Document ID: FAA-2017-1102-0006
Agency: faa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Airworthiness Directives: Airbus Airplanes
Posted Date: 2018-07-18T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 18, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33809-33817]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13802]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-1102; Product Identifier 2017-NM-078-AD; Amendment 
39-19320; AD 2018-13-08]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2016-01-11, 
which applied to certain Airbus Model A320-211, -212, and -231 
airplanes. AD 2016-01-11 required repetitive inspections for cracking 
of the radius of the front spar vertical stringers and the horizontal 
floor beam on frame (FR) 36, repetitive inspections for cracking of the 
fastener holes of the front spar vertical stringers on FR 36, and 
repair if necessary. This AD adds new thresholds and intervals for the 
repetitive inspections; requires, for certain airplanes, a potential 
terminating action modification of the center wing box area; and 
expands the applicability. This AD was prompted by a report that, 
during a center fuselage certification full-scale fatigue test, cracks 
were found on the front spar vertical stringer at a certain frame. This 
AD was also prompted by a determination that, during further 
investigations of the frame as part of the widespread fatigue damage 
(WFD) campaign, certain inspection compliance times have to be revised 
and new inspections and a new potential terminating action modification 
have to be introduced. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe 
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective August 22, 2018.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of August 22, 
2018.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule, 
contact Airbus, Airworthiness Office-EIAS, Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine 
No: 2, 31700 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax 
+33 5 61 93 44 51; email [email protected]; 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. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
1102.

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-2017-
1102; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket 
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and 
other information. The address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-
647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, 
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, 
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3223.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 
part 39 to supersede AD 2016-01-11, Amendment 39-18370 (81 FR 3316, 
January 21, 2016) (``AD 2016-01-11''). AD 2016-01-11 applied to certain 
Airbus Model A320-211, -212, and -231 airplanes. The NPRM published in 
the Federal Register on December 13, 2017 (82 FR 58566). The NPRM was 
prompted by a report that, during a center fuselage certification full-
scale fatigue test, cracks were found on the front spar vertical 
stringer at a certain frame. The NPRM proposed to continue to require 
repetitive inspections for cracking of the radius of the front spar 
vertical stringers and the horizontal floor beam on FR 36, repetitive 
inspections for cracking of the fastener holes of the front spar 
vertical stringers on FR 36, and repair if necessary. The NPRM also 
proposed to add new thresholds and intervals for the repetitive 
inspections; require, for certain airplanes, a potential terminating 
action modification of the center wing box area; and expand the 
applicability. We are issuing this AD to address fatigue cracking of 
the front spar vertical stringers on the wings, which

[[Page 33810]]

could result in the reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical 
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 
2017-0099, dated June 8, 2017 (referred to after this as the Mandatory 
Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an 
unsafe condition for certain Airbus Model A318 series airplanes; Model 
A319 series airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, 
and -233 airplanes; and Model A321 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    During centre fuselage certification full-scale fatigue test, 
cracks were found on the front vertical stringer at frame (FR) 36. 
Analysis of these findings indicated that a number of in-service 
aeroplanes could be similarly affected.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to 
crack propagation and consequent deterioration of the structural 
integrity of the aeroplane.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, Airbus issued Airbus 
Service Bulletin (SB) A320-57-1016 to provide inspection 
instructions, and, consequently, [Direction G[eacute]n[eacute]rale 
de l'Aviation Civile] DGAC France issued AD 97-311-105 [which 
corresponded to FAA AD 98-18-26, Amendment 39-10742 (63 FR 47423, 
September 8, 1998)] to require those repetitive [high frequency eddy 
current (HFEC)] inspections [for cracking]. At the same time, 
modification in accordance with Airbus SB A320-57-1017 was 
introduced as (optional) terminating action for the repetitive 
inspections * * *.
    After that [French] AD was issued, and following new analysis, 
modification per Airbus SB A320-57-1017 was no longer considered to 
be terminating action for the repetitive inspections as required by 
DGAC France AD 97-311-105. Aeroplanes with [manufacturer serial 
number] MSN 0080 up to MSN 0155 inclusive were delivered with the 
addition of a 5 [millimeter] mm thick light alloy shim under the 
heads of 2 fasteners at the top end of the front spar vertical 
stringers (Airbus mod 21290P1546, which is the production line 
equivalent to in-service modification through Airbus SB A320-57-
1017). Aeroplanes with MSN 0156 or higher are delivered with 
vertical stiffeners of the forward wing spar upper end with 
stiffener cap thickness increased from 4 to 6 mm (Airbus mod 
21290P1547).
    Prompted by these findings, Airbus issued SB A320-57-1178 
Revision 01 to introduce new repetitive inspections and, 
consequently, EASA issued AD 2014-0069 [which corresponds to FAA AD 
2016-01-11], superseding DGAC France AD 97-311-105 to require the 
new repetitive inspections, and, depending on findings, 
accomplishment of applicable corrective action(s).
    Since [EASA] AD 2014-0069 was issued, further investigations in 
the frame of the Widespread Fatigue Damage (WFD) campaign identified 
that some repetitive inspection thresholds and intervals have to be 
revised or introduced, and a new [potential] terminating action 
modification has been designed.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD retains the 
requirements of EASA AD 2014-0069, which is superseded, revises and 
introduces thresholds and intervals for the repetitive inspections, 
[introduces a potential terminating action modification,] and 
expands the Applicability.

    Required actions also include reporting. Although this AD does not 
explicitly restate the requirements of AD 2016-01-11, it retains 
certain requirements of AD 2016-01-11. Those requirements are 
referenced in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1178, Revision 03, 
including only Appendix 03, both dated November 29, 2016.
    This service information is identified in ``Related Service 
Information under 1 CFR part 51,'' in this preamble and in paragraph 
(i)(1) of this AD. 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-2017-1102.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing 
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and 
the FAA's response to each comment.

Support for the NPRM

    United Airlines (UAL) stated that it agrees with the intent of the 
NPRM.

Request To Change Costs of Compliance Section

    Delta Airlines (DAL) requested that the Costs of Compliance section 
of the proposed AD be revised to include the costs for reporting 
inspection findings and for modifying the airplane as specified in 
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1200. DAL stated that the cost of 
reporting, in addition to the cost for the modification has been 
significantly underestimated in the cost section of the proposed AD. 
DAL noted that it takes 2 work-hours per airplane to do the steps for 
reporting, in addition to numerous work-hours for setup time. DAL 
pointed out that the proposed AD mandates two service bulletins, and 
the cost of both should be included in the proposed AD. DAL explained 
that the kit cost for the modification is $55,360 (depending on 
configuration), and the labor is approximately 137 work-hours. DAL 
stated that the cost does not reflect lost revenue due to removing the 
airplane from service outside of the normal maintenance schedule. Given 
all of these factors, DAL asserted that the true cost of the proposed 
AD on operators should be as follows.
     For the inspection provided in Airbus Service Bulletin 
A320-57-1178: $1,947,850 + $232,275 for reporting.
     For the modification provided in Airbus Service bulletin 
A320-57-1200: $54,609,075 + $232,275 for reporting.
     Total cost to industry is: $57,021,475.
    We partially agree. We do not agree to increase the work-hours for 
reporting; however. We estimate only the time necessary to submit a 
report (per each response), since the reporting information would be 
obtained when accomplishing the inspection(s) in the service 
bulletin(s). However, we do agree to include the costs for the 
modification for certain airplanes specified in Airbus Service Bulletin 
A320-57-1200, dated November 20, 2015, which will result in a total 
fleet cost of $1,107,050 or $110,705 per product, for the basic 
requirement of this AD. We have changed the ``Costs of Compliance'' 
section of this final rule accordingly.

Request To Clarify Certain Requirements in Table 1 to Paragraphs (g), 
(h), (i)(1), and (j) of the Proposed AD

    UAL asked that we revise table 1 to paragraphs (g), (h), (i)(1), 
and (j) of the proposed AD to clarify that Airbus modification (Mod) 
21290P1546 is limited to airplanes with manufacturer serial numbers 
(MSN) 0080 up to MSN 0155 inclusive. UAL also asked that another 
clarification be added to table 1 to specify that Mod 21290P1547 is 
effective for airplanes with MSN 0156 or higher, which were delivered 
with vertical stiffeners of the forward wing spar upper end with 
stiffener cap thickness increased from 4 to 6 mm. UAL stated that those 
airplanes were delivered with the addition of a 5 millimeter (mm) thick 
light alloy shim under the heads of two fasteners at the top end of the 
front spar vertical stringers. UAL added that Mod 21290P1546 is the 
production line equivalent to in-service modifications through Airbus 
Service Bulletin A320-57-1017.
    We do not agree with the commenter's requests. Figure 1 to 
paragraphs (g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of this AD (table 1 to paragraphs 
(g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of the proposed AD) defines configurations by 
whether or not certain modifications were done and certain service 
bulletins were embodied. Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1017 provides 
information regarding Mod 21290P1546 and Mod 21290P1547 that identifies 
the specific configuration of the airplanes. The definitions in figure 
1 to paragraphs (g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of this AD and figure 2 to 
paragraphs (g) and (i)(1) of this AD

