been identified, which allows proper
identification of the affected parts and their withdrawal from
service. Consequently, Airbus issued [service bulletin] SB A320-92-
1116 and SB A320-92-1118 to provide the necessary instructions to
the affected operators. No rods delivered as spare parts are
affected by the manufacturing issue.
For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD retains the
requirements of EASA AD 2016-0204, which is superseded, and requires
replacement of battery retaining rods depending on manufacturer
identification. This [EASA] AD also provides a terminating action
for the repetitive inspections.
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-2018-
0077.
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.
Request To Revise the Compliance Time
Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA) requested that we
revise the compliance time. ALPA stated that the proposed AD specifies
a compliance time of within 24 months after the AD effective date. ALPA
commented that because the proposed AD is related to quality, it
believes this compliance time is insufficient. ALPA also commented that
since the issuance of the manufacturer's service information, operators
have had over 12 months to comply with the required corrective actions.
ALPA stated that, additionally, the time estimated to complete the
inspections and replacement of the affected parts is minimal. ALPA
recommended that we consider a compliance time of within 12 months
after the AD effective date.
We disagree with the commenter. While some U.S. operators have had
time to plan and schedule the work contained in the Airbus service
information, there is no obligation for any U.S. operator to perform
those actions without a regulatory requirement. Therefore, we agree
with EASA's decision to allow a 24-month compliance time to plan,
schedule, and accomplish the actions necessary to remove the unsafe
condition. If additional data are presented that would justify a
shorter compliance time, we may consider further rulemaking on this
issue. We have not changed this AD in this regard.
Request To Revise the Definition of Serviceable Rod
Delta Airlines (DAL) requested that we revise the definition of a
serviceable rod in paragraph (g) of the proposed AD. DAL stated to add
an additional paragraph that specifies:
A battery retaining rod with an ISB [inspection service
bulletin] label installed in accordance with the accomplishment
instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-1116, Revision 00,
dated January 31, 2017 (for Airbus Model A319 and A320 series
airplanes; and A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -
232 airplanes); or Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-1118, Revision
00, dated January 31, 2017 (for Airbus Model A320-251N and -271N
airplanes).
We partially agree with revising the definition of a serviceable
rod in paragraph (g) of this AD. We have determined that the
installation of the ISB label does not affect the unsafe condition and
have removed the requirement from this AD. We have coordinated this
changed with EASA. Furthermore, we have revised paragraph (g) of this
AD to clarify that the battery retaining rod used for replacement must
be positively identified as a serviceable battery retaining rod.
Request for Clarification Regarding Manufacturer Serial Numbers
United Airlines (UAL) requested clarification regarding
manufacturer serial numbers in the proposed AD. UAL stated that the
manufacturer serial numbers are not applicable to the proposed AD as
identified in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-1116, Revision 00, dated
January 31, 2017, and Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-1118, Revision
00, dated January 31, 2017. UAL stated that, although the machining
that caused the failure mode is identified in the service information,
the same battery retaining rod part number used in pre- and post-
service information remains unchanged. UAL commented that it is unclear
whether a serial number, batch number, or date exists for those battery
retaining rods. UAL also asked how were the battery
[[Page 38961]]
retaining rod spares deemed to be serviceable in paragraph (g)(1) of
the proposed AD?
We agree to provide clarification for the commenter. According to
EASA AD 2017-0161R1, dated September 19, 2017; corrected September 20,
2017; no spares with manufacturing defects were delivered by Airbus.
Only a certain batch of defective parts were installed in production on
certain manufacturer serial numbers as specified in Airbus Service
Bulletin A320-92-1116, Revision 00, dated January 31, 2017; and Airbus
Service Bulletin A320-92-1118, Revision 00, dated January 31, 2017. If
an operator does not have an airplane affected as specified in the
service information, then there is no concern relative to defective
spare parts. We have not changed this AD in this regard.
Request To Clarify the Identification of Affected Parts
DAL requested that we clarify the identification of the affected
parts in paragraph (h) of the proposed AD. DAL stated that the detailed
inspection to identify the battery retaining rod manufacturer should be
of the battery support assemblies and not the battery retaining rods.
We agree with the commenter's request. We have revised paragraph
(h) of this AD to require a detailed inspection of the battery support
assemblies to identify the manufacturer of the battery retaining rods.
Request To Include an Additional Method of Compliance to the AD
Requirements
DAL requested that we add an additional method of compliance for
paragraphs (h), (i), and (j) of the proposed AD. DAL stated that the
language, ``or using a method approved by the Manager, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA
Design Organization Approval (DOA),'' should be included as an option
to using the service information. DAL also stated that this language
should be considered standard wording for future ADs as applicable.
