Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 150 / Friday, August 3, 2018 / Proposed Rules 38091 

applicable service information specified in 

paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(7) of this AD. 

(1) Airbus Service Bulletin A330–29–3131, 

dated August 11, 2017. 

(2) Airbus Service Bulletin A330–29–3132, 

dated August 11, 2017. 

(3) Airbus Service Bulletin A330–29–3133, 

dated August 11, 2017. 

(4) Airbus Service Bulletin A340–29–4099, 

dated August 11. 2017. 

(5) Airbus Service Bulletin A340–29–4100, 

dated August 11, 2017. 

(6) Airbus Service Bulletin A340–29–4101, 

dated August 11, 2017. 

(7) Airbus Service Bulletin A340–29–5026, 

dated August 11, 2017. 

(j) Part Re-identification 

(1) For Group 1 airplanes: Concurrently 

with the PRV replacement required by 

paragraph (i) of this AD, re-identify the part 

numbers of affected HRs as specified in table 

1 to paragraphs (g), (h), (i), and (j) of this AD, 

in accordance with the applicable service 

information specified in paragraphs (i)(1) 

through (i)(7) of this AD. 

(2) For Group 2 airplanes: At the applicable 

time specified in table 1 to paragraphs (g), 

(h), (i), and (j) of this AD, re-identify the part 

numbers of affected PRVs and HRs, in 

accordance with the applicable service 

information specified in paragraphs (i)(1) 

through (i)(7) of this AD. 

(k) Terminating Action 

Replacement of all affected PRVs on an 

airplane, as required by paragraph (i) of this 

AD, terminates all requirements of AD 2017– 

01–08 for that airplane. 

(l) Parts Installation Prohibition 

(1) For Group 1 airplanes: After 

replacement of all affected parts as required 

by paragraph (i) of this AD, do not install any 

affected PRV. 

(2) For Group 2 airplanes: As of the 

effective date of this AD, do not install any 

affected PRV. 

(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 Branch, send it 

to the attention of the person identified in 

paragraph (n)(2) of this AD. Information may 

be emailed to: 9-ANM-116-AMOCREQUESTS@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 SAS’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 

2018–0064, dated March 23, 2018, for related 

information. This MCAI may be found in the 

AD docket on the internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for and 

locating Docket No. FAA–2018–0704. 

(2) For more information about this AD, 

contact Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace 

Engineer, International Section, Transport 

Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th 

St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and 

fax: 206–231–3229. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness 

Office—EAL, Rond Point Emile Dewoitine 

No: 2, 31700 Blagnac Cedex, France; 

telephone: +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax: +33 5 61 

93 45 80; email: airworthiness.A330-A340@

airbus.com; internet http://www.airbus.com. 

You may view this service information at the 

FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 

South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 206–231–3195. 

Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on July 

25, 2018. 

James Cashdollar, 

Acting Director, System Oversight Division, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2018–16574 Filed 8–2–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2018–0641; Product 

Identifier 2018–NM–032–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede 

Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2017–22– 

07, which applies to certain Airbus 

Model A319 series airplanes; Model 

A320–211, –212, –214, –231, –232, and 

–233 airplanes; and Model A321–111, 

–112, –131, –211, –212, –213, –231, and 

–232 airplanes. AD 2017–22–07 requires 

repetitive inspections of the frame forks, 

and corrective actions if necessary. AD 

2017–22–07 also includes optional 

modifications that constitute 

terminating action. Since we issued AD 

2017–22–07, an evaluation was done by 

the design approval holder (DAH) 

indicating that the frame forks and outer 

skin on the forward and aft cargo 

compartment doors are subject to 

widespread fatigue damage (WFD), and 

a determination was made that a 

modification of the frame forks must be 

accomplished. This proposed AD would 

require modifying certain forward and 

aft cargo compartment doors, and 

related investigative and corrective 

actions. We are proposing this AD to 

address the unsafe condition on these 

products. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by September 17, 

2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this NPRM, 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: http://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. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the internet at http:// 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
38092 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 150 / Friday, August 3, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2018– 

0641; 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 NPRM, the regulatory 

evaluation, any comments received, and 

other information. The street address for 

the Docket Operations office (telephone 

800–647–5527) is in the ADDRESSES

section. Comments will be available in 

the AD docket shortly after receipt. 