[[Page 33811]]

correspond to the airplane configuration definitions provided in 
Appendix 1 of EASA AD 2017-0099, dated June 8, 2017. Therefore, we have 
not changed this AD in this regard.

Request To Extend Compliance Times for Configuration 003 Airplanes

    DAL asked that we extend the proposed initial compliance time for 
Configuration 003 airplanes identified in figure 3 to paragraph (i)(1) 
of the proposed AD. DAL asked that the initial inspection be extended 
to 24 months, or at a minimum, that the flight-hour limit be increased 
to 1,500 flight hours, since the initial inspection is dependent on 
flight cycles, not flight hours. DAL provided the following options for 
the proposed compliance time: (1) Next scheduled . . ., (2) 12-month . 
. ., or (3) 4-months. . . . DAL stated that it currently operates five 
airplanes, which are Configuration 003 on which the threshold of 
``Before exceeding 32,000 flight cycles or 64,000 flight hours since 
airplane first flight'' for the initial inspection has been exceeded. 
DAL added that, at current fleet utilization rates, it will require the 
inspections be done within approximately 85 days after the effective 
date of the AD, due to the flight-hour limit. DAL noted that this will 
necessitate a special maintenance visit. DAL also stated that its 
maintenance program requires a maintenance visit every 24 months, and 
added that most, if not all, of the airplanes will not visit a hangar 
within the next 3 months.
    DAL asked that the compliance time be extended to 6 years after the 
effective date of the AD, with supplemental inspections for 
accomplishing the modification required by paragraph (j) of the 
proposed AD. At a minimum, DAL requested relief by allowing for an 
inspection, as specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1178, 
Revision 03, dated November 29, 2016, at 2-year intervals until the 
heavy ``H'' check can be reached. DAL stated that modifications to 
Configuration 003 airplanes require incorporation of Airbus Service 
Bulletin A320-57-1200, dated November 20, 2015, prior to reaching 
48,000 flight cycles or 96,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first. 
DAL stated that, at its current utilization rate, this modification 
would be required in approximately 4 years; however, its current heavy 
maintenance ``H'' checks are scheduled at 6-year intervals. DAL noted 
that this is a minimal risk, since Configuration 003 airplanes will 
receive supplemental inspections within a short time after the 
effective date specified in paragraph (i)(1) of the proposed AD.
    We do not agree with the commenter's requests to extend the 
specified compliance times. The compliance times for the actions 
specified in this AD for addressing widespread fatigue damage (WFD) 
were established to ensure that affected structure is replaced before 
WFD develops. 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. Therefore, we have 
not changed this AD in this regard.

Request To Allow Alternative Method of Compliance (AMOC) in Lieu of 
Contacting the Manufacturer for Repair Instructions

