[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 249 (Monday, December 30, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71788-71792]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-28069]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0481; Product Identifier 2019-NM-058-AD; Amendment 
39-21002; AD 2019-24-13]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) 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, -216, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -
131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. This AD was prompted 
by a report that during a maintenance check, cracks were found in a 
stiffener of a certain lateral window frame. This AD requires 
repetitive high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspections for cracking 
of a stiffener of a certain lateral window frame, and applicable 
related investigative and corrective actions, 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 February 3, 2020.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of February 3, 
2020.

ADDRESSES: For the material incorporated by reference (IBR) in this AD, 
contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; 
telephone +49 221 89990 1000; email [email protected]; 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 IBR material 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 in the AD docket on the internet at 
https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. 
FAA-2019-0481.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0481; 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 regulatory evaluation, 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, 
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South 
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax 206-231-3223.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the 
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2019-0067R1, dated September 11, 
2019 (``EASA AD 2019-0067R1'') (also referred to as the Mandatory 
Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``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. Model A320-215 airplanes are not on the U.S. Register; 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 by adding an AD that would apply to all 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 24, 2019 (84 FR 29426). The NPRM was prompted by a report that 
during a maintenance check, cracks were found in a stiffener of a 
certain lateral window frame. The NPRM proposed to require repetitive 
HFEC inspections for cracking of a stiffener of a certain lateral 
window frame, and applicable related investigative and corrective 
actions.
    The FAA is issuing this AD to address cracking of the horizontal 
upper

[[Page 71789]]

stiffener of the lateral window frame, which could reduce the 
structural integrity of the fuselage. See the MCAI for additional 
background information.

Comments

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

Request To Revise the Applicability

    Emirates Airlines (EAD) requested that the FAA exclude Model A319-
115 VIP airplanes from the applicability. EAD commented that the 
proposed inspection requirements are related to airworthiness 
limitations (ALI) task 531105-02-1 and ALI task 531105-01-1. EAD also 
commented that these ALI tasks are not applicable to Model A319-115 VIP 
airplanes, and after reporting this to EASA, EASA confirmed that this 
is correct. EAD stated that the EASA AD has been revised to remove 
Model A319-115 VIP airplanes from the applicability.
    The FAA agrees with the commenter's request. This AD now references 
EASA AD 2019-0067R1. The applicability in paragraph (c) of this AD is 
now limited to the airplanes identified in AD 2019-0067R1, which 
excludes certain Model A318 and A319 airplanes, including those 
identified by EAD. It has been determined that certain Model A318 and 
A319 airplane configurations could be removed from the applicability of 
this AD as the compliance time for the initial inspection is beyond the 
maintenance program publication trigger for those configurations.

Request To Clarify the Applicability

    Delta Airlines (DAL) asked whether all manufacturer serial numbers 
are affected regardless of the applicability specified in EASA AD 2019-
0067. DAL stated that in ``Required Action(s) and Compliance Time(s)'' 
of EASA AD 2019-0067, operators are instructed to accomplish a special 
detailed inspection of each affected part ``in accordance with'' the 
instructions of the applicable service information. DAL commented that 
the referenced service information is missing several airplane 
manufacturer serial numbers.
    The FAA agrees to clarify. If there is a discrepancy between the 
applicability of this AD and the effectivity of the service 
information, then this AD takes precedence. As noted previously, the 
applicability of this AD is now limited to the airplanes identified in 
EASA AD 2019-0067R1. This AD has not been revised regarding this issue.

First Request To Revise the Compliance Time for Reporting

    American Airlines (AAL) and United Airlines (UAL) requested that 
the compliance time for reporting be revised to match that of EASA AD 
2019-0067, which is 90 days instead of 30 days as specified in the 
proposed AD. AAL stated that the requirement to submit inspection 
results within 30 days would put an undue burden on its operations.
    The FAA agrees with the commenters' request. The FAA's standard 
compliance time for an AD reporting requirement is 30 days; however, 
the FAA has determined that 90 days is acceptable for this AD. 
Therefore, the compliance times in paragraphs (h)(3)(i) and (ii) of 
this AD have been revised to 90 days, which matches the compliance time 
for reporting in EASA AD 2019-0067R1.

