Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 8, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 7033 

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. 

(3) The following service information was 

approved for IBR on March 15, 2022. 

(i) International Aero Engines AG (IAE) 

Non-Modification Service Bulletin (NMSB) 

No. V2500–E5–72–0015, Revision 1, dated 

August 10, 2021. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(4) The following service information was 

approved for IBR on July 13, 2021 (86 FR 

30380, June 8, 2021). 

(i) IAE NMSB No. V2500–ENG–72–0713, 

Revision 1, dated January 26, 2021. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(5) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact International Aero Engines 

AG, 400 Main Street, East Hartford, CT 

06118; phone: (800) 565–0140; email: 

help24@prattwhitney.com; website: https://

connect.prattwhitney.com. 

(6) You may view this referenced service 

information at the FAA, Airworthiness 

Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 

1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. 

For information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call (817) 222–5110. 

(7) 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, 

email: fr.inspection@nara.gov, or go to: 

https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ 

ibr-locations.html. 

Issued on January 10, 2022. 

Lance T. Gant, 

Director, Compliance & Airworthiness 

Division, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2022–02574 Filed 2–7–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2021–0501; Project 

Identifier MCAI–2021–00168–T; Amendment 

39–21908; AD 2022–02–11] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding 

Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2019–20– 

10, which applied to certain Airbus SAS 

Model A318 series airplanes; Model 

A319–111, –112,–113, –114, –115, –131, 

–132, and –133 airplanes; Model A320– 

211, –212, –214, –216, –231, –232, and 

–233 airplanes; and Model A321–111, 

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

–232 airplanes. AD 2019–20–10 

required repetitive rototest inspections 

of the holes at the door stop fittings for 

any cracking, and corrective actions if 

necessary. Since the FAA issued AD 

2019–20–10, a clarification of a certain 

compliance time for the rototest 

inspection was added. This AD clarifies 

a certain compliance time and continues 

to require repetitive rototest inspections 

of the holes at the door stop fittings for 

any cracking, and repair if necessary, as 

specified in a European Union Aviation 

Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is 

incorporated by reference. The FAA is 

issuing this AD to address the unsafe 

condition on these products. 

DATES: This AD is effective March 15, 

2022. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in this AD 

as of March 15, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: For material incorporated 

by reference (IBR) in this AD, contact 

EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 

Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 

8999 000; email ADs@easa.europa.eu; 

internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may 

find this IBR material on the EASA 

website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. 

You may view this material at the FAA, 

Airworthiness Products Section, 

Operational Safety 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 in the AD docket at 

https://www.regulations.gov by 

searching for and locating Docket No. 

FAA–2021–0501. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket at 

https://www.regulations.gov by 

searching for and locating Docket No. 

FAA–2021–0501; or in person at Docket 

Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. The AD docket contains this 

final rule, the mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI), any 

comments received, and other 

information. The address for Docket 

Operations is 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, 

Large Aircraft Section, International 

Validation Branch, FAA, 2200 South 

216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; 

telephone and fax 206–231–3223; email 

Sanjay.Ralhan@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

EASA, which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Union, has issued EASA AD 2018– 

0289R1, dated February 10, 2021 (EASA 

AD 2018–0289R1) (also referred to as 

the MCAI), to correct an unsafe 

condition for certain Airbus SAS Model 

A318 series airplanes; Model A319–111, 

–112, –113, –114, –115, –131, –132, and 

–133 airplanes; Model A320–211, –212, 

–214, –215, –216, –231, –232, and –233 

airplanes; and Model A321–111, –112, 

–131, –211, –212, –213, –231, and –232 

airplanes. EASA AD 2018–0289R1 

supersedes EASA AD 2018–0289 (which 

corresponds to FAA AD 2019–20–10, 

Amendment 39–19763 (84 FR 61526, 

November 13, 2019) (AD 2019–20–10). 

Model A320–215 airplanes are not 

certificated by the FAA and are not 

included on the U.S. type certificate 

data sheet; this AD therefore does not 

include those airplanes in the 

applicability. 

The FAA issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to supersede AD 2019–20–10. 

