Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 46 (Wednesday, March 9, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12409-12413]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-04545]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-0243; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-114-AD; 
Amendment 39-18423; AD 2016-05-05]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all 
Airbus Model A300 series airplanes; Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-
600R series airplanes, and A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes 
(collectively called Model A300-600 series airplanes); and Model A310 
series airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of cracked aluminum 
support struts of the trimmable horizontal stabilizer (THS) caused by 
stress corrosion. This AD requires inspections to identify the part 
number of each support strut, repetitive inspections for cracking of 
the THS support strut ends, installation of reinforcing clamps on strut 
ends, and replacement of support struts, if necessary. We are issuing 
this AD to detect and correct cracked THS support struts, which could 
lead to the rupture of all four support struts making the remaining 
structure unable to carry limit loads, which could result in loss of 
the THS and reduced control of the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective April 13, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of April 13, 
2016.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2015-0243 or in person at the 
Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket 
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.
    For service information identified in this final rule, 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 [email protected]; Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information at the 
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. 
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 
425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
0243.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, 
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone 425-227-2125; 
fax 425-227-1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

[[Page 12410]]

airplanes; Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series airplanes, 
and A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called Model A300-
600 series airplanes); and Model A310 series airplanes. The NPRM 
published in the Federal Register on February 18, 2015 (80 FR 8571).
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical 
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA 
Airworthiness Directive 2014-0164, dated July 11, 2014 (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; Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series 
airplanes, and A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called 
Model A300-600 series airplanes); and Model A310 series airplanes. The 
MCAI states:

    During scheduled maintenance, several Trimmable Horizontal 
Stabilizer (THS) support struts were found cracked at the strut 
ends. The THS is supported and articulated at frame (FR) 91 in the 
tail cone. Lateral movement is prevented by four diagonal support 
struts.
    Investigations revealed that the cracks were caused by stress 
corrosion and propagated from the inside to the outside of the 
strut.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to the 
rupture of all four THS support struts at FR91, which would make the 
remaining structure unable to carry limit loads, potentially 
resulting in loss of the Horizontal Tail Plane.
    To address this unsafe condition, EASA issued AD 2014-0121 
[http://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2014-0121] to require repetitive High 
Frequency Eddy Current (HFEC) inspections of the THS support strut 
ends, installation of reinforcing clamps on strut ends and, 
depending on findings, replacement of damaged support struts. 
Installation of reinforcing clamps on strut ends is considered a 
temporary solution pending introduction of a re-designed support 
strut.
    Since that [EASA] AD was issued, it was discovered that the 
[EASA] AD appeared to also require HFEC inspections of steel struts, 
which are not prone to cracking. The unsafe condition exists only on 
support struts made of aluminum, which were introduced through 
Airbus modification (mod) 06101, but may also have been installed in 
service as replacement parts on aeroplanes in pre-mod 06101 
configuration.
    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD retains the 
requirements of EASA AD 2014-0121, which is superseded, and 
clarifies the need for an initial identification of the support 
struts installed on aeroplanes in pre-mod 06101 configuration. The 
related Airbus Service Bulletins (SB) remain unchanged.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2015-0243-0002.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing 
this AD. We have considered the comments received. The following 
presents the comments received on the NPRM (80 FR 8571, February 18, 
2015) (``the NPRM'') and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Remove Repetitive Inspections From the NPRM

    FedEx stated that Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6172, dated 
February 14, 2014 and Airbus Service Bulletin A310-53-2136, dated 
February 14, 2014, require an application of sealant and installation 
of a clamp over the affected area. FedEx stated periodic re-inspections 
for cracking of the THS support strut ends would induce further damage 
since it requires removal of the reinforcing clamps and sealant before 
accomplishing the HFEC inspection.
    We infer from the commenter's statement that FedEx requests removal 
of the repetitive inspection requirement from the proposed AD. We 
disagree because if operators follow established procedures, removal of 
the sealant should not introduce damage to the support struts installed 
on the THS. We have not changed this final rule in this regard.

