AD 2017-21-07

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Airbus Model A300 series airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report of reduction of the de-icing performance of the pitot probe over time that could remain hidden to the flight crew. This

[[Page 48907]]

AD requires repetitive detailed inspections of the pitot probe heater insulation resistance, and replacement of the pitot probe heater if necessary. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

Final rule.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,

[[Page 48909]]

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):

2017-21-07 Airbus: Amendment 39-19078; Docket No. FAA-2017-0497; Product Identifier 2016-NM-209-AD.

(a) Effective Date

This AD is effective November 27, 2017.

(b) Effective Date

None.

(c) Applicability

This AD applies to Airbus Model A300 B2-1A, B2-1C, B2K-3C, B2- 203, B4-2C, B4-103, and B4-203 airplanes, certificated in any category, all manufacturer serial numbers.

(d) Subject

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 34, Navigation.

(e) Reason

This AD was prompted by areport of reduction of the de-icing performance of the pitot probe over time that could remain hidden to the flight crew. We are issuing this AD to ensure nominal de-icing performance of the pitot probe in order to prevent unreliable airspeed indications, which could result in reduced control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Definition of Pitot Probes

For the purpose of this AD, affected pitot probes are the First Officer's Pitot Probe 40DA, Captain's Pitot Probe 41DA, and Standby Pitot Probe 42DA.

(h) Repetitive Inspections

At the time specified in paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD, whichever occurs later, do a detailed inspection of the pitot probe heater insulation resistance on each affected pitot probe, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-34-0185, Revision 00, dated August 29, 2016. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 24 months.
(1) Within 24 months since the last detailed inspection of the pitot probe heater insulation resistance, as specified in Airbus A300 Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM), Task 30-31-00, Insulation Test of Pitot Heater Resistance.
(2) Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD.

(i) Corrective Action

If, during any detailed inspection as required by paragraph (h) of this AD, any pitot probe fails the test, as specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-34-0185, Revision 00, dated August 29, 2016, before further flight, replace the affected pitot probe with a serviceable (new or inspected as required by this AD) pitot probe, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-34-0185, Revision 00, dated August 29, 2016. Replacement of pitot probes, as required by this paragraph, does not constitute terminating action for the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (h) of this AD.

(j) Reporting

At the applicable times required by paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD: Submit a report of the findings (both positive and negative) of each inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD, as specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-34-0185, Revision 00, dated August 29, 2016, to Airbus Service Bulletin Reporting Online Application on Airbus World (https://w3.airbus.com/).
(1) For inspections done before the effective date of this AD: Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD.
(2) For inspections done on or after the effective date of this AD: Within 30 days after accomplishing each inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD.

(k) 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 (l)(2) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-116-AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. 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 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 European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include theDOA- authorized signature.
(3) 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 5 minutes 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.
(4) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by paragraph (j) 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.

(l) Related Information

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD 2016-0248, dated December 15, 2016, 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-2017-0497.
(2) For more information about this AD, contact Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone: 425-227-2125; fax: 425-227-1149.
(3) Service information identified in this AD that is not incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in paragraphs (m)(3) and (m)(4) of this AD.

(m) 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 A300-34-0185, Revision 00, dated August 29, 2016.
(ii) Reserved.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone: +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax: +33 5 61 93 44 51; email: account.airworth-eas@airbus.com; Internet: http://www.airbus.com.
(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For

[[Page 48910]]

information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-227-1221.
(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.