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: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposal. Send your comments to 

an address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 

2018–0641; Product Identifier 2018– 

NM–032–AD’’ at the beginning of your 

comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD based on those comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

Fatigue damage can occur locally, in 

small areas or structural design details, 

or globally, in widespread areas. 

Multiple-site damage is widespread 

damage that occurs in a large structural 

element such as a single rivet line of a 

lap splice joining two large skin panels. 

Widespread damage can also occur in 

multiple elements such as adjacent 

frames or stringers. Multiple-site 

damage and multiple-element damage 

cracks are typically too small initially to 

be reliably detected with normal 

inspection methods. Without 

intervention, these cracks will grow, 

and eventually compromise the 

structural integrity of the airplane. This 

condition is known as WFD. It is 

associated with general degradation of 

large areas of structure with similar 

structural details and stress levels. As 

an airplane ages, WFD will likely occur, 

and will certainly occur if the airplane 

is operated long enough without any 

intervention. 

The FAA’s WFD final rule (75 FR 

69746, November 15, 2010) became 

effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD 

rule requires certain actions to prevent 

structural failure due to WFD 

throughout the operational life of 

certain existing transport category 

airplanes and all of these airplanes that 

will be certificated in the future. For 

existing and future airplanes subject to 

the WFD rule, the rule requires that 

DAHs establish a limit of validity (LOV) 

of the engineering data that support the 

structural maintenance program. 

Operators affected by the WFD rule may 

not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, 

unless an extended LOV is approved. 

The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, 

November 15, 2010) does not require 

identifying and developing maintenance 

actions if the DAHs can show that such 

actions are not necessary to prevent 

WFD before the airplane reaches the 

LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend 

on accomplishment of future 

maintenance actions. As stated in the 

WFD rule, any maintenance actions 

necessary to reach the LOV will be 

mandated by airworthiness directives 

through separate rulemaking actions. 

In the context of WFD, this action is 

necessary to enable DAHs to propose 

LOVs that allow operators the longest 

operational lives for their airplanes, and 

still ensure that WFD will not occur. 

This approach allows for an 

implementation strategy that provides 

flexibility to DAHs in determining the 

timing of service information 

development (with FAA approval), 

while providing operators with certainty 

regarding the LOV applicable to their 

airplanes. 

We issued AD 2017–22–07, 

Amendment 39–19087 (82 FR 56158, 

November 28, 2017) (‘‘AD 2017–22– 

07’’), for certain Airbus Model A319 

series airplanes; Model A320–211, –212, 

–214, –231, –232, and –233 airplanes; 

and Model A321–111, –112, –131, –211, 

–212, –213, –231, and –232 airplanes. 

AD 2017–22–07 requires repetitive 

inspections of the frame forks, and 

corrective actions if necessary. AD 

2017–22–07 also includes optional 

modifications that constitute 

terminating action. AD 2017–22–07 

resulted from a report of cracks on frame 

forks and outer skin on the forward and 

aft cargo compartment doors. We issued 

AD 2017–22–07 to address cracks on the 

frame forks and outer skin on the 

forward and aft cargo compartment 

doors, which could lead to reduced 

structural integrity and failure of the 

cargo compartment door, possible 

decompression of the airplane, and 

injury to occupants. 

Actions Since AD 2017–22–07 Was 

Issued 

Since we issued AD 2017–22–07, an 

evaluation was done by the DAH 

indicating that the frame forks and outer 

skin on the forward and aft cargo 

compartment doors are subject to WFD, 

and a determination was made that a 

modification of the frame forks must be 

accomplished. 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness 

Directive 2018–0024, dated January 29, 

2018 (referred to after this as the 

Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness 

Information, or ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct 

an unsafe condition for certain Airbus 

Model A319 series airplanes; Model 

A320–211, –212, –214, –216, –231, 

–232, and –233 airplanes; and Model 

A321–111, –112, –131, –211, –212, 

–213, –231, and –232 airplanes. The 

MCAI states: 

During full scale fatigue test, cracks were 

found on frame forks and outer skin on 

forward and aft cargo doors. To improve the 

fatigue behaviour of the frame forks, Airbus 

introduced modification (mod) 22948 in 

production, and issued inspection Service 

Bulletin (SB) A320–52–1032 and mod SB 

A320–52–1042, both recommended. Since 

those actions were taken, further improved 

cargo compartment doors were introduced in 

production through Airbus mod 26213, on 

aeroplanes having [manufacturer serial 

number] MSN 0759 and up. 