Request To Remove Installation Requirement From the NPRM

    FedEx and United Parcel Service (UPS) stated they disagree with the 
requirement to install the clamping. Both commenters claimed that 
installing reinforcing clamps will not resolve any stress mitigation 
and crack progression. UPS stated that the NPRM proposed to require 
repair prior to further flight, if cracking is identified. FedEx and 
UPS stated that repetitive inspections provide a sufficient level of 
safety on the struts and that the installation of reinforcement clamps 
does not enhance the support strut installation, but adds an additional 
cost without a corresponding safety benefit. FedEx and UPS requested 
removal of the clamp installation requirement specified by paragraphs 
(i) and (j) of the proposed AD.
    We disagree to remove the requirement to install clamping from 
paragraphs (i) and (j) of this AD. The clamping reduces the 
circumferential stresses in the rod-ends and supports the circular 
shape of the rod ends. As a result, stress corrosion of the rod is 
stopped, or partially reduced, due to the lower circumferential 
stresses. We have not changed this final rule in this regard.

Request To Remove Certain References From Paragraph (l) of the NPRM

    UPS requested that we remove reference to paragraphs (i)(1) through 
(i)(3) of the proposed AD from paragraph (l) of the proposed AD. UPS 
stated the service bulletins identified in paragraphs (i)(1) through 
(i)(3) of the proposed AD do not include an inspection form or 
inspection requirements within the accomplishment instructions of the 
service information and therefore these documents should not be 
referenced in paragraph (l) of the proposed AD, which specifies 
reporting inspection results.
    We agree with the request because paragraph (l) of this AD only 
requires the reporting of certain inspections results. Paragraph (i) of 
this AD requires an installation of reinforcing clamps. We have revised 
paragraph (l) of this AD to remove the reference to paragraphs (i)(1) 
through (i)(3) of this AD.
    We have also revised paragraph (l) of this AD by removing a 
reference to paragraph (h) of this AD in order to match the reporting 
requirement specified in the MCAI. Paragraph (l) of the proposed AD 
refers to inspections required by both paragraphs (g) and (h) of the 
proposed AD. However, reporting is only required for inspections 
required by paragraph (g) of this AD.

Request To Revise Costs of Compliance

    FedEx requested that we revise the Costs of Compliance paragraph of 
the proposed AD to accurately reflect the cost of replacing cracked 
struts. FedEx stated it agrees that struts that are determined to be 
cracked should be replaced but finds that this adds an additional 
financial burden to the airlines. FedEx stated there are no warranty 
provisions stated in the manufacturer's service information to mitigate 
the additional expense of replacing struts, nor is it accounted for in 
the NPRM.
    We disagree because the conditional cost of replacing the struts 
was accounted for in the NPRM by using the standard part cost for non-
avionics parts of $10,000 and an estimate that any necessary follow-on 
actions would take about 15 work-hours. Further, we do not control 
warranty coverage for affected individuals. We have not changed this 
final rule in this regard.

Request To Include Installation of Steel Struts as Terminating Action

    FedEx requested that we revise the NPRM to state that the 
installation of steel struts constitutes a terminating

[[Page 12411]]

action for the repetitive inspections specified by paragraph (h) of the 
proposed AD. FedEx noted that Airbus may be developing a solution that 
would terminate the repetitive inspections, but as of yet, Airbus has 
not published any service information that would eliminate the need for 
the repetitive inspections specified by paragraph (h) of the proposed 
AD.
    We disagree to change this final rule because terminating action is 
not available at this time. When terminating action becomes available, 
the FAA may consider installation of the new design struts as an 
alternative method of compliance (AMOC) to this AD once the 
manufacturer's design solution is released. We have not changed this 
final rule in this regard.

