AD 2017-16-07

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Airbus Model A330-200, A330-200 Freighter, A330-300, A340-500, and A340-600 series airplanes; and A340-313 airplanes. This AD was prompted by the discovery of Tartaric Sulfuric Anodizing (TSA)/Chromic Acid Anodizing (CAA) surface treatment in certain bulk cargo door frame holes of certain airplanes. This AD requires inspection of the fuselage bulk cargo door frames at specific locations, and corrective action 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, 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):

2017-16-07 Airbus: Amendment 39-18984; FAA-2016-9517; Product Identifier 2016-NM-100-AD.

(a) Effective Date

This AD is effective October 10, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

None.

(c) Applicability

This AD applies to the following Airbus airplanes, certificated in any category, manufacturer serial numbers (MSNs) 0400 and higher.
(1) Airbus Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, and -243 airplanes.
(2) Airbus Model A330-223F and -243F airplanes.
(3) Airbus Model A330-301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, - 342, and -343 airplanes.
(4) Airbus Model A340-313 airplanes.
(5) Airbus Model A340-541 airplanes.
(6) Airbus Model A340-642 airplanes.

(d) Subject

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Reason

This AD was prompted by the discovery of Tartaric Sulfuric Anodizing (TSA)/Chromic Acid Anodizing (CAA) surface treatment in certain bulk cargo door frame holes of airplanes with MSNs 0400 and higher. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracks in the bulk cargo door frames, caused by TSA/CAA surface treatment in certain bulk cargo door frame holes. Cracks in the bulk cargo door frames can cause the in-flight loss of a bulk cargo door, damage to the airplane, and subsequent reduced control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Initial Inspection

At the applicable compliance time specified in table 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD, do the actions specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD, in accordance with the instructions of Airbus Alert Operators Transmission (AOT) A53L012-16, Revision 00, dated May 30, 2016.
(1) Accomplish a rototest inspection to detect cracking of the holes for the bulk cargo door support fittings at fuselage frame (FR) 67 and FR 69, and a high-frequency eddy-current (HFEC) inspection of the holes for the door latch fitting at FR 69.
(2) Accomplish a detailed visual inspection to detect cracking in the bulk cargo door support fittings at FR 67 and FR 69 and the holes for the door latch fitting at FR 69.

Table 1 to Paragraph (g) of This AD--Initial Inspection ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total flight cycles
accumulated since airplane
first flight, on the Compliance time
effective date of this AD ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 12,500 total flight cycles or Within 200 flight cycles or 2 months,
more. whichever occurs first, after the
effective date of this AD. Fewer than 12,500 total Within 200 flight cycles or 2 months,
flight cycles. whichever occurs first, after exceeding
12,500 flight cycles. ------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 41877]]

(h) Repetitive Inspections

At intervals not to exceed the values specified in table 2 to paragraph (h) of this AD, as applicable, depending on the previously selected inspection method, repeat the inspection(s) specified in either paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD.

Table 2 to Paragraph (h) of this AD--Repetitive Inspections ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection method Inspection interval ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Detailed visual inspection............. 150 flight cycles. Rototest and HFEC inspections.......... 2,900 flight cycles. ------------------------------------------------------------------------

(i) Repair

If, during any inspection required by paragraph (g) or (h) of this AD, any crack is detected, before further flight, repair 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).

(j) Non-Terminating Action for Repairs

Accomplishment of a repair on an airplane, as required by paragraph (i) of this AD, does not constitute terminating action for the inspections required by this AD for that airplane, unless otherwise specified in repair instructions approved by the Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA.

(k) Reporting

After the initial inspection specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, and after each repetitive inspection specified in paragraph (h) of this AD, at the applicable times specified in paragraph (k)(1) and (k)(2) of this AD: Report inspection findings, both positive and negative, to Airbus in accordance with the instructions of Airbus AOT A53L012-16, Revision 00, dated May 30, 2016.
(1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the inspection.
(2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the effective date of this AD.

(l) 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 manager of the International Section, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (m)(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 EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA- 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.

(m) Related Information

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD 2016-0102, dated June 1, 2016; corrected June 7, 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-2016-9517.
(2) For more information about this AD, contact Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards Section, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-1138; 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 (n)(3) and (n)(4) of this AD.

