Document ID: FAA-2017-0812-0009
Agency: faa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Airworthiness Directives: Airbus SAS Airplanes
Posted Date: 2019-05-13T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 92 (Monday, May 13, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20822-20823]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-09742]

 ========================================================================
 Proposed Rules
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
 the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
 notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
 the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 92 / Monday, May 13, 2019 / Proposed 
Rules  

[[Page 20822]]

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0812; Product Identifier 2016-NM-198-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA withdraws a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that 
proposed a new airworthiness directive (AD), which would have applied 
to all Airbus SAS Model A330-200 Freighter, A330-200, and A330-300 
series airplanes. The NPRM would have required reinforcement 
modifications of various structural parts of the fuselage, and related 
investigative and corrective actions if necessary. Since the NPRM was 
issued, we have determined that more restrictive maintenance 
requirements are necessary and that the NPRM does not adequately 
address the identified unsafe condition. Accordingly, the NPRM is 
withdrawn.

DATES: As of May 13, 2019, the proposed rule, which was published in 
the Federal Register on September 19, 2017 (82 FR 43715), is withdrawn.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
0812; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket 
contains this AD action, the NPRM (82 FR 43715, September 19, 2017) 
(``the NPRM''), the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and 
other information. The address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-
647-5527) is 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 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 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.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion

    We proposed to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations 
(14 CFR part 39) with a NPRM for a new AD for all Airbus SAS Model 
A330-200 Freighter, A330-200, and A330-300 series airplanes. The NPRM 
published in the Federal Register on September 19, 2017 (82 FR 43715). 
The NPRM would have required reinforcement modifications of various 
structural parts of the fuselage, and related investigative and 
corrective actions if necessary. The NPRM was prompted by an evaluation 
by the design approval holder (DAH) indicating that certain fuselage 
structures are subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). The proposed 
actions were intended to prevent crack initiation and undetected 
propagation in the fuselage, which could result in reduced structural 
integrity of the airplane.

Actions Since NPRM Was Issued

    Since we issued the NPRM, Airbus SAS developed new modifications 
for Model A330-200 Freighter series airplanes and issued associated 
service information. In addition, for certain required modifications, 
upper thresholds in flight hours have been defined and the 
applicability of certain required actions was redefined to certain 
airplane configurations. In light of these changes, we are considering 
further rulemaking.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in considering 
the proposal. The following presents the comments received on the 
proposal and the FAA's response to each comment.

Support for the NPRM

    The commenters Grant Bingham, Ryan Pearson, Nicole Pfeffer, and 
Dyess Verfuth indicated their support for the NPRM.

Requests To Publish One AD for Each Individual Piece of Service 
Information

    American Airlines (AAL) and Delta Airlines (DAL), speaking also on 
behalf of Hawaiian Airlines, requested that the proposed AD be 
separated into several ADs, preferably with one AD issued per one piece 
of service information. All commenters pointed to the extreme 
difficulty of capturing and tracking the various tasks and compliance 
times for each airplane configuration on the respective operator's 
maintenance tracking system. AAL contended that the variety of 
maintenance thresholds, tasks, and service information that fall under 
the requirements of one AD would force the development of an untested 
workaround within their maintenance tracking system. AAL noted that 
their system is optimally designed for one service bulletin per one AD. 
DAL further argued that the request to separate this proposed AD into 
one AD per individual piece of service information was consistently 
requested by numerous operators since 2014 at Industry Structures Task 
Group meetings.
    Additionally, both commenters reasoned that if any of the 
associated service information was revised or the proposed AD was 
superseded, the resulting update and revision of their own associated 
internal documentation would cause a substantial burden on the 
operators. AAL pointed out that such a large-scale revision to 
compliance documentation may result in unnecessary confusion between 
the operators and the local FAA authority. AAL went on to note that if 
an alternate method of compliance were issued for a specific situation 
or piece of service information, AAL would be obligated to revise their 
internal documentation as well, resulting in an increased burden on 
operators.
    AAL also expressed concern that, due to the wide range of 
maintenance thresholds, the possibility exists that they may never be 
able to show accomplishment of the proposed AD. AAL explained that in 
several instances the maintenance thresholds are so high that their 
airplanes may never reach the threshold specified by certain service 
information, which may result in the appearance that they have not yet 
accomplished service information that specifies action at higher 
thresholds, even as they are complying with other

[[Page 20823]]

service information that specifies action at lower thresholds.
    We acknowledge the commenters' request and justifications. We have 
withdrawn this proposed AD. We are considering further rulemaking that 
clarifies the applicability of modifications to Airbus SAS Model A330-
200 Freighter series airplanes and its associated service information, 
defines upper thresholds in flight hours for certain airplanes, and 
redefines the applicability of some required actions to certain 
airplane configurations.

Requests To Reference the Latest Service Information

    AAL and DAL noted that, since the proposed AD was issued, revised 
service information is available and they have requested that we update 
the proposed AD to reference the latest service information. The 
commenters also requested that we revise the proposed AD to include 
previous revisions of the service information as credit for operators 
who have already accomplished the proposed actions using those 
revisions.
    We acknowledge the commenter's requests. We are considering further 
rulemaking, which would refer to the latest service information 
available, and, if appropriate, allow previous revisions of the service 
information as credit for operators who have already accomplished the 
proposed actions using those revisions.

FAA's Conclusions

    Upon further consideration, we have determined that more 
restrictive maintenance requirements are necessary and that the NPRM 
does not adequately address the identified unsafe condition. 
Accordingly, the NPRM is withdrawn.
    Withdrawal of the NPRM does not preclude the FAA from issuing 
another related action or commit the FAA to any course of action in the 
future.

Regulatory Impact

    Since this action only withdraws an NPRM, it is neither a proposed 
nor a final rule and therefore is not covered under Executive Order 
12866, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, or DOT Regulatory Policies and 
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979).

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by 
reference, Safety.

The Withdrawal

    Accordingly, we withdraw the NPRM, Docket No. FAA-2017-0812, 
Product Identifier (formerly Directorate Identifier) 2016-NM-198-AD, 
which was published in the Federal Register on September 19, 2017 (82 
FR 43715).

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on May 3, 2019.
Mike Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-09742 Filed 5-10-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P