Request To Extend the Repetitive Inspection Interval

    UPS requested that we extend the repetitive inspection interval 
required by paragraph (h) of the proposed AD. UPS stated that a 
manufacturer's investigation identified the cracking to be the result 
of inter-granular stress corrosion and that for cracking to develop, 
three factors need to be present: a material flaw at the granular 
level, an environmental condition for corrosion to develop, and a 
tensile load to induce damage development/propagation at the material 
flaw. UPS added that the area is already protected with anti-corrosion 
materials. UPS stated that based on the low occurrence of cracking, the 
propagation properties of cracking due to stress corrosion, and the age 
of the fleet, fleet airworthiness can be maintained using all three 
operational parameters--flight hours, flight cycles, and calendar time. 
UPS requested that we revise the repetitive inspection interval from 24 
months to 5,000 flight hours, 2,500 flight cycles, or 36 months, 
whichever occurs first.
    We do not agree with the request to extend the repetitive 
inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD because the UPS 
proposal is not supported by analysis or data. In developing an 
appropriate compliance time for the actions specified in paragraph (h) 
of this AD, we considered the safety implications and normal 
maintenance schedules for the timely accomplishment of the specified 
actions. We have determined that the proposed interval will ensure an 
acceptable level of safety and allow the actions to be done during 
scheduled maintenance intervals for most affected operators. However, 
affected operators may request an AMOC to request an extension of the 
repetitive inspection interval under the provisions of paragraph (m)(1) 
of this AD by submitting data and analysis substantiating that the 
change would provide an acceptable level of safety. We have not changed 
this final rule in this regard.

Request To Delay Rule Due to Pending Release of New Design of Support 
Strut and Service Information

    FedEx and UPS requested that the release date of the NPRM be 
suspended pending Airbus's release of a newly designed support strut 
that, if installed, would be terminating action for the repetitive 
inspections proposed by the NPRM. FedEx stated the manufacturer is 
working on service information that contains a terminating action for 
the repetitive inspections proposed in the NPRM, but as of yet, has not 
been published. UPS stated that suspending the release of the NPRM 
would prevent extra work for the FAA and operators.
    We disagree with delaying issuance of this final rule until new 
service information or a new design becomes available. We consider that 
to delay this AD action would be inappropriate, in light of the 
identified unsafe condition. When new service information or a new 
design becomes available, we may consider additional rulemaking. We may 
also consider new service information and/or installation of the new 
design struts as an AMOC to this AD. Operators may apply for an AMOC in 
accordance with the provisions of paragraph (m)(1) of this AD. We have 
not changed this final rule 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:
    <bullet> Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the 
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
    <bullet> 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 the following service information.
    <bullet> Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0394, dated February 14, 
2014. This service information describes procedures for reinforcing the 
support struts of the THS at frame 91 in the fuselage tail section of 
Airbus Model A300 series airplanes.
    <bullet> Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0395, dated February 14, 
2014. This service information describes procedures for inspecting for 
cracking of the support struts of the THS at frame 91 in the fuselage 
tail section of Airbus Model A300 series airplanes.
    <bullet> Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6172, dated February 14, 
2014. This service information describes procedures for reinforcing the 
support struts of the THS at frame 91 in the fuselage tail section of 
Airbus Model A300-600 series airplanes.
    <bullet> Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6174, dated February 14, 
2014. This service information describes procedures for inspecting for 
cracking of the support struts of the THS at frame 91 in the fuselage 
tail section of Airbus Model A300-600 series airplanes.
    <bullet> Airbus Service Bulletin A310-53-2136, dated February 14, 
2014. This service information describes procedures for reinforcing the 
support struts of the THS at frame 91 in the fuselage tail section of 
Airbus Model A310 series airplanes.
    <bullet> Airbus Service Bulletin A310-53-2137, dated February 14, 
2014. This service information describes procedures for inspecting for 
cracking of the support struts of the THS at frame 91 in the fuselage 
tail section of Airbus Model A310 series airplanes.
    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 174 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We also estimate that it will take about 5 work-hours per product 
to comply with the basic requirements