AD 2019–20–10 applied to certain 

Airbus SAS Model A318 series 

airplanes; Model A319–111, –112, –113, 

–114, –115, –131, –132, and –133 

airplanes; Model A320–211, –212, –214, 

–216, –231, –232, and –233 airplanes; 

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

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

The NPRM published in the Federal 

Register on June 16, 2021 (86 FR 31989). 

The NPRM was prompted by a report 

that cracks were detected on frame 

(FR)16 and FR20 web holes and 

passenger door intercostal fitting holes 

at the door stop fitting locations, and a 

determination that a certain compliance 

time needs to be clarified. The NPRM 

proposed to clarify a certain compliance 

time and continue to require repetitive 

rototest inspections of the holes at the 

door stop fittings for any cracking, and 

repair if necessary as specified in EASA 

AD 2018–0289R1. 

The FAA is issuing this AD to address 

cracking of the web holes at the door 

stop fittings, which could affect the 

structural integrity of the airplane. See 

the MCAI for additional background 

information. 

Discussion of Final Airworthiness 

Directive 

Comments 

The FAA received comments from 

two commenters, including Delta 

Airlines (DAL) and United Airlines 

(UAL). The following presents the 

comments received on the NPRM and 

the FAA’s response to each comment. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
7034 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 8, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

Request To Clarify the Requirements of 

the Repair Design Approval Sheet 

(RDAS) 

DAL requested clarification for the 

following RDAS approval: 

• Can the FAA confirm that 

paragraph (h)(4) of the proposed AD 

allow operators to account for repairs 

that are approved using a Repair and 

Design Approval Form (RDAF) in 

addition to those repairs that are 

approved using RDAS? DAL commented 

that since 2021, the RDAS is no longer 

Airbus’s form of approving repair 

instructions and it has been replaced by 

RDAF. 

• Can the FAA confirm that if a repair 

has been approved, ‘‘in accordance with 

a method approved by the Manager, 

Large Aircraft Section, International 

Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or 

Airbus SAS’s EASA Design 

Organization Approval (DOA). If 

approved by the DOA, the approval 

must include the DOA-authorized 

signature,’’ it is acceptable to 

accomplish the next inspection for each 

repaired area affected by using the same 

method of compliance? DAL 

commented that if this is the case, it 

requests the FAA either revise 

paragraph (h)(4) of the proposed AD or 

include an exception paragraph to the 

proposed AD to explicitly makes this 

clear. 

The FAA confirms that it accepts 

Airbus’s EASA DOA approval in the 

form of both an RDAS and an RDAF. 

The FAA also confirms that for 

paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2018– 

0289R1, the next inspections are done at 

the times specified in the approved 

method. The FAA has added paragraph 

(h)(5) of this AD to specify where 

paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2018–0289R1 

refers to accomplishing the next due 

inspection of each repaired affected area 

‘‘within the compliance time as 

specified in, Airbus RDAS, as 

applicable,’’ this AD uses the applicable 

compliance time specified in the repair 

‘‘approved by the Manager, Large 

Aircraft Section, International 

Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or 

Airbus SAS’s EASA Design 

Organization Approval (DOA). If 

approved by the DOA, the approval 

must include the DOA-authorized 

signature.’’ 

Request To Revise the Compliance 

Time 

UAL stated AD 2018–0289R1 was 

issued to clarify that, to determine the 

compliance time for the initial 

inspection of an affected area, the latest 

accomplishment of the airworthiness 

limitations item (ALI) task for that 

affected area must be taken into 

account. UAL stated that the initial 

inspection for the FR16 door stop fitting 

holes cannot be accomplished within 

16,800 flight cycles from ALI task 

531103–01–1 if FR20 was the only 

applicable side for the task at 

‘‘[airworthiness limitations section] ALS 

Part 2 Rev 3’’ or earlier revisions. UAL 

commented that, therefore, the proposed 

AD may have an impact on an airline’s 

operation and, for FR16 only, result in 

immediate non-compliance if ALI task 

531103–01–1 was accomplished at 

‘‘ALS Part 2 Rev 3’’ or earlier revisions 

for FR20. UAL stated that condition ‘‘A’’ 

in ‘‘Table 1: Inspection Thresholds’’ of 

AD 2018–0289R1, specifies the 

inspection threshold for FR16 as 30,000 

total flight cycles and certain airplanes 

may be above 30,000 total flight cycles 

under this condition. 