In the frame of the Widespread Fatigue 

Damage (WFD) study, it was determined that 

repetitive inspection are necessary for aft and 

forward cargo compartment doors on 

aeroplanes that are in pre-mod 26213 

configuration. Failure to detect cracks would 

reduce the cargo door structural integrity. 

This condition, if not detected and 

corrected, could lead to cargo door failure, 

possibly resulting in decompression of the 

aeroplane and injury to occupants. 

To address this unsafe condition, Airbus 

issued SB A320–52–1171 to provide 

instructions for repetitive special detailed 

inspections (SDI). This SB was later revised 

to correct the list of affected cargo doors. 

Airbus also issued SB A320–52–1170, 

introducing a door modification which 

would allow terminating the repetitive 

SDI[s]. 

Consequently, EASA issued AD 2016–0187 

[which corresponds to FAA AD 2017–22–07] 

to require repetitive SDI[s] of the affected 

cargo doors and, depending on findings, the 

accomplishment of applicable repairs. That 

[EASA] AD also included reference to SB 

A320–52–1170 as optional terminating 

action. 

Since that [EASA] AD was issued, further 

investigations linked to the WFD analysis 

highlighted that, to meet the WFD 

requirements, it is necessary to require 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 150 / Friday, August 3, 2018 / Proposed Rules 38093 

embodiment of the terminating action 

modification. 

For the reason described above, this 

[EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA 

AD 2016–0187, which is superseded, and 

requires modification of all affected cargo 

doors, which constitutes terminating action 

for the repetitive SDI[s] required by this 

[EASA] AD. 

The related investigative action is a 

high frequency eddy current (HFEC) 

rotating probe inspection for cracks. 

Corrective actions include, among other 

things, oversizing and cold-expanding 

any affected holes and repair. You may 

examine the MCAI in the AD docket on 

the internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2018– 

0641. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

Airbus has issued the following 

service information. 

• Service Bulletin A320–52–1171, 

Revision 02, dated April 10, 2017, 

which describes procedures for 

repetitive special detailed inspections of 

all frame forks in the beam 4 area of any 

affected door, and corrective actions. 

• Service Bulletin A320–52–1042, 

Revision 2, dated January 14, 1997, 

which describes procedures for 

modification of all affected forward and 

aft cargo compartment doors. 

• Service Bulletin A320–52–1170, 

including Appendices 01 and 02, dated 

September 5, 2016, which describes 

procedures for modifying all affected 

forward and aft cargo compartment 

doors, including oversize and cold 

working of riveting for all frame forks. 

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. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This Proposed AD 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of another 

country, and is approved for operation 

in the United States. Pursuant to our 

bilateral agreement with the State of 

Design Authority, we have been notified 

of the unsafe condition described in the 

MCAI and service information 

referenced above. We are proposing this 

AD because we evaluated all pertinent 

information and determined an unsafe 

condition exists and is likely to exist or 

develop on other products of these same 

type designs. 

Explanation of Compliance Time 

The compliance time for the 

replacement specified in this proposed 

AD for addressing WFD was established 

to ensure that discrepant structure is 

replaced before WFD develops in 

airplanes. Standard inspection 

techniques cannot be relied on to detect 

WFD before it becomes a hazard to 

flight. We will not grant any extensions 

of the compliance time to complete any 

AD-mandated service bulletin related to 

WFD without extensive new data that 

would substantiate and clearly warrant 

such an extension. 

Paragraphs (j)(2) and (j)(3) of AD 

2017–22–07 allowed an optional 

terminating modification that could be 

done at any time. This proposed AD 

would still permit that optional 

terminating modification, but with new 

limitations on the compliance time, i.e., 

the optional modification must be done 

on or after the accumulation of 21,700 

flight cycles since first installation of 

the door on an airplane in order to 

terminate the repetitive inspections. The 

repetitive inspections are not terminated 

if the modification is done before the 

accumulation of 21,700 flight cycles 

since first installation of the door on an 

airplane. These limitations match those 

in EASA AD 2018–0024, dated January 

29, 2018. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 88 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We estimate the following costs to 

comply with this proposed AD: 

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on 

U.S. operators 

Modification ....................... 24 work-hours × $85 per 

hour = $2,040.