    DAL asked that an allowance be made under the provisions of 
paragraph (o)(2) of the proposed AD (and future ADs) for contacting 
Airbus for any deviations to the instructions contained within the 
service bulletins required in paragraphs (i) and (j) of the proposed 
AD, and to be able to use their EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA) 
approvals without seeking separate and redundant FAA AMOCs. DAL stated 
that as airplanes are scheduled for maintenance to comply with the 
proposed AD, the operator may discover that the Airbus service 
information contains errors that can affect compliance with the actions 
in the proposed AD. DAL did not state there are any known errors in the 
service information required in paragraphs (i) and (j) of the proposed 
AD. DAL added that, although the proposed AD provides an option to 
receive approval from the Manager, International Section, Transport 
Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA, or Airbus's EASA DOA; as specified in 
paragraph (o)(2) of the proposed AD, no such allowance is provided for 
receiving approval for deviations from the service information. DAL 
noted that past experience has shown that the FAA is unable to provide 
AMOC approvals within 2 days after receiving the request, which could 
result in grounding of airplanes. DAL suggested using the language in 
paragraph (6) of the MCAI.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request. Paragraph (o)(2) of 
this AD, ``Contacting the Manufacturer,'' only addresses the 
requirement to contact the manufacturer for corrective actions for the 
identified unsafe condition and does not cover deviations from the 
requirements of AD-mandated actions. We do not agree to expand 
paragraph (o)(2) of this AD to include such deviations because we need 
to ensure that any deviations from the requirements of AD-mandated 
actions are properly reviewed to adequately address the unsafe 
condition. Regarding paragraph (6) of the MCAI, if an operator is not 
able to comply with service information that is required by an AD, then 
the operator must request an AMOC in accordance with the procedures 
specified in paragraph (o)(1) of this AD.
    We also note that, although we cannot guarantee AMOC approvals 
within 2 business days, we have provided AMOC approvals to U.S. 
operators, including DAL, within 24 hours of receiving the request, 
provided operators submit a complete AMOC package with substantiation 
and explanation of the urgency, such as, but not limited to, a 
disruption in operation. Guidance for submitting AMOCs is available in 
FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 39-10. We also recommend that operators work 
with the original equipment manufacturers to address errors in service 
information as part of AD planning, in addition to submitting comments 
to the NPRM denoting any errors in the service information, so that 
corrections to methods of compliance (MOC) can be addressed in the FAA 
final rule. Additional guidance for operators on AD management can be 
found in FAA AC 39-9. We have not changed this AD in this regard.

Requests To Change or Delete Reporting Requirement

    DAL and UAL asked that the reporting of findings (positive or 
negative), as specified in the reporting requirement in paragraphs (n) 
and (o)(4) of the proposed AD, be limited to positive findings only, or 
be removed entirely. DAL stated that it will require a significant 
amount of work to collect, collate, and disseminate the requested data 
to Airbus, resulting in little or no benefit to the airworthiness of 
the airplane. DAL added that any findings will require transmission of 
findings to engineering from maintenance prior to submission to Airbus, 
which could result in a time lag and opportunities for error. DAL and 
UAL asserted that all positive findings are already reported to Airbus 
as part of the repair process and Airbus has the means to determine 
negative findings, so reporting is a duplicative burden on operators. 
Further, DAL argued that the Paperwork Reduction Act (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-104publ13/html/PLAW-104publ13.htm) is meant 
to reduce the burden placed on public entities from government agencies 
when

[[Page 33812]]

the information is obtainable from other sources, especially for the 
convenience of a foreign business. Additionally, DAL notes that only 
individuals that have the required access--controlled by Airbus--may 
submit reports, and provided data about what is required in order to 
submit a report (i.e., work-hours for the various steps in the 
process). DAL asserted that the cost of reporting on its operation 
would be $518,710, and that Airbus, EASA, nor the FAA have demonstrated 
in any of the service documents why the reporting requirement in this 
AD is necessary.
    We agree to limit the reporting requirement to positive findings 
only for the reasons provided by the commenters. We have changed 
paragraph (n) of this AD accordingly.
    We do not agree to remove the reporting requirement in this AD 
because the inspection reports will enable the manufacturer to obtain 
better insight into the nature, cause, and extent of the cracking, and 
eventually to develop final corrective action to address the unsafe 
condition. Once final corrective action has been identified, we might 
consider further rulemaking.

Clarification of Actions That Prompted This AD

    We have revised the SUMMARY section of this final rule and 
paragraph (e) of this AD to clarify what prompted this AD. In addition 
to the report of cracks on the front spar vertical stringer at a 
certain frame, this AD was prompted by a determination that, during 
further investigations of the frame as part of the WFD campaign, 
certain inspection compliance times have to be revised and new 
inspections and a new potential terminating action modification have to 
be introduced.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comments received, 
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting 
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial 
changes. We have determined that these changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the 
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was 
already proposed in the NPRM.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the 
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued the following service information.
     Service Bulletin A320-57-1178, Revision 03, including only 
Appendix 03, both dated November 29, 2016. The service information 
describes procedures for a rototest inspection for cracking of the 
radius of the front spar vertical stringers on FR 36, a HFEC for 
cracking of the horizontal floor beam on FR 36, and an HFEC inspection 
for cracking of the fastener holes of the front spar vertical stringers 
on FR 36.
     Service Bulletin A320-57-1200, dated November 20, 2015. 
The service information describes procedures for modifying the center 
wing box area, which includes related investigative and corrective 
actions. Related investigative actions include an HFEC inspection on 
the radius of the rib flanges, a rototest inspection of the fastener 
holes, detailed and HFEC inspections for cracking on the cut edges, 
detailed and rototest inspections on all open fastener holes, and an 
inspection to determine if secondary structure brackets are installed. 
Corrective action includes reworking the secondary structure bracket 
and repair.
    This service information is reasonably available because the 
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of 
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 815 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    The actions required by AD 2016-01-11, take about 24 work-hours per 
inspection cycle per product, at an average labor rate of $85 per work-
hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the actions that 
are required by AD 2016-01-11 is $2,040 per inspection cycle per 
product.
    We also estimate that it takes about 273 work-hours per product to 
comply with the basic requirements of this AD and 1 work-hour for 
reporting per response. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. 
Required parts cost about $87,500 per product. Based on these figures, 
we estimate the cost of this AD on affected U.S. operators of certain 
airplanes specified in the service information to be $1,107,050 or 
$110,705 per product.
    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide 
cost estimates for the repair of cracking specified in this AD.

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 current valid OMB control number. The control 
number for the collection of information required by this AD is 2120-
0056. The paperwork cost associated with this AD has been detailed in 
the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for 
reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the 
collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with 
this AD is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden 
and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA 
at 800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591, ATTN: Information 
Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to 
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the 
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, 
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in 
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General 
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with 
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing 
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator 
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within 
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition 
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this 
rulemaking action.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the 
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by 
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is 
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but 
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the 
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to 
the Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications 
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct 
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States,

[[Page 33813]]

or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various 
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies 
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or 
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria 
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 
2016-01-11, Amendment 39-18370 (81 FR 3316, January 21, 2016), and 
adding the following new AD:

2018-13-08 Airbus: Amendment 39-19320; Docket No. FAA-2017-1102; 
Product Identifier 2017-NM-078-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective August 22, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2016-01-11, Amendment 39-18370 (81 FR 3316, 
January 21, 2016) (``AD 2016-01-11'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 
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; certificated in any category; all 
manufacturer serial numbers, except airplanes specified in 
paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Model A319 and A320 series airplanes on which Airbus 
Modification 160000 (structural reinforcement for sharklet 
installation) has been embodied in production.
    (2) Model A321 series airplanes on which Airbus Modification 
160021 (structural reinforcement for sharklet installation) has been 
embodied in production.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report that, during a center fuselage 
certification full-scale fatigue test, cracks were found on the 
front spar vertical stringer at frame (FR) 36. This AD was also 
prompted by a determination that, during further investigations of 
the frame as part of the widespread fatigue damage (WFD) campaign, 
certain inspection compliance times have to be revised and new 
inspections and a new potential terminating action modification have 
to be introduced. We are issuing this AD to address fatigue cracking 
of the front spar vertical stringers on the wings, which could 
result in the reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Definition of Airplane Configurations

    For the purposes of this AD, airplane configurations are defined 
in figure 1 to paragraphs (g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of this AD and 
figure 2 to paragraphs (g) and (i)(1) of this AD.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18JY18.001

[[Page 33814]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18JY18.002

(h) Actions Required for Previously Inspected Airplanes

    For Configuration 001, 002, or 003 airplanes, as identified in 
figure 1 to paragraphs (g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of this AD, on 
which the inspections specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-
1178, dated October 29, 2013, have been accomplished before the 
effective date of this AD; but the additional work specified in 
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1178, Revision 01, dated May 28, 
2014, including Appendix 01, dated May 28, 2014, has not been 
accomplished before the effective date of this AD: Before 
accomplishing the initial inspection required by paragraph (i)(1) of 
this AD, contact the Manager, International Section, Transport 
Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Aviation Safety Agency 
(EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA) for 
further instructions and accomplish those instructions accordingly.

(i) Repetitive Inspections

    (1) Within the compliance time defined in figure 3 to paragraph 
(i)(1) of this AD, as applicable to airplane configuration as 
identified in figure 1 to paragraphs (g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of 
this AD and figure 2 to paragraphs (g) and (i)(1) of this AD, 
accomplish a special detailed inspection (SDI) for cracking of the 
radius of the front spar vertical stringers and the horizontal floor 
beam and the fastener holes on FR 36, in accordance with the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1178, 
Revision 03, including only Appendix 03, both dated November 29, 
2016.

[[Page 33815]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18JY18.003

    (2) If no cracking is found during any inspection required by 
paragraph (i)(1) of this AD, repeat the inspection required by 
paragraph (i)(1) of this AD thereafter at intervals not to exceed 
the inspection interval values defined in figure 4 to paragraphs 
(i)(2) and (l) of this AD, except as provided by paragraph (l) of 
this AD.

[[Page 33816]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18JY18.004

(j) Modification

    For A320 series airplanes, Configuration 001, 002, or 003 as 
identified in figure 1 to paragraphs (g), (h), (i)(1), and (j) of 
this AD: Within the compliance time defined in figure 5 to paragraph 
(j) of this AD, as applicable, modify the center wing box area, 
including doing all applicable related investigative and corrective 
actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of 
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1200, dated November 20, 2015, 
except as required by paragraph (k) of this AD. Do all applicable 
related investigative and corrective actions before further flight.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18JY18.005

(k) Corrective Action

    If any crack is found during any inspection required by this AD: 
Before further flight, repair using a method approved by the 
Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or 
the EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval 
must include the DOA-authorized signature. Where Airbus Service 
Bulletin A320-57-1178, Revision 03, including only Appendix 03, both 
dated November 29, 2016; and Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1200, 
dated November 20, 2015; specify to contact Airbus for appropriate 
action, and specify that action as ``RC'' (Required for Compliance), 
accomplish corrective actions in accordance with this paragraph.

(l) Previous Repairs

    For airplanes that have been repaired in the inspection area 
specified in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD before the effective date 
of this AD using a method approved by the

[[Page 33817]]

Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or 
the EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA: Accomplish repetitive SDIs within 
the compliance time defined in those repair instructions for 
repetitive SDIs. If no compliance time is identified in the repair 
instructions for repetitive SDIs, accomplish the repetitive SDIs 
required by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD at the compliance times 
defined in figure 4 to paragraphs (i)(2) and (l) of this AD.

(m) No Terminating Action

    Modification or repair of an airplane, as specified in paragraph 
(j) or (k) of this AD, does not constitute terminating action for 
the repetitive inspections required by this AD, unless it is 
specified otherwise in a repair method approved by the Manager, 
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the EASA; 
or Airbus's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must 
include the DOA-authorized signature.

(n) Reporting Requirement

    Submit a report of the positive findings of the inspections 
required by paragraphs (i) and (j) of this AD to ``Airbus Service 
Bulletin Reporting Online Application'' on Airbus World (https://w3.airbus.com/), at the applicable time specified in paragraph 
(n)(1) or (n)(2) of this AD.
    (1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of 
this AD: Report within 30 days after that inspection.
    (2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this 
AD: Report within 30 days after the effective date of this AD.

(o) Other FAA AD Provisions

    (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 manager of the International Section, send it to the 
attention of the person identified in paragraph (p)(2) of this AD. 
Information may be emailed to: [email protected]. 
Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal 
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the 
local flight standards district office/certificate holding district 
office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: As of the effective date of 
this AD, 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 EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. If approved by the 
DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as specified in 
paragraph (k) 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.
    (4) Reporting Requirements: A federal agency may not conduct or 
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a 
person be subject to a 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 current 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 be approximately 1 
work-hour per response, including the time for reviewing 
instructions, completing and reviewing the collection of 
information. All responses to this collection of information are 
mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden and 
suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to the FAA at 
800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information 
Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

(p) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information 
(MCAI) EASA AD 2017-0099, dated June 8, 2017, 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-2017-1102.
    (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) Service information identified in this AD that is not 
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in 
paragraphs (q)(3) and (q)(4) of this AD.

(q) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the 
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed 
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do 
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1178, Revision 03, including 
only Appendix 03, both dated November 29, 2016.
    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1200, dated November 20, 
2015.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact 
Airbus, Airworthiness Office--EIAS, Rond-Point Emile Dewoitine No: 
2, 31700 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 
5 61 93 44 51; email [email protected]; internet 
http://www.airbus.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport 
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For 
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 
206-231-3195.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated 
by reference at the 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 Des Moines, Washington, on June 12, 2018.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-13802 Filed 7-17-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P