UAL commented that the side of FR16 

was added to the ALI task 531103–01– 

1 description in ‘‘ALS Part 2 Rev 4,’’ 

and as stated in ‘‘ALS Part 2 Rev 4, 

Section 2 Paragraph 1(1),’’ the two digit 

sequence number following structural 

significant item number (i.e., 531103– 

01) changes when the inspection area is 

physically different (i.e., FR16 or FR20). 

UAL also commented that ‘‘ALS Part 2 

Rev 4’’ did not change the ALI task 

sequence number or describe any 

retroactive action if FR20 was the only 

side previously inspected using ‘‘ALS 

Part 2 Rev 3’’ or earlier revisions. UAL 

stated that it believes this change was 

overlooked in ‘‘ALS Part 2 Rev 4,’’ and 

as a result, operators may not have been 

aware to reset the initial inspection for 

the ALI for FR16. 

The FAA acknowledges the 

commenter’s concern for the FR16 

inspection requirement. The FAA has 

added paragraph (h)(6) to this AD to 

include a 30-day grace period as of the 

effective date of this AD for airplanes 

affected by condition ‘‘A’’ in ‘‘Table 1: 

Inspection Thresholds’’ of AD 2018– 

0289R1. The 30-day grace period 

prevents grounding of airplanes that are 

above the 30,000 total flight cycle 

threshold while still allowing for an 

acceptable level of safety. 

Regarding the change in ‘‘ALS part 2 

Rev 4,’’ the FAA notes that the 

description for task 531103–01 to 

accomplish the inspection for FR16 and 

FR20 is specified in ‘‘ALS part 2 Rev 4.’’ 

The change related to FR16 was also 

referenced in the record of revision 

section of ‘‘ALS part 2.’’ 

Request To Clarify Alternative Method 

of Compliance (AMOC) Approvals 

DAL requested clarification of AMOC 

approvals as specified in paragraphs 

(i)(1)(i) and (ii) of the proposed AD. 

DAL commented on a scenario where an 

AMOC was approved for AD 2019–20– 

10 for an operator’s entire fleet, which 

included a deviation to one of the 

paragraphs in EASA AD 2018–0289 and 

a deviation to one of the applicable 

service bulletins for correcting an error. 

DAL commented that because the 

AMOC is applicable to the whole fleet, 

it is possible that the AMOC approval 

applies to a manufacturer serial number 

that is applicable to the compliance 

time specified in ‘‘Table 1: Inspection 

Thresholds,’’ Row B, of EASA AD 2018– 

0289R1. DAL asked if this particular 

AMOC still applies once the final rule 

becomes effective or is a new AMOC 

request required for a deviation to the 

EASA AD requirements and for the 

service bulletin correction? 

The FAA agrees to provide 

clarification. The intent of the paragraph 

(i)(1)(i) and (ii) of this AD is to ensure 

that existing AMOCs are not 

inadvertently affected with the new 

inspection threshold added in EASA AD 

2018–0289R1. It is the operator’s 

responsibility to consult with the FAA 

oversight office and the office 

responsible for the issuance of an 

AMOC if AMOC validity is impacted by 

‘‘Table 1: Inspection Thresholds,’’ Row 

B, of EASA AD 2018–0289R1. If an 

AMOC is issued to correct service 

bulletin errors and it is not related to the 

inspection threshold change in ‘‘Table 

1: Inspection Thresholds,’’ Row B, of 

EASA AD 2018–0289R1, then it would 

be applicable to this AD without further 

evaluation. The FAA has not changed 

the AD in this regard. 

Requests To Include or Exclude a 

Reporting Requirement 

UAL requested that the proposed AD 

include a reporting requirement for the 

inspection. UAL stated that it believes 

no reporting to the manufacturer is 

required since it is not a requirement in 

AD 2019–20–10 or EASA AD 2018– 

0289R1; however, UAL also noted that 

Airbus Mandatory Bulletin A320–53– 

1339, Revision 01, dated April 7, 2021, 

contains reporting in the ‘‘Required for 

Compliance’’ section of the service 

bulletin. 