Up to $240 ........................ Up to $2,280 ..................... Up to $200,640. 

Inspection .......................... 25 work-hours × $85 per 

hour = $2,125.

$0 ...................................... $2,125 ............................... $187,000. 

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 proposed 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 proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would 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 this proposed regulation: 

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. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
38094 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 150 / Friday, August 3, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 

2017–22–07, Amendment 39–19087 (82 

FR 56158, November 28, 2017), and 

adding the following new AD: 

Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2018–0641; Product 

Identifier 2018–NM–032–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by September 

17, 2018. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD replaces AD 2017–22–07, 

Amendment 39–19087 (82 FR 56158, 

November 28, 2017) (‘‘AD 2017–22–07’’). 

(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, and –233 airplanes; and 

Model A321–111, –112, –131, –211, –212, 

–213, –231, and –232 airplanes, certificated 

in any category, manufacturer serial numbers 

through 0758 inclusive. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 52, Doors. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by an evaluation by 

the design approval holder (DAH) indicating 

that the frame forks and outer skin on the 

forward and aft cargo compartment doors are 

subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD), 

and a determination that a modification of 

the frame forks must be accomplished. We 

are issuing this AD to address cracks on the 

frame forks and outer skin on the forward 

and aft cargo compartment doors, which 

could lead to reduced structural integrity and 

failure of the cargo compartment door, 

possible decompression of the airplane, and 

injury to occupants. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Retained Definition of Affected Door, 

With No Changes 

This paragraph restates the definition in 

paragraph (g) of AD 2017–22–07, with no 

changes. For the purpose of this AD, an 

‘‘affected door’’ is a forward or aft cargo 

compartment door, having any part number 

listed in table 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD, 

except a cargo compartment door on which 

Airbus Service Bulletin A320–52–1042 or 

Airbus Service Bulletin A320–52–1170 is 

embodied. 

(h) Retained Repetitive Special Detailed 

Inspection of Frame Forks, With No Changes 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (h) of AD 2017–22–07, with no 

changes. At the latest of the compliance 

times listed in paragraphs (h)(1) through 

(h)(4) of this AD: Do a special detailed 

inspection of all frame forks in the beam 4 

area of any affected door as defined in 

paragraph (g) of this AD, in accordance with 

the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Service Bulletin A320–52–1171, Revision 02, 

dated April 10, 2017, except as specified in 

paragraphs (l) and (m) of this AD. Repeat the 

inspection thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 3,000 flight cycles. A review of the 

airplane delivery or maintenance records is 

acceptable to identify any affected door 

installed on the airplane, provided that the 

cargo compartment door part number can be 

conclusively determined from that review. 

(1) Before exceeding 37,500 flight cycles 

since first installation of the door on an 

airplane. 

(2) Within 900 flight cycles after January 2, 

2018 (the effective date of AD 2017–22–07), 

without exceeding 41,950 flight cycles since 

first installation of the door on an airplane. 

(3) Within 50 flight cycles after January 2, 

2018 (the effective date of AD 2017–22–07), 

for a door having reached or exceeded 41,900 

flight cycles since first installation on an 

airplane. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1EP03AU18.000</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 150 / Friday, August 3, 2018 / Proposed Rules 38095 

(4) Within 3,000 flight cycles since the last 

inspection of the door as specified in Airbus 

Service Bulletin A320–52–1032. 

(i) Retained Corrective Actions, With No 

Changes 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (i) of AD 2017–22–07, with no 

changes. If any crack is found during any 

inspection required by paragraph (h) of this 

AD, before further flight, do all applicable 

corrective actions in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Service Bulletin A320–52–1171, Revision 02, 

dated April 10, 2017, except as specified in 

paragraphs (l) and (m) of this AD. 

Accomplishment of applicable corrective 

actions does not constitute terminating action 

for the repetitive inspections. 