Second Request To Revise the Compliance Time for Reporting

    DAL requested that the NPRM allow up to 30 days following the 
return-to-service date of the visit instead of 30 days from the finding 
to comply with the reporting requirement. DAL stated that while the 
visit is ongoing, all of the paperwork remains with the airplane, so 
while engineering may be aware of the finding, it may not yet have 
access to the details of the finding or repair until after the visit is 
closed and the files are sent to the central repository.
    The FAA disagrees with the commenter's request. Each operator has a 
unique AD management program, which comprises methods for demonstrating 
compliance with the AD in accordance with the applicable operational 
regulations; therefore, the FAA cannot prescribe or modify an AD based 
on an individual operator's unique methods of preparing the airplane 
for compliance. As noted previously, the compliance time for reporting 
has been changed from 30 to 90 days in this AD. In addition, operators 
may request approval of an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) 
using the procedures in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD to request a 
different compliance time. This AD has not been revised regarding this 
issue.

Request Regarding No Findings

    DAL requested that inspections with no findings not be required to 
be reported.
    The FAA disagrees with the commenter's request. Reporting all 
findings from the inspections is necessary to assess the extent of the 
problem in the affected fleet and to develop any additional corrective 
action that may be necessary. This AD has not been revised regarding 
this issue.

Request To Include Methods for Reporting and OMB Control Number

    DAL requested that the FAA specifically include a ``Reporting 
Requirements'' paragraph in the proposed AD and provide the largest 
number of methods for submitting the report (e.g., email, fax, letter, 
Airbus Tech Request, service bulletin reporting on the Airbus website). 
DAL stated that the reporting requirement paragraph should also include 
the ``AD Manual'' identifying the ``what, how, and when,'' and that the 
``OMB 2120-0056 approved'' statement should be included in the 
regulatory text of the proposed AD, instead of the preamble.
    The FAA would like to clarify that the specific reporting 
requirements are specified in paragraph (h)(3) of this AD and paragraph 
(7) of EASA AD 2019-0067R1. For clarification, this AD allows the 
reporting methods that are specified in the service information 
identified in EASA AD 2019-0067R1, including the methods mentioned by 
DAL. When reporting is required, the FAA currently includes the OMB 
Control Number in both the preamble and regulatory text of an AD. OMB 
Control Number 2120-0056 is included in paragraph (i)(4) of this AD. 
This AD has not been revised regarding this issue.

Request To Revise Certain Language in the Proposed AD

    DAL requested that the language in the proposed AD reflect the 
corrosion inhibiting compound (CIC) control in the corrosion prevention 
control program (CPCP) with a statement such as ``Reapplication of CICs 
may be controlled by the operator's CPCP program instead of this SB'' 
or ``Reapplication of CICs is not an RC [Required for Compliance] 
step.'' DAL stated that this proposed language could be added to the 
``Requirements'' paragraph, the ``Exceptions to EASA AD 2019-0067'' 
paragraph, or the ``Other FAA AD Provisions'' paragraph in the proposed 
AD.
    DAL commented that the service information states that all steps in 
the ``Procedure and Test'' sections are RC. DAL added that some of 
those procedural steps include re-applying CICs. DAL also stated that 
the referenced service information is not related to corrosion, and 
these steps might be part of the modification but should not be RC. DAL 
commented that since the choice of CICs is under the operators' control 
within their CPCP program, operators may have to request

[[Page 71790]]

approval of an AMOC to use their standard CIC rather than what is 
specified in the service information. DAL also commented that an 
operator may have to use an old or out-of-date CIC because it is listed 
in older service information.
    The FAA disagrees with the commenter's request. The EASA and Airbus 
approved the applicable protective finish as a required step to 
mitigate the risk addressed in this AD, and the FAA agrees that this 
step should be required. DAL has not proposed an alternative CIC or 
justified the need for an alternative CIC to complete the protective 
finish step. Each operator has its own unique CPCP, which may not 
contain information relative to mitigating the risk addressed in this 
AD. Operators may request approval of an AMOC using the procedures in 
paragraph (i)(1) of this AD for using an alternative CIC. This AD has 
not been revised regarding this issue.