DAL requested that the FAA add a 

statement to paragraph (h) of the 

proposed AD exempting operators from 

any mandatory reporting. DAL 

commented that Airbus has issued 

Mandatory Bulletin A320–53–1339, 

Revision 01, dated April 7, 2021, and 

that paragraph 3.C. of the service 

bulletin contains instructions to 

complete an ‘‘Inspection Report Sheet’’ 

form and to send the completed form to 

Airbus. DAL stated that paragraph 

3.C.(8) of Airbus Mandatory Bulletin 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 8, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 7035 

A320–53–1339, Revision 01, dated April 

7, 2021, is considered an ‘‘RC’’ 

paragraph, and therefore, reporting the 

inspection results is considered 

mandatory. DAL commented that, 

typically, reporting is needed from 

operators to determine root cause of the 

issue and that the root cause of the 

safety concern is already addressed in 

previously issued revisions of the 

service information. 

The FAA agrees to clarify. EASA AD 

2018–0289R1 does not include a 

reporting requirement that is separate 

from the reporting to address an unsafe 

condition (inspection findings); 

however EASA AD 2018–0289R1 allows 

the use of later-approved revisions of 

the service information, which includes 

Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 

A320–53–1339, Revision 01, dated April 

7, 2021. Airbus Mandatory Service 

Bulletin A320–53–1339, Revision 01, 

dated April 7, 2021, specifies reporting 

is necessary if the cracked intercostal(s) 

are replaced according to repair 

instruction R53113118. The FAA would 

also like to clarify that requirements to 

contact manufacturer to obtain method 

of compliance does not require specific 

reporting requirements and must be 

complied with. 

The FAA has added paragraph (h)(7) 

of this AD to clarify that the reporting 

specified in paragraph 3.C.(8) of the 

inspection service bulletin referenced in 

EASA AD 2018–0289R1, is required 

only if the cracked intercostal(s) have 

been replaced using repair instruction 

R53113118. 

Conclusion 

The FAA reviewed the relevant data, 

considered the comments received, and 

determined that air safety requires 

adopting this AD as proposed. Except 

for minor editorial changes, and any 

other changes described previously, this 

AD is adopted as proposed in the 

NPRM. None of the changes will 

increase the economic burden on any 

operator. Accordingly, the FAA is 

issuing this AD to address the unsafe 

condition on these products. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

EASA AD 2018–0289R1 describes 

procedures for repetitive rototest 

inspections of the holes at the door stop 

fittings for any cracking and repair if 

necessary. This material 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 

The FAA estimates that this AD 

affects 1,528 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

The FAA estimates the following costs 

to comply with this AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS FOR REQUIRED ACTIONS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

Cost on U.S. 

operators 

Retained actions from AD 2019-20-10 (1,229 

airplanes).

33 work-hours × $85 per hour = $2,805 ........ $0 $2,805 $3,447,345 

Inspections ...................................................... 33 work-hours × $85 per hour = $2,805 ........ 0 2,805 4,286,040 

The FAA estimates the following 

costs to do any necessary on-condition 

actions that would be required based on 

the results of any required actions. The 

FAA has no way of determining the 

number of aircraft that might need this 

on-condition action: 

ESTIMATED COSTS OF ON-CONDITION ACTIONS

Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product 

51 work-hours × $85 per hour = $4,335 (repair) ............................................................................................. $350 $4,685 

1 work-hours × $85 per hour = $85 (reporting) ............................................................................................... 0 85 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

A federal agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, nor shall a person be subject 

to penalty for failure to comply with a 

collection of information subject to the 

requirements of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act unless that collection of 

information displays a currently valid 

OMB Control Number. The OMB 

Control Number for this information 

collection is 2120–0056. Public 

reporting for this collection of 

information is estimated to take 

approximately 1 hour per response, 

including the time for reviewing 

instructions, searching existing data 

sources, gathering and maintaining the 

data needed, and completing and 

reviewing the collection of information. 