(j) Terminating Modification 

Before the accumulation of 56,300 total 

flight cycles, but not before the accumulation 

of 21,700 total flight cycles since first 

installation of the affected door on an 

airplane: Modify all affected doors of an 

airplane, including accomplishment of all 

applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Service Bulletin A320–52–1170, including 

Appendices 01 and 02, dated September 5, 

2016. Accomplishing this modification 

constitutes terminating action for the 

repetitive inspections specified in paragraph 

(h) of this AD for that airplane, provided that, 

after modification, no affected door is reinstalled on that airplane. 

(k) Retained Optional Terminating Action, 

With Changes Related to Compliance 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (j) of AD 2017–22–07, with 

changes related to compliance. 

(1) Modification of all affected doors of an 

airplane before the effective date of this AD, 

in accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320– 

52–1042, Revision 2, dated January 14, 1997, 

constitutes terminating action for the 

repetitive inspections specified in paragraph 

(h) of this AD and a method of compliance 

for the modification required by paragraph (j) 

of this AD, for that airplane, provided that, 

after modification, no affected door is reinstalled on that airplane. On or after the 

effective date of this AD, the modification 

required by paragraph (j) of this AD must be 

done. 

(2) Modification of all affected doors of an 

airplane including accomplishment of all 

applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions, if done before the effective 

date of this AD in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Service Bulletin A320–52–1170, dated 

September 5, 2016, except as specified in 

paragraph (l) of this AD, constitutes 

terminating action for the repetitive 

inspections specified in paragraph (h) of this 

AD and a method of compliance for the 

modification required by paragraph (j) of this 

AD, for that airplane, provided that, after 

modification, no affected door is re-installed 

on that airplane. On or after the effective date 

of this AD, the modification required by 

paragraph (j) of this AD must be done. 

(3) Modification of all affected doors on an 

airplane, in case of finding damaged frame 

forks, as specified in an Airbus Repair Design 

Approval Sheet (RDAS), if done before the 

effective date of this AD and done in 

accordance with 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); 

constitutes terminating action for the 

repetitive inspection specified in paragraph 

(h) of this AD and a method of compliance 

for the modification required by paragraph (j) 

of this AD, for that airplane, provided that, 

after modification, no affected door is reinstalled on that airplane. On or after the 

effective date of this AD, the modification 

required by paragraph (j) of this AD must be 

done. 

(l) Retained Exception to Service 

Information 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (k) of AD 2017–22–07, with no 

changes. Where Airbus Service Bulletin 

A320–52–1170, including Appendices 01 

and 02, dated September 5, 2016; or Airbus 

Service Bulletin A320–52–1171, Revision 02, 

dated April 10, 2017; specifies to contact 

Airbus for appropriate action, and specifies 

that action as ‘‘RC’’ (Required for 

Compliance): Before further flight, 

accomplish corrective actions in accordance 

with the procedures specified in paragraph 

(p)(2) of this AD. 

(m) Retained No Reporting Requirement 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (l) of AD 2017–22–07, with no 

changes. Although Airbus Service Bulletin 

A320–52–1171, Revision 02, dated April 10, 

2017, specifies to submit certain information 

to the manufacturer, and specifies that action 

as ‘‘RC,’’ this AD does not include that 

requirement. 

(n) Retained Credit for Previous Actions 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (m) of AD 2017–22–07, with no 

changes. 

(1) This paragraph provides credit for the 

actions required by paragraphs (h) and (i) of 

this AD, if those actions were performed 

before January 2, 2018 (the effective date of 

AD 2017–22–07), using Airbus Service 

Bulletin A320–52–1171, dated October 29, 

2015, provided that it can be conclusively 

determined that any part number 

D52371000018 was also inspected as 

specified in paragraph (h) of this AD. 

(2) This paragraph provides credit for the 

actions required by paragraphs (h) and (i) of 

this AD, if those actions were performed 

before January 2, 2018 (the effective date of 

AD 2017–22–07), using Airbus Service 

Bulletin A320–52–1171, Revision 01, dated 

September 5, 2016. 

(o) Parts Installation Limitation 

As of the effective date of this AD, no 

person may install, on any airplane, an 

affected door specified in paragraph (g) of 

this AD, unless less than 56,300 flight cycles 

have accumulated since first installation of 

the door on an airplane, and unless the door 

has been inspected in accordance with the 

requirements of paragraph (h) of this AD and 

all applicable corrective actions have been 

done in accordance with paragraph (i) of this 

AD. 

