```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 141 (Wednesday, July 23, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42652-42655]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-16535]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0004; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-143-AD; 
Amendment 39-17900; AD 2014-14-05]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 
Airbus Model A320-111, -211, -212, and -231 airplanes. This AD was 
prompted by reports of broken struts of the center wing box (CWB). This 
AD requires a detailed inspection of the CWB struts for cracking, and 
repair if necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct 
cracked or broken struts, which could result in strut failure and 
consequent reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective August 27, 2014.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of August 27, 
2014.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0004; or in person at the 
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.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus, 
Airworthiness Office--EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 
Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 
51; email account.airworth-eas@airbus.com; Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information at the 
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. 
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 
425-227-1221.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, 
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone: 425-227-1405; 
fax: 425-227-1149.

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 A320-
111, -211, -212, and -231 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal 
Register on February 10, 2014 (79 FR 7596).
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical 
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA 
Airworthiness Directive 2013-0149, dated July 16, 2013 (referred to 
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or 
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified 
products. The MCAI states:

    Two cases of broken Centre Wing Box (CWB) struts have been 
reported on A320 aeroplanes. Investigation results indicated that 
strut thickness in the crack initiation area was lower than 
specified in the production drawings. Only a limited batch of 
aeroplanes is affected by this manufacturing defect.
    This condition, if not corrected, could result in strut failure, 
reducing the residual life of the remaining struts to below the 
initial Design Service Goal, which would deteriorate the structural 
integrity of the aeroplane.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires 
repetitive Detailed Visual inspections (DVI) of the lower and upper 
ends of the CWB struts to detect cracks and, depending on findings, 
accomplishment of associated corrective actions [repair].

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-0004-0002.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing 
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM (79 FR 7596, February 10, 
2014) or on the determination of the cost to the public.

``Contacting the Manufacturer'' Paragraph in This AD

    Since late 2006, we have included a standard paragraph titled 
``Airworthy Product'' in all MCAI ADs in which the FAA develops an AD 
based on a foreign authority's AD.
    The MCAI or referenced service information in an FAA AD often 
directs the owner/operator to contact the manufacturer for corrective 
actions, such as a repair. Briefly, the Airworthy Product paragraph 
allowed owners/operators to use corrective actions provided by the 
manufacturer if those actions were FAA-approved. In addition, the 
paragraph stated that any actions approved by the State of Design

[[Page 42653]]

Authority (or its delegated agent) are considered to be FAA-approved.
    In the NPRM (79 FR 7596, February 10, 2014), we proposed to prevent 
the use of repairs that were not specifically developed to correct the 
unsafe condition, by requiring that the repair approval provided by the 
State of Design Authority or its delegated agent specifically refer to 
this FAA AD. This change was intended to clarify the method of 
compliance and to provide operators with better visibility of repairs 
that are specifically developed and approved to correct the unsafe 
condition. In addition, we proposed to change the phrase ``its 
delegated agent'' to include a design approval holder (DAH) with State 
of Design Authority design organization approval (DOA), as applicable, 
to refer to a DAH authorized to approve required repairs for the 
proposed AD.
    No comments were provided to the NPRM (79 FR 7596, February 10, 
2014) about these proposed changes. However, a comment was provided for 
another NPRM, Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-101-AD (78 FR 78285, 
December 26, 2013), in which the commenter stated the following: ``The 
proposed wording, being specific to repairs, eliminates the 
interpretation that Airbus messages are acceptable for approving minor 
deviations (corrective actions) needed during accomplishment of an AD 
mandated Airbus service bulletin.''
    This comment has made the FAA aware that some operators have 
misunderstood or misinterpreted the Airworthy Product paragraph to 
allow the owner/operator to use messages provided by the manufacturer 
as approval of deviations during the accomplishment of an AD-mandated 
action. The Airworthy Product paragraph does not approve messages or 
other information provided by the manufacturer for deviations to the 
requirements of the AD-mandated actions. The Airworthy Product 
paragraph only addresses the requirement to contact the manufacturer 
for corrective actions for the identified unsafe condition and does not 
cover deviations from other AD requirements. However, deviations to AD-
required actions are addressed in 14 CFR 39.17, and anyone may request 
the approval for an alternative method of compliance to the AD-required 
actions using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    To address this misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the 
Airworthy Product paragraph, we have changed that paragraph and 
retitled it ``Contacting the Manufacturer.'' This paragraph now 
clarifies that for any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective 
actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a 
method approved by the FAA, the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), 
or Airbus's EASA DOA.
    The Contacting the Manufacturer paragraph also clarifies that, if 
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized 
signature. The DOA signature indicates that the data and information 
contained in the document are EASA-approved, which is also FAA-
approved. Messages and other information provided by the manufacturer 
that do not contain the DOA-authorized signature approval are not EASA-
approved, unless EASA directly approves the manufacturer's message or 
other information.
    This clarification does not remove flexibility previously afforded 
by the Airworthy Product paragraph. Consistent with long-standing FAA 
policy, such flexibility was never intended for required actions. This 
is also consistent with the recommendation of the Airworthiness 
Directive Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee to increase 
flexibility in complying with ADs by identifying those actions in 
manufacturers' service instructions that are ``Required for 
Compliance'' with ADs. We continue to work with manufacturers to 
implement this recommendation. But once we determine that an action is 
required, any deviation from the requirement must be approved as an 
alternative method of compliance.
    Other commenters to the NPRM discussed previously, Directorate 
Identifier 2012-NM-101-AD (78 FR 78285, December 26, 2013), pointed out 
that in many cases the foreign manufacturer's service bulletin and the 
foreign authority's MCAI might have been issued some time before the 
FAA AD. Therefore, the DOA might have provided U.S. operators with an 
approved repair, developed with full awareness of the unsafe condition, 
before the FAA AD is issued. Under these circumstances, to comply with 
the FAA AD, the operator would be required to go back to the 
manufacturer's DOA and obtain a new approval document, adding time and 
expense to the compliance process with no safety benefit.
    Based on these comments, we removed the requirement that the DAH-
provided repair specifically refer to this AD. Before adopting such a 
requirement, the FAA will coordinate with affected DAHs and verify they 
are prepared to implement means to ensure that their repair approvals 
consider the unsafe condition addressed in this AD. Any such 
requirements will be adopted through the normal AD rulemaking process, 
including notice-and-comment procedures, when appropriate. We also have 
decided not to include a generic reference to either the ``delegated 
agent'' or ``DAH with State of Design Authority design organization 
approval,'' but instead we have provided the specific delegation 
approval granted by the State of Design Authority for the DAH 
throughout this AD.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data 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 (79 FR 7596, February 10, 2014) for correcting the unsafe 
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was 
already proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 7596, February 10, 2014).

We also determined that these changes will not increase the economic 
burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 16 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                         Cost per
             Action                          Labor cost                Parts cost        product                    Cost on U.S. operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection......................  12 work-hours x $85 per hour =                $0           $1,020   $16,320 per inspection cycle.
                                   $1,020 per inspection cycle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 42654]]

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide 
cost estimates for the on-condition action specified in this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to 
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the 
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, 
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in 
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General 
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with 
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing 
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator 
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within 
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition 
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this 
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    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 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 adding the following new airworthiness 
directive (AD):

2014-14-05 Airbus: Amendment 39-17900; Docket No. FAA-2014-0004; 
Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-143-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective August 27, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Model A320-211, -212, and -231 
airplanes, certificated in any category, all manufacturer serial 
numbers up to 0136 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of broken struts of the center 
wing box (CWB) on certain airplanes. We are issuing this AD to 
detect and correct cracked or broken struts, which could result in 
strut failure and consequent reduced structural integrity of the 
airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Repetitive Inspections

    At the applicable time specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) 
of this AD: Do a detailed inspection of each strut of the CWB for 
cracking, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of 
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1149, Revision 01, dated February 
12, 2013. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to 
exceed 16,800 flight cycles or 33,600 flight hours, whichever occurs 
first.
    (1) For airplanes on which the inspection required by paragraph 
(g) of this AD has not been done as of the effective date of this 
AD: Do the inspection at the later of the times specified in 
paragraphs (g)(1)(i) and (g)(1)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Before the accumulation of 31,700 total flight cycles or 
63,400 total flight hours since first flight, whichever occurs 
first.
    (ii) Within 1,250 flight cycles or 2,500 flight hours after the 
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.
    (2) For airplanes on which the inspection required by paragraph 
(g) of this AD has been done as of the effective date of this AD: Do 
the inspection within 16,800 flight cycles or 33,600 flight hours 
after the most recent inspection, whichever occurs first.

(h) Repair

    If any crack is found during any inspection required by 
paragraph (g) of this AD: Before further flight, repair using a 
method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, 
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety 
Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). 
If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized 
signature.

(i) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph 
(g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective 
date of this AD using Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1149, dated 
April 1, 2008, which is not incorporated by reference in this AD.

(j) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, 
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using 
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight 
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information 
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Sanjay 
Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport 
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; telephone: 425-227-1405; fax: 425-227-1149. Information may be 
emailed to: 9-ANM-116-AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. Before using any 
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or 
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight 
standards district office/certificate holding district office. The 
AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (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 
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 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.

(k) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information 
(MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2013-0149, dated July 16, 2013, 
for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on 
the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-
2014-0004-0002.
    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not 
incorporated by reference may be viewed at the addresses specified 
in paragraphs (l)(3) and (l)(4) of this AD.

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the 
incorporation by reference

[[Page 42655]]

(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) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1149, Revision 01, dated 
February 12, 2013.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact 
Airbus, Airworthiness Office--EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 
31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 
61 93 44 51; email account.airworth-eas@airbus.com; Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport 
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 
425-227-1221.
    (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: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 25, 2014.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-16535 Filed 7-22-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```