We disagree with the commenter's request. We have already provided
a method of compliance (MOC) for paragraphs (h), (i), and (j) of this
AD in accordance with the applicable service information. Any
deviations from the required MOC would need an evaluation in form of an
AMOC. DAL's proposed option is generally utilized in cases where no MOC
has been established or we have known information that the MOC may not
be applicable for all airplanes in the U.S fleet. We have not changed
the AD in this regard.
Request To Not Require Certain Service Information Labels on the
Battery Rod
DAL and American Airlines (AA) requested that we not mandate that a
service information label be attached to each battery retaining rod as
required by the Airbus service information specified in paragraphs (j)
and (l) of the proposed AD. AA also requested that we not mandate
attachments of a service information label as part of the replacement
required by paragraph (i) of the proposed AD. DAL stated that it has 7
affected airplanes that would have a different final configuration than
the current and future fleet of 348 airplanes in its A320FAM fleet.
AA stated that all battery retaining rods provided by Airbus post
August 2016 are marked and stamped with manufactures part number (MPN)
D8241023700000. AA commented that this marking of the new battery
retaining rods can be used in lieu of the information service bulletin
(ISB) label. AA also commented that it plans to replace all existing
battery retaining rods with the new battery retaining rods that are
marked with MPN D8241023700000.
In addition, AA stated that installing the ISB label on the battery
retaining rods on 128 of its A319/A320 airplanes does not add a safety
value, but will put a burden on AA to maintain two different
configurations of battery retaining rod installation between 128
airplanes that are effected by the service information in the proposed
AD and 265 airplanes that are not affected by the service information
in the proposed AD.
We agree with the commenters' request. We agree that the ISB label
is not necessary to mitigate the risk addressed in this AD. Therefore,
we have determined that the installation of ISB label should be
optional and not a required for compliance (RC) step.
However, 14 CFR 39.9, specifies that operators have a continuing
obligation to maintain compliance with an AD, and the installation of
the ISB label or an equivalent method to identify a serviceable battery
retaining rod provides the operators with a simplified way to
demonstrate compliance with the AD requirements. We have removed
paragraph (j) of the proposed AD and revised paragraph (l) of this AD
to revise the terminating action requirements. We have also added
paragraph (j) of this AD to provide an exception to paragraph (i) of
this AD, which specifies that installing the ISB label is not a
requirement in this AD.
Request To Revise the Terminating Action Paragraph
DAL requested that paragraph (l) of the proposed AD, ``Terminating
Action,'' be revised to read, ``Replacement of all battery retaining
rods,'' and not, ``Replacement of all battery retaining rods marked
`SA. . . .' '' DAL stated that the battery retaining rods are not
marked with ``SA,'' only the battery support assemblies.
We agree with the commenter's request and have revised the AD
accordingly.
Request To Use Alternate Part Numbers
Spirit Airlines requested that either the service information or
the proposed AD be revised to provide the use of alternate materials to
label part number (P/N) ASNE0248A1-4H9. Spirit Airlines stated that P/N
ASNE0248A1-4H9 is no longer available, and that alternate P/N E0248A1-
4H9P and P/N ASNE0248A1-4H9T may be obtained from Airbus. Spirit
Airlines believes that use of these alternate part numbers would
provide an equivalent level of safety as referenced in Airbus Dossier
Reference 80403684/003, dated January 8, 2018, and Airbus Retrofit
Information Letter SA92M16012714 R00, dated February 1, 2017.
DAL requested that a previously approved AMOC be used in the
proposed AD. DAL stated that in paragraph (h) and (j) of the proposed
AD, Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-1116, Revision 00, dated January
31, 2017, calls out a non-procurable part number for the identification
label. Therefore, DAL proposed that recognition of AMOC AIR-676-18-152,
issued against AD 2016-25-24, which allows an alternate label part
number, be added to paragraph (m) of the proposed AD as an acceptable
method of compliance to the proposed AD.
We partially agree with the commenters request. As we stated
previously, we have determined that installation of an ISB label is not
an RC step. Therefore, a previously issued AMOC for allowing alternate
label part numbers is unnecessary. However, we would like to remind
operators that 14 CFR 39.9 specifies an operator's continuing
obligation to maintain compliance with an AD, and installation of an
ISB label or an equivalent method provides operators with a method to
demonstrate the affected battery retaining rods have been removed and
replaced with serviceable retaining rods in compliance with the AD
requirements.
[[Page 38962]]
Differences Between This AD and the MCAI
The MCAI includes a requirement to install an ISB label. This AD
does not include that requirement. We have determined that the ISB
label is not necessary to mitigate the risk addressed in this AD.
However, 14 CFR 39.9, specifies that operators have a continuing
obligation to maintain compliance with an AD, and the installation of
the ISB label or an equivalent method to identify a serviceable battery
retaining rod provides the operators with a simplified way to
demonstrate compliance with the AD requirements.
Conclusion
We reviewed the relevant data, considered 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 minor 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 Service Bulletin A320-92-1116, Revision 00, dated
January 31, 2017; and Service Bulletin A320-92-1118, Revision 00, dated
January 31, 2017. This service information describes a detailed
inspection of the battery support assemblies to identify the battery
retaining rod manufacturer, replacement of the battery retaining rods
with serviceable battery retaining rods if necessary, and adding the
applicable service information label on each battery retaining rod if
necessary. These documents are distinct since they apply to different
airplane models. 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 330 airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:
Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost per Cost on U.S.
Action Labor cost Parts cost product operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection......................... 1 work-hour x $85 per hour $0 $85 $28,050
= $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacement
that would be required based on the results of the inspection. We have
no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need this
replacement:
On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost per
Action Labor cost Parts cost product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement................................ 1 work-hour x $85 per hour = $85... $0 $85
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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, 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:
[[Page 38963]]
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
0
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
2018-16-12 Airbus: Amendment 39-19352; Docket No. FAA-2018-0077;
Product Identifier 2017-NM-126-AD.
(a) Effective Date
This AD is effective September 12, 2018.
(b) Affected ADs
This AD affects AD 2016-25-24, Amendment 39-18750 (81 FR 90958,
December 16, 2016) (``AD 2016-25-24'').
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to Airbus Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -
115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -
216, -231, -232, -233, -251N, and -271N airplanes; and Model A321-
111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes,
certificated in any category, as identified in Airbus Service
Bulletin A320-92-1116, Revision 00, dated January 31, 2017; or
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-1118, Revision 00, dated January 31,
2017.
(d) Subject
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 92, Electrical
system installation.
(e) Reason
This AD was prompted by reports of battery retaining rod
failures due to quality defects of the material used during parts
manufacturing. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct broken
battery retaining rods, which, in the event of a hard landing or
severe turbulence, could cause the battery to detach from its
housing, resulting in damage to other electrical equipment and
surrounding structure. This condition could lead to loss of normal
electrical power generation and subsequent inability to restore
electrical power to essential airplane systems.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
(g) Definition of a Serviceable Rod
For the purpose of this AD, a serviceable battery retaining rod
is defined in paragraphs (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD.
(1) A battery retaining rod provided as a spare part by Airbus.
(2) A battery retaining rod previously fitted on a battery
support assembly installed on an airplane manufacturer serial number
that is not specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-1116,
Revision 00, dated January 31, 2017 (for Airbus Model A319 and A320
series airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213,
-231, and -232 airplanes); or Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-1118,
Revision 00, dated January 31, 2017 (for Airbus Model A320-251N and
-271N airplanes), provided the battery retaining rod used for
replacement can be positively identified as a serviceable battery
retaining rod.
(h) Identification of Affected Parts
Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD: Accomplish
a detailed inspection of the battery support assemblies to identify
the battery retaining rod manufacturer, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of the Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-
1116, Revision 00, dated January 31, 2017 (for Airbus Model A319 and
A320 series airplanes, and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -
213, -231, and -232 airplanes); or Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-
1118, Revision 00, dated January 31, 2017 (for Airbus Model A320-
251N and -271N airplanes).
(i) Replacement of Affected Parts if Marking Is Found on Battery
Support Assembly
If, during the inspection specified in paragraph (h) of this AD,
the quality stamp on any battery support assemblies are found marked
with an ``SA'' manufacturer identification, before further flight,
replace the battery retaining rods with serviceable battery
retaining rods, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions
of the Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-1116, Revision 00, dated
January 31, 2017 (for Airbus Model A319 and A320 series airplanes;
and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232
airplanes); or Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-1118, Revision 00,
dated January 31, 2017 (for Airbus Model A320-251N and -271N
airplanes); except as provided by paragraph (j) of this AD.
(j) Exception to the Service Information
Although Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-1116, Revision 00,
dated January 31, 2017; and Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-1118,
Revision 00, dated January 31, 2017; specify to install inspection
service bulletin (ISB) labels, this AD does not include that
requirement.
(k) Parts Installation Prohibition
As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install, on
any airplane, a non-serviceable battery retaining rod.
(l) Terminating Action
Replacement of all battery retaining rods with a serviceable
battery retaining rod as required by paragraph (i) of this AD
constitutes terminating action for all requirements of AD 2016-25-24
for that airplane.
(m) Other FAA AD Provisions
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(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 International Section, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (n)(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: 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 European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval
(DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-
authorized signature.
(3) Required for Compliance (RC): 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.
(n) Related Information
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA AD 2017-0161R1, dated September 19, 2017; corrected
September 20, 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-2018-0077.
(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.
(o) 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 A320-92-1116, Revision 00, dated
January 31, 2017.
(ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-92-1118, Revision 00, dated
January 31, 2017.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus, Airworthiness Office--EIAS, 2 Rond Point Emile Dewoitine,
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
[[Page 38964]]
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 July 27, 2018.
James Cashdollar,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-16736 Filed 8-7-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