(p) 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 (p)(2) of this AD. Information may 

be emailed to: 9-ANM-116-AMOCREQUESTS@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): Except 

as specified in paragraphs (l) and (m) of this 

AD: If any service information contains 

procedures or tests that are identified as RC, 

those procedures and tests must be done to 

comply with this AD; any procedures or tests 

that are not identified as RC are 

recommended. Those procedures and tests 

that are not identified as RC may be deviated 

from using accepted methods in accordance 

with the operator’s maintenance or 

inspection program without obtaining 

approval of an AMOC, provided the 

procedures and tests identified as RC can be 

done and the airplane can be put back in an 

airworthy condition. Any substitutions or 

changes to procedures or tests identified as 

RC require approval of an AMOC. 

(q) Related Information 

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2018–0024, dated 

January 29, 2018, for related information. 

This MCAI may be found in the AD docket 

on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov 

by searching for and locating Docket No. 

FAA–2018–0641. 

(2) For more information about this AD, 

contact Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Section, Transport Standards 

Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des 

Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206– 

231–3223. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Airbus, Airworthiness 

Office—EIAS, 2 Rond Point Emile Dewoitine, 

31700 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone: +33 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
38096 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 150 / Friday, August 3, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

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 

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. 

Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on July 

24, 2018. 

James Cashdollar, 

Acting Director, System Oversight Division, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2018–16497 Filed 8–2–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2018–0703; Product 

Identifier 2018–NM–007–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for all The 

Boeing Company Model 747–8 and 747– 

8F series airplanes. This proposed AD 

was prompted by reports of damaged 

vapor seals, block seals, and heat shield 

seals on the outboard pylons between 

the engine strut and aft fairing. This 

proposed AD would require installing 

new aft fairing vapor seals, heatshield 

seals, heatshield seal retainers, block 

seals and outboard lateral restraint 

access panels. We are proposing this AD 

to address the unsafe condition on these 

products. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by September 17, 

2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this NPRM, 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. 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 http://www.regulations.gov by 

searching for and locating Docket No. 

FAA–2018–0703. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2018– 

0703; 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 NPRM, the regulatory 

evaluation, any comments received, and 

other information. The street address for 

the Docket Office (phone: 800–647– 

5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. 

Comments will be available in the AD 

docket shortly after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christopher Baker, Aerospace Engineer, 

Propulsion Section, FAA, Seattle ACO 

Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des 

Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: 206– 

231–3552; email: Christopher.R.Baker@

faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposal. Send your comments to 

an address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 

2018–0703; Product Identifier 2018– 

NM–007–AD’’ at the beginning of your 

comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this NPRM. We will consider 

all comments received by the closing 

date and may amend this NPRM 

because of those comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

We have received reports of damaged 

vapor seals, block seals, and heat shield 

seals on the outboard pylons between 

the engine strut and aft fairing. Such 

damage could allow flammable fluid 

leakage out of the aft fairing. This 

condition, if not addressed, could result 

in an uncontrolled fire in the engine 

strut. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–54A2247, dated August 3, 

2017. This service information describes 

procedures for installing new aft fairing 

vapor seals, heatshield seals, heatshield 

seal retainers, block seals, and outboard 

lateral restraint access panels. 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. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this AD because we 

evaluated all the relevant information 

and determined the unsafe condition 

described previously is likely to exist or 

develop in other products of the same 

type design. 

Proposed AD Requirements 

This proposed AD would require 

accomplishment of the actions 

identified as ‘‘RC’’ (required for 

compliance) in the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–54A2247, dated August 3, 

2017, described previously, except as 

discussed under ‘‘Differences Between 

this Proposed AD and the Service 

Information,’’ and except for any 

differences identified as exceptions in 

the regulatory text of this proposed AD. 

For information on the procedures 

and compliance times, see this service 

information at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2018– 

0703. 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

The applicability in this proposed AD 

does not refer to paragraph 1.A., 

‘‘Effectivity,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–54A2247, dated August 3, 

2017. The service information does not 

contain a comprehensive list of the 

airplanes affected by the identified 

unsafe condition because the spare parts 

identified in paragraph (j) of this AD 

have been determined to be rotable parts 

that are capable of being installed on all 

Model 747–8 and 747–8F series 

airplanes. Therefore, the applicability of 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1