[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 164 (Wednesday, August 27, 2025)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41773-41776]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-16404]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2025-0213; Project Identifier MCAI-2024-00385-T;
Amendment 39-23115; AD 2025-17-05]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2017-14-
14, which applied to all Airbus SAS Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -
212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. AD 2017-14-14 required repetitive
inspections for cracking in the cabin floor beam junction at certain
fuselage frame locations and repair if necessary. Since the FAA issued
AD 2017-14-14, further analysis determined that the compliance times
for the inspections must also be based on flight hours. This AD
continues to require the actions in AD 2017-14-14, revises compliance
times, and adds a provision for optional modifications. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
DATES: This AD is effective October 1, 2025.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of October 1,
2025.
ADDRESSES:
AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2025-0213; 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-
[[Page 41774]]
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Washington, DC 20590.
Material Incorporated by Reference:
For European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) material
identified in this AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668
Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email [email protected].
You may find this material on the EASA website at 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 at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2025-0213.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Timothy Dowling, Aviation Safety
Engineer, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone: 206-
231-3667; email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2017-14-14, Amendment 39-18958 (82 FR
33002, July 19, 2017) (AD 2017-14-14). AD 2017-14-14 applied to all
Airbus SAS Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232
airplanes. AD 2017-14-14 required repetitive inspections for cracking
in the cabin floor beam junction at certain fuselage frame locations
and repair if necessary. The FAA issued AD 2017-14-14 to detect and
correct cracking in the cabin floor beam junction at certain fuselage
frame locations, which could result in reduced structural integrity of
the airplane.
The NPRM was published in the Federal Register on February 27, 2025
(90 FR 10801). The NPRM was prompted by AD 2024-0128, dated July 3,
2024 (EASA AD 2024-0128) (also referred to as ``the MCAI''), issued by
EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union. The MCAI states that the manufacturer developed a
modification that restores the fatigue potential at each location
(junction) by doing cold-working at the cabin floor beam and fitting
junction for airplanes with a pre-mod 155607 configuration. The
manufacturer also developed optional modification instructions for
airplanes with a post-mod 155607 configuration. These modifications can
be used to extend the compliance time for an inspection cycle. In
addition, further analysis determined that the compliance times for the
inspections must also be based on flight hours.
In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to continue to require the actions in
AD 2017-14-14 and to revise compliance times and add a provision for
optional modifications, as specified in EASA AD 2024-0128. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2025-0213.
Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive
Comments
The FAA received comments from an individual who supported the NPRM
without change.
The FAA received additional comments from an anonymous commenter
and ProTech Aero Services Limited (ProTech). The following presents the
comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.
Request To Confirm Use of Later Revisions Is Allowed
ProTech requested the FAA confirm that the proposed AD would allow
the use of later-approved revisions of the material specified in EASA
AD 2024-0128, as acceptable for compliance with the AD requirements.
This AD does allow the use of later-approved revisions of the
material referenced in EASA AD 2024-0128 as acceptable for compliance
with the required actions. This AD adopts the ``Ref. Publications''
section of EASA AD 2024-0128, which includes the current version of the
referenced material as well as later approved revisions.
Request To Consider Alternatives to Repetitive Inspections
The anonymous commenter suggested that the FAA should explore the
feasibility of design modifications or reinforcements to eliminate the
need for repetitive inspections. The commenter stated design
improvements can provide long-term solutions to structural issues.
The FAA acknowledges the commenter's concern. The FAA evaluated the
available information and determined that the actions required by this
AD are sufficient to address the unsafe condition. However, under the
provisions of paragraph (j)(1) of this AD, any person may request
approval of an alternative method of compliance (AMOC), including
design improvements or other alternatives, if the proposal provides an
acceptable level of safety. The FAA has not changed this AD in this
regard.
Request To Reduce Inspection Intervals
The anonymous commenter requested that the FAA reduce the
inspection intervals proposed in the NPRM. The commenter reasoned that
frequent inspections have been shown to identify structural issues
before they escalate.
The FAA does not agree to reduce the inspection intervals. A full-
scale fatigue test campaign was performed on a Model A321 airframe, and
the test results were used to determine an appropriate inspection
interval. The FAA also considered the safety implications, parts
availability, and normal maintenance schedules for timely
accomplishment of the repetitive inspections. In consideration of all
of these factors, the FAA determined that the compliance time, as
proposed, represents an appropriate interval in which the affected
cabin floor beam junctions can be inspected in a timely manner within
the fleet, while still maintaining an adequate level of safety. If
additional data are presented that would justify a shorter compliance
time, the FAA may consider further rulemaking. The FAA has not changed
this AD in this regard.
Request To Confirm Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) Methods Were
Considered
The anonymous commenter asked whether the FAA has considered
mandating advanced NDT methods such as ultrasonic or eddy current
inspections. The commenter asserted that advanced NDT methods would
enhance detection of subsurface cracks.
The FAA is aware of those NDT inspections and requires such
inspections where appropriate or necessary for detecting cracks. It was
determined that detailed inspections are sufficient for addressing the
unsafe condition of this AD. However, under the provisions of paragraph
(j)(1) of this AD, any person may request approval of an AMOC to use
other types of inspections if the proposal provides an acceptable level
of safety. The FAA has not changed this AD in this regard.
Request To Require Inspection Reporting
The anonymous commenter stated that operators should be required to
report all findings of cracks to the FAA to facilitate data collection
and trend analysis. The commenter reasoned that reports aid in
identifying patterns and prevent issues.
The FAA does not agree to require reporting. In certain cases, the
FAA
[[Page 41775]]
might determine that additional information (i.e., data collection) is
needed to understand the problem and develop appropriate mitigation for
an unsafe condition. In this case, because the safety concern was found
during a full-scale fatigue test campaign, the unsafe condition was
identified and a corrective action was developed without the need to
require additional operator reports. However, an operator may still
choose to send relevant inspection information to the FAA. The FAA has
not changed this AD in this regard.
Request To Mitigate the Financial Impact
The anonymous commenter asked the FAA what measures will be taken
to mitigate the economic impact of the proposed inspections on small
operators. The commenter stated that small operators may face financial
challenges in complying with frequent inspections.
The FAA acknowledges the commenter's concern and recognizes that
this AD imposes certain operational costs on operators. Under certain
circumstances, the airplane manufacturer might provide financial
relief, but the FAA does not provide economic mitigation to small
operators. The FAA has not changed this AD in this regard.
Conclusion
These products have been approved by the civil aviation authority
of another country and are approved for operation in the United States.
Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design
Authority, that authority has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition
described in the MCAI referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant
data, considered any comments received, and determined that air safety
requires adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing
this AD to address the unsafe condition on this product. Except for
minor editorial changes, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM.
None of the changes will increase the economic burden on any operator.
Material Incorporated by Reference Under 1 CFR Part 51
The FAA reviewed EASA AD 2024-0128, which specifies procedures for
inspections for cracking on the frame to cabin floor beam junction at
certain fuselage frame locations (frames 35.1 and 35.2, left- and
right-hand sides), repairs, and optional modifications to extend an
inspection interval. 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 494 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:
Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost on U.S.
Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Retained actions from AD 2017-14- Up to 8 work-hours x None Up to $680 per Up to $335,920 per
14. $85 per hour = $680 inspection cycle. inspection cycle.
per inspection
cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Costs for Optional Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 135 work-hours x $85 per hour = Up to $7,510..................... Up to $18,985.
$11,475.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 50 work-hours x $85 per hour = $1,600 $5,850
$4,250..............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
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
[[Page 41776]]
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
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:
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2017-14-14, Amendment 39-18958
(82 FR 33002, July 19, 2017); and
0
b. Adding the following new AD:
2025-17-05 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39-23115; Docket No. FAA-2025-0213;
Project Identifier MCAI-2024-00385-T.
(a) Effective Date
This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective October 1, 2025.
(b) Affected ADs
This AD replaces AD 2017-14-14, Amendment 39-18958 (82 FR 33002,
July 19, 2017) (AD 2017-14-14).
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to all Airbus SAS Model A321-111, -112, -131, -
211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes, certificated in any
category.
(d) Subject
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by a determination from fatigue testing on
the Model A321 airframe that cracks could develop in the cabin floor
beam junction at certain fuselage frame locations. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address cracking in the cabin floor beam junction
at certain fuselage frame locations. The unsafe condition, if not
addressed, could result in reduced 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 paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD: Comply
with all required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2024-0128, dated July 3, 2024 (EASA AD 2024-0128).
(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2024-0128
(1) Where EASA AD 2024-0128 refers to ``13 June 2016 [the
effective date of EASA AD 2016-0105],'' this AD requires using
August 23, 2017 (the effective date of AD 2017-14-14).
(2) Where EASA AD 2024-0128 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
(3) This AD does not adopt the ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD
2024-0128.
(4) Where paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2024-0128 specifies an option
to ``contact Airbus for approved repair instructions and, within the
compliance time specified therein, accomplish those instructions
accordingly'', this AD requires replacing that text with ``the crack
must be repaired before further flight using a method approved by
the Manager, AIR-520, Continued Operational Safety 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''.
(i) No Reporting Requirement
Although the material referenced in EASA AD 2024-0128 specifies
to submit certain information (inspection report sheet) to the
manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement.
(j) Additional AD Provisions
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, AIR-
520, Continued Operational Safety 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 manager of
the Continued Operational Safety Branch, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (k) of this AD and email to:
[email protected].
(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 2017-14-14 are approved as
AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of EASA AD 2024-0128 that are
required by paragraph (g) of this AD.
(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, AIR-520,
Continued Operational Safety Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's
EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-
authorized signature.
(3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by
paragraphs (i) and (j)(2) of this AD, if any material 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.
(k) Additional Information
For more information about this AD, contact Timothy Dowling,
Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA
98198; phone: 206-231-3667; email: [email protected].
(l) Material Incorporated by Reference
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the material listed in this paragraph
under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this material as applicable to do the actions
required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2024-0128,
dated July 3, 2024.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) For EASA material identified in this AD, contact EASA,
Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221
8999 000; email [email protected]. You may find this material on
the EASA website at 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 at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability
of this material at NARA, visit www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations or email [email protected].
Issued on August 19, 2025.
Lona C. Saccomando,
Acting Deputy Director, Integrated Certificate Management Division,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2025-16404 Filed 8-26-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P