Request To Work on the Airplane Under Certain Circumstances

    DAL requested that the FAA revise the proposed AD to allow work on 
the airplane while it is on jacks, and to define when the operator can 
or cannot move it (the jacks). DAL stated that since the accomplishment 
of the proposed AD must be ``in accordance with'' the service 
information, ``basic airplane configuration'' will result in 
accomplishing the inspections while the airplane is not on jacks. DAL 
also stated that it has many visits requiring the airplane to be jacked 
and routinely accomplishes multiple tasks simultaneously during service 
visits. DAL commented that requiring the service information to be 
accomplished during that portion of the visit with the weight on wheels 
limits the ability for the operator to perform the work.
    The FAA disagrees with the commenter's request. The FAA cannot 
prescribe or modify an AD based on an individual operator's unique 
methods of preparing the airplane for compliance. The FAA encourages 
DAL to work with the FAA certificate management office in establishing 
methods needed to prepare the airplane for AD-related work using either 
Airbus service information, or equivalent, in accordance with DAL's 
maintenance or inspection program. If necessary, operators may request 
approval of an AMOC using the procedures specified in paragraph (i)(1) 
of this AD. The AD has not been changed in this regard.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments 
received, and determined that air safety and the public interest 
require adopting this final rule with the changes described previously 
and minor editorial changes. The FAA has determined that these minor 
changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the 
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was 
already proposed in the NPRM.
    The FAA also determined that these changes will not increase the 
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this final 
rule.

Related IBR Material Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2019-0067R1 describes procedures for repetitive HFEC 
inspections of the horizontal upper stiffener of the lateral window 
frame on the right-hand (RH) and left-hand (LH) sides for any cracking, 
and applicable related investigative and corrective actions. 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 1,291 airplanes of U.S. 
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9 work-hours x $85 per hour = $765...........................              $0             $765         $987,615
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 these on-condition actions:

                Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Labor cost              Parts cost        Cost per product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 13 work-hours x $85 per                $0  Up to $1,105.
 hour = Up to $1,105.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Table does not include estimated costs for reporting and on-condition
  repairs. The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable the
  agency to provide cost estimates for the on-condition repairs
  specified in this AD.

    The FAA estimates that it would take about 1 work-hour per product 
to comply with the on-condition reporting requirement in this AD. The 
average labor rate is $85 per hour. Based on these figures, the FAA 
estimates the cost of reporting the inspection results on U.S. 
operators to be $85 per product.

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. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or 
any

[[Page 71791]]

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.
    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 and 
associated appliances to the Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, 
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various 
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive 
Order 12866,
    (2) 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.

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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


Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness 
directive (AD):

2019-24-13 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39-21002; Docket No. FAA-2019-0481; 
Product Identifier 2019-NM-058-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective February 3, 2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus SAS airplanes identified in paragraphs 
(c)(1) through (4) of this AD, certificated in any category, as 
identified in European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2019-
0067R1, dated September 11, 2019 (``EASA AD 2019-0067R1'').
    (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 during a maintenance 
check, cracks were found in an upper stiffener of the lateral window 
frame at the frame 4 upper attachment. The FAA is issuing this AD to 
address cracking of the horizontal upper stiffener of the lateral 
window frame, which could reduce the structural integrity of the 
fuselage.

(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 2019-0067R1.

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2019-0067R1

    (1) For purposes of determining compliance with the requirements 
of this AD: Where EASA AD 2019-0067R1 refers to its effective date, 
this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2019-0067R1 does not 
apply to this AD.
    (3) Paragraph (7) of EASA AD 2019-0067R1 specifies to report 
certain inspection results to Airbus. For this AD, report those 
inspection results at the applicable time specified in paragraph 
(h)(3)(i) or (ii) of this AD.
    (i) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of 
this AD: Submit the report within 90 days after the inspection.
    (ii) If the inspection was done before the effective date of 
this AD: Submit the report within 90 days after the effective date 
of this AD.

(i) 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 (j) 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: For any requirement in this AD 
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be 
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International 
Section, Transport Standards 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 2019-0067R1 that contains RC procedures and 
tests: Except as required by (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.
    (4) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement: 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

[[Page 71792]]

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 
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. 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.

(j) Related Information

    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.

(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 2019-0067R1, 
dated September 11, 2019.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For information about EASA AD 2019-0067R1, contact the EASA, 
Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 
89990 6017; email [email protected]; 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, 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. This 
material may be found in the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2019-0481.
    (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 
[email protected], or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on December 4, 2019.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-28069 Filed 12-27-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P