All responses to this collection of 

information are mandatory. Send 

comments regarding this burden 

estimate or any other aspect of this 

collection of information, including 

suggestions for reducing this burden, to 

Information Collection Clearance 

Officer, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 10101 Hillwood 

Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177–1524. 

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. 

The FAA is 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. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
7036 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 8, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that this AD: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska, and 

(3) Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

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: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by: 

■ a. Removing Airworthiness Directive 

(AD) AD 2019–20–10, Amendment 39– 

19763 (84 FR 61526, November 13, 

2019); and 

■ b. Adding the following new AD: 

2022–02–11 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39– 

21908; Docket No. FAA–2021–0501; 

Project Identifier MCAI–2021–00168–T. 

(a) Effective Date 

This airworthiness directive (AD) is 

effective March 15, 2022. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD replaces AD 2019–20–10, 

Amendment 39–19763 (84 FR 61526, 

November 13, 2019) (AD 2019–20–10). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Airbus SAS airplanes 

specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of 

this AD, certificated in any category, as 

identified in European Union Aviation Safety 

Agency (EASA) AD 2018–0289R1, dated 

February 10, 2021 (EASA AD 2018–0289R1). 

(1) Model A318–111, –112, –121, and –122 

airplanes. 

(2) Model A319–111, –112, –113, –114, 

–115, –131, –132, and –133 airplanes. 

(3) Model A320–211, –212, –214, –216, 

–231, –232, and –233 airplanes. 

(4) Model A321–111, –112, –131, –211, 

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

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by a report that 

cracks were detected on frame (FR)16 and 

FR20 web holes and passenger door 

intercostal fitting holes at the door stop 

fitting locations, and a determination that a 

certain compliance time needs to be clarified. 

The FAA is issuing this AD to address 

cracking of the web holes at the door stop 

fittings, which could affect the structural 

integrity of the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Requirements 

Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this 

AD: Comply with all required actions and 

compliance times specified in, and in 

accordance with, EASA AD 2018–0289R1. 

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2018–0289R1 

(1) Where EASA AD 2018–0289R1 refers to 

its effective date, this AD requires using the 

effective date of this AD. 

(2) The ‘‘Remarks’’ section of EASA AD 

2018–0289R1 does not apply to this AD. 

(3) Where Table 1 of EASA AD 2018– 

0289R1 refers to a compliance time ‘‘after 31 

May 2017,’’ this AD requires using a 

compliance time after May 31, 2018 (the 

effective date of task 531103–01–1 in ‘‘ALS 

Part 2 rev. 6’’). 

(4) Where paragraphs (3) and (6) of EASA 

AD 2018–0289R1 refers to actions that have 

been done ‘‘in accordance with Airbus Repair 

Design Approval Sheet (RDAS),’’ this AD 

includes repair done ‘‘in accordance with a 

method approved by the Manager, Large 

Aircraft Section, International Validation 

Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS’s 

EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). 

If approved by the DOA, the approval must 

include the DOA-authorized signature.’’ 

(5) Where paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2018– 

0289R1 refers to accomplishing the next due 

inspection of each repaired affected area 

‘‘within the compliance time as specified in, 

Airbus RDAS, as applicable,’’ for this AD use 

the applicable compliance time specified in 

the repair ‘‘approved by the Manager, Large 

Aircraft Section, International Validation 

Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS’s 

EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). 

If approved by the DOA, the approval must 

include the DOA-authorized signature.’’ 

(6) Where condition ‘‘A’’ in Table 1 of 

EASA AD 2018–0289R1 specifies a 

compliance time of ‘‘Before exceeding 

30[,]000 FC since aeroplane first flight,’’ this 

AD requires, for the inspection at frame 16 

only, a compliance time of ‘‘Before exceeding 

30,000 flight cycles since airplane’s first 

flight, or within 30 days after the effective 

date of this AD, whichever occurs later.’’ 

(7) If the actions in paragraph 3.C.(8) of the 

inspection service bulletin referenced in 

EASA AD 2018–0289R1 specifies to report all 

findings, this AD requires reporting if only 

the cracked intercostal(s) that have been 

replaced using repair instruction R53113118. 