Discussion

We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Airbus Model A300 series airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on May 30, 2017 (82 FR 24601) (``the NPRM''). The NPRM was prompted by a report of reduction of the de-icing performance of the pitot probe over time that could remain hidden to the flight crew. The NPRM proposed to require repetitive detailed inspections of the pitot probe heater insulation resistance, and replacement of the pitot probe heater if necessary. We are issuing this AD to ensure nominal de-icing performance of the pitot probe in order to prevent unreliable airspeed indications, which could result in reduced control 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 2016-0248, dated December 15, 2016 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Model A300 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

An operator reported a reduction of the deicing performance of the pitot probe over the time. Pitot probes are heated to prevent ice accretion. De-icing performances of the Pitot probe might be reduced if Pitot probe heater degrades over time. Investigation results highlighted that the magnitude of de-icing performance reduction depended on how much the [pitot probe] heater is degraded. This degradation could remain hidden to the crew.
Pitot probes heater degradation, if not detected and corrected, could lead to unreliable airspeed indications, possibly resulting in reduced control of the aeroplane.
To ensure nominal de-icing performances of the Pitot probe, Airbus developed an inspection process to check the pitot [probe] heater performance, and published Service Bulletin (SB) A300-34-0185 to provide the necessary instructions to operators.
For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires repetitive detailed inspections (DET) of the pitot [probe] heater, and, depending on findings, replacement with a serviceable one.

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- 0497.

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.

Request To Reduce the Maximum Possible Initial Compliance Time

The Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA) expressed its partial support for the NPRM. ALPA requested that we change the introductory text of paragraph (h) of the proposed AD from ``. . . whichever occurs later . . .'' to ``. . . whichever occurs first . . .'' ALPA is concerned that a possible duration of 30 months to comply with the initial inspection requirement of the NPRM is too long and could adversely affect safety. ALPA also mentioned that they preferred that no more than 24 months pass between inspections.
We do not agree with the commenter's request to shorten the compliance time. After considering the available information, we have determined that the compliance time, as proposed, represents an appropriate interval of time in which the required actions can be performed in a timely manner within the affected fleet, while still maintaining an adequate level of safety. In developing an appropriate compliance time, we considered the safety implications, parts availability, and normal maintenance schedules for timely accomplishment of the detailed inspections. The proposed compliance time corresponds with the compliance times specified in the MCAI. Additionally, the affected airplanes are currently in storage. To reduce the compliance time of the proposed AD would necessitate (under the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act) reissuing the notice, reopening the period for public comment, considering additional comments subsequently received, and eventually issuing a final rule. That process would delay issuance of the final rule. In light of this, and in consideration of the amount of time that has already elapsed since issuance of the original notice, we have determined that further delay of this AD is not appropriate. We have not changed this AD in this regard.

Request To Reduce Compliance Time for Reporting

Airbus recommended that we reduce the compliance time for reporting from 30 days to 10 days (after the effective date of this AD) for inspections with findings. No further justification was provided.
We do not agree with the commenter's request to reduce the compliance time for reporting. After considering the available information, we have determined that the compliance time for reporting findings, as proposed, represents an appropriate interval of time in which the required actionscan be performed in a timely manner within the affected fleet, while still maintaining an adequate level of safety. To reduce the reporting compliance time of this AD would, as mentioned previouly, necessitate reissuing the notice, reopening the period for public comment, considering additional comments subsequently received, and

[[Page 48908]]

eventually issuing a final rule. In light of this, we have determined that the 30-day compliance time for reporting is appropriate. We have not changed this AD in this regard.

Conclusion

We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this AD as proposed except for minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor 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.

RelatedService Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

Airbus has issued Airbus Service Bulletin A300-34-0185, Revision 00, dated August 29, 2016. The service information describes procedures for repetitive detailed inspections of the pitot probe heater insulation resistance and replacement of the pitot probe heater. 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 5 airplanes of U.S. registry.
We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

Estimated Costs ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost on U.S.
Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product operators ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Repetitive inspection.......... 5 work-hours x $85 per $0 $425 per $2,125 per
hour = $425 per inspection cycle. inspection cycle.
inspection cycle. Reporting...................... 1 work hour x $85 per $0 $85 per inspection $425 per
hour = $85 per cycle. inspection cycle.
inspection cycle. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacement that will be required based on the results of the required inspection. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need this replacement:

On-Condition Costs ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost per
Action Labor cost Partscost product ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Replacement................................ 3 work-hours x $85 per hour = $255. $9,015 $9,270 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 safetyin 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, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels ofgovernment.
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.