(n) 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 A330 Alert Operators Transmission (AOT) A53L012-16, Revision 00, dated May 30, 2016, including Appendices 1 through 6. Except as described in paragraph (n)(2)(i)(E), none of these appendices are identified as ``appendices'' to Airbus A330 AOT A53L012-16.
(A) Appendix 1. Airbus Technical Disposition TD_K48_S3_01755_2016, Issue B, dated May 12, 2016.
(B) Appendix 2. Airbus Technical Disposition TD_K48_S3_01754_2016, Issue B, dated May 12, 2016.
(C) Appendix 3. Airbus Technical Disposition TD_K48_S3_01772_2016, Issue A, dated May 12, 2016.
(D) Appendix 4. Airbus Technical Disposition TD_K48_S3_01773_2016, Issue A, dated May 12, 2016.
(E) Appendix 5. Appendix 4: AOT reporting sheet, undated. (Appendix 5 is incorrectly identified as ``Appendix 4'' on all pages.)
(F) Appendix 6. Advance Copy of Chapter 53-40-18, ALL_A330_NTM_534018, dated May 18, 2016, of the Airbus A330 Non- Destructive Testing (NDT) Manual.
(``Advance copy'' indicates that the identified material will be incorporated into the NDT manual during the next manual revision. The ``advanced copy'' is intended to provide operators with access to the identified material quickly instead of making them wait several months until the next manual revision is released.)
(ii) Reserved.
(3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email airworthiness.A330-A340@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 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 A330-200, A330-200 Freighter, A330-300, A340-500, and A340-600 series airplanes; and A340-313 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on December 28, 2016 (81 FR 95538) (``the NPRM''). The NPRM was prompted by the discovery of TSA/CAA surface treatment in certain bulk cargo door frame holes of certain airplanes. The NPRM proposed to require inspection of the fuselage bulk cargo door frames at specific locations, and corrective action if necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracks in the bulk cargo door frames, caused by TSA/CAA surface treatment in certain bulk cargo door frame holes. Cracks in the bulk cargo door frames can cause the in-flight loss of a bulk cargo door, damage to the airplane, and subsequent reduced control of the airplane.
The European Aviation SafetyAgency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2016-0102, dated June 1, 2016; corrected June 7, 2016 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''); to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Model A330-200, A330-200 Freighter, A330-300, A340-500, and A340-600 series airplanes; and A340-313 airplanes. The MCAI states:

In the frame of the certification of the A330 Extended Service Goal exercise, it has been identified that Tartaric Sulfuric Anodising (TSA)/Chromic Acid Anodising (CAA) surface treatment is present in some frame holes, from aeroplane MSN [manufacturer serial number] 0400 and later MSN, following production process modification. On bulk cargo door frames (FR) 67 and FR 69 Right Hand Side, the door fitting attachment holes have this TSA/CAA

[[Page 41875]]

treatment, which leads to a detrimental effect on fatigue behaviour. Thiscondition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to critical cracks in the primary structure, possibly resulting in in- flight loss of a bulk cargo door, consequent decompression and potential damage to the aeroplane that could reduce the control of the aeroplane.
To address this potential unsafe condition, Airbus issued Alert Operators Transmission (AOT) A53L012-16 to provide instructions to inspect the fuselage bulk cargo door frames at specific locations.
For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires repetitive non-destructive test (rototest and high-frequency eddy- current (HFEC)) inspection or visual detailed (DET) inspections [to detect cracking] of the affected areas, and, depending on findings, accomplishment of a repair.
This [EASA] AD is considered an interim measure, and further [EASA] AD action may follow.

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-2016-9517.

Comments

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

Request To Remove the Reporting Requirement

Lufthansa agrees that reporting inspection results, as proposed in paragraph (k) of the proposed AD, is beneficial to the original equipment manufacturer (OEM). However, Lufthansa disagrees that reporting should be a hard requirement for operators. Lufthansa does not consider that reporting or non-reporting is an airworthiness concern for the affected aircraft. Lufthansa does not agree with the potential of having to ground an aircraft just because the reporting may be provided later than 30 days after inspection. According to Lufthansa, some layover may, in fact, take more than 30 days to complete; in such cases, the aircraft may not yet be released back into service, and the reporting as proposed could become overdue. Lufthansa considersthat because of these circumstances, reporting should be a strong recommendation, but not a requirement.
We find that reporting of inspection results for the affected aircraft is necessary. Reporting allows the manufacturer to collect airworthiness information from operators in order to fully understand the scope of the unsafe condition and to develop a final solution as a terminating action. Reporting is not intended to ground aircraft and is only required after the inspections required by paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD have been completed. We have made no change to this AD in this regard.

Conclusion

We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment 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.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

Airbus has issued Alert Operators Transmission (AOT) A53L012-16, Revision 00, dated May 30, 2016, including the following appendices.
Appendix 1. Technical Disposition TD_K48_S3_01755_2016, Issue B, dated May 12, 2016.
Appendix 2. Technical Disposition TD_K48_S3_01754_2016, Issue B, dated May 12, 2016.
Appendix 3. Technical Disposition TD_K48_S3_01772_2016, Issue A, dated May 12, 2016.
Appendix 4. Technical Disposition TD_K48_S3_01773_2016, Issue A, dated May 12, 2016.
Appendix 5. Appendix 4: AOT reporting sheet, undated. (Appendix 5 is incorrectly identified as ``Appendix 4'' on all pages.
Appendix 6. Advance Copy of Chapter 53-40-18, ALL_A330_NTM_534018, dated May 18, 2016, of the Airbus A330 Non- Destructive Testing (NDT) Manual. (``Advance copy'' indicates that the identified material will be incorporated into the NDT manual during the next manualrevision. The ``advanced copy'' is intended to provide operators with access to the identified material quickly instead of making them wait several months until the next manual revision is released.)
The service information describes procedures for inspections of the fuselage bulk cargo frames at the door support and latch fittings location; repair instructions; and reporting instructions. 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 96 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Inspection....................... 2 work-hours x $85 $0 $170 per inspection $16,320 per
per hour = $170 cycle. inspection cycle.
per inspection
cycle. Reporting........................ 1 work-hour x $85 $0 $85................ $8,160.
per hour = $85. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacements that would 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 Parts cost product ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Optional door frame replacement............... 200 work-hours x $85 per hour = $68,000 $85,000
$17,000. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 41876]]

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, 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.