Report results at the applicable time 

specified in paragraph (h)(7)(i) or (ii) of this 

AD. If operators have reported findings as 

part of obtaining any corrective actions 

approved by Airbus SAS’s European 

Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) Design 

Organization Approval (DOA), operators are 

not required to report those findings as 

specified in this paragraph. 

(i) If the inspection was done on or after 

the effective date of this AD: Submit the 

report within 30 days after the inspection. 

(ii) If the inspection was done before the 

effective date of this AD: Submit the report 

within 30 days after the effective date of this 

AD. 

(i) Additional AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, Large Aircraft 

Section, International Validation 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 responsible Flight 

Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending 

information directly to the Large Aircraft 

Section, International Validation Branch, 

send it to the attention of the person 

identified in paragraph (j) of this AD. 

Information may be emailed to: 9-AVS-AIR730-AMOC@faa.gov. 

(i) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 

of the responsible Flight Standards Office. 

(ii) AMOCs approved previously for AD 

2019–20–10 are approved as AMOCs for the 

corresponding provisions of EASA AD 2018– 

0289R1 that are required by paragraph (g) of 

this AD, except for those airplanes having a 

compliance time specified in ‘‘Table 1: 

Inspection Thresholds,’’ Row B, of EASA AD 

2018–0289R1. 

(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any 

requirement in this AD to obtain instructions 

from a manufacturer, the instructions must 

be accomplished using a method approved 

by the Manager, Large Aircraft Section, 

International Validation Branch, FAA; or 

EASA; or Airbus SAS’s EASA Design 

Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by 

the DOA, the approval must include the 

DOA-authorized signature. 

(3) Required for Compliance (RC): For any 

service information referenced in EASA AD 

2018–0289R1 that contains RC procedures 

and tests: Except as required by paragraph 

(i)(2) of this AD, RC 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. 

(j) Related Information 

For more information about this AD, 

contact Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, 

Large Aircraft Section, International 

Validation Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th 

St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and 

fax 206–231–3223; email Sanjay.Ralhan@

faa.gov. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 8, 2022 / Rules and Regulations 7037 

(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 this AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA) AD 2018–0289R1, dated February 10, 

2021. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(3) For EASA AD 2018–0289R1, contact 

EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 

Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 

000; email ADs@easa.europa.eu; Internet 

www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this 

EASA AD on the EASA website at https://

ad.easa.europa.eu. 

(4) You may view this material at the FAA, 

Airworthiness Products Section, Operational 

Safety 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 material that is 

incorporated by reference at the National 

Archives and Records Administration 

(NARA). For information on the availability 

of this material at NARA, email 

fr.inspection@nara.gov, or go to: https://

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued on January 10, 2022. 

Lance T. Gant, 

Director, Compliance & Airworthiness 

Division, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2022–02554 Filed 2–7–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

15 CFR Part 744 

[Docket No. 220120–0031] 

RIN 0694–AI69 

Revisions to the Unverified List 

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and 

Security, Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Industry and 

Security (BIS) is amending the Export 

Administration Regulations (EAR) by 

adding thirty-three (33) persons to the 

Unverified List (UVL). The thirty-three 

persons are added to the UVL on the 

basis that BIS was unable to verify their 

bona fides because an end-use check 

could not be completed satisfactorily for 

reasons outside the U.S. Government’s 

control. 

DATES: This rule is effective: February 8, 

2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Linda Minsker, Director, Office of 

Enforcement Analysis, Phone: (202) 

482–4255 or by email at UVLRequest@

bis.doc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Unverified List, found in 

supplement no. 6 to part 744 of the EAR 

(15 CFR parts 730 through 774), 

contains the names and addresses of 

foreign persons who are or have been 

parties to a transaction, as such parties 

are described in § 748.5 of the EAR, 

involving the export, reexport, or 

transfer (in-country) of items subject to 

the EAR, and whose bona fides (i.e., 

legitimacy and reliability relating to the 

end use and end user of items subject 

to the EAR) BIS has been unable to 

verify through an end-use check. BIS 

may add persons to the UVL when BIS 

or Federal officials acting on BIS’s 

behalf have been unable to verify a 

foreign person’s bona fides because an 

end-use check, such as a pre-license 

check (PLC) or a post-shipment 

verification (PSV), cannot be completed 

satisfactorily for reasons outside the 

U.S. Government’s control. 

There are occasions when, for a 

number of reasons, including but not 

limited to reasons unrelated to the 

cooperation of the foreign party subject 

to the end-use check, end-use checks 

cannot be completed. For example, BIS 

sometimes initiates end-use checks but 

is unable to complete them because the 

foreign party cannot be found at the 

address indicated on the associated 

export documents and BIS cannot locate 

the party by telephone or email. 

Additionally, BIS sometimes is unable 

to conduct end-use checks when host 

government agencies do not respond to 

requests to conduct end-use checks, 

prevent the scheduling of such checks, 

or refuse to schedule them in a timely 

manner. Under circumstances such as 

these, although BIS has an interest in 

informing the public of its inability to 

verify the foreign party’s bona fides, 

there may not be sufficient information 

to add the foreign person at issue to the 

Entity List under § 744.11 of the EAR 

(Criteria for revising the Entity List). In 

such circumstances, BIS may add the 

foreign person to the UVL. 

Furthermore, BIS sometimes conducts 

end-use checks but cannot verify the 

bona fides of a foreign party. For 

example, BIS may be unable to verify 

bona fides if, during the conduct of an 

end-use check, a recipient of items 

subject to the EAR is unable to produce 

the items that are the subject of the enduse check for visual inspection or 

provide sufficient documentation or 

other evidence to confirm the 

disposition of the items. The inability of 

foreign persons subject to end-use 

checks to demonstrate their bona fides 

raises concerns about the suitability of 

such persons as participants in future 

exports, reexports, or transfers (incountry) of items subject to the EAR and 

indicates a risk that such items may be 

diverted to prohibited end uses and/or 

end users. However, BIS may not have 

sufficient information to establish that 

such persons are involved in activities 

described in part 744 or 746 of the EAR, 

preventing the placement of the persons 

on the Entity List. In such 

circumstances, the foreign persons may 

be added to the UVL. 

As provided in § 740.2(a)(17) of the 

EAR, the use of license exceptions for 

exports, reexports, and transfers (incountry) involving a party or parties to 

the transaction who are listed on the 

UVL is suspended. Additionally, under 

§ 744.15(b) of the EAR, there is a 

requirement for exporters, reexporters, 

and transferors to obtain (and maintain 

a record of) a UVL statement from a 

party or parties to the transaction who 

are listed on the UVL before proceeding 

with exports, reexports, and transfers 

(in-country) to such persons, when the 

exports, reexports and transfers (incountry) are not subject to a license 

requirement. 

Requests for the removal of a UVL 

entry must be made in accordance with 

§ 744.15(d) of the EAR. Decisions 

regarding the removal or modification of 

UVL entry will be made by the Deputy 

Assistant Secretary for Export 

Enforcement, based on a demonstration 

by the listed person of its bona fides. 

Changes to the EAR 

Supplement No. 6 to Part 744 (‘‘the 

Unverified List’’ or ‘‘UVL’’) 

Along with the additions to the UVL 

detailed below, this rule also changes 

the country name of ‘‘China’’ in the first 

column of the UVL to the ‘‘People’s 

Republic of China.’’ This change reflects 

how China is described in the Entity 

List and Military End-User List, both 

supplements to part 744. This rule adds 

thirty-three persons to the UVL by 

amending Supplement No. 6 to part 744 

of the EAR to include their names and 

addresses. BIS is adding these persons 

pursuant to § 744.15(c) of the EAR, on 

the basis that BIS could not verify their 

bona fides because an end-use check on 

transactions subject to the EAR in which 

these persons were parties could not be 

completed satisfactorily for reasons 

outside the U.S. Government’s control. 

This final rule implements the decision 

to add the following thirty-three persons 

located in China to the UVL: 

China, People’s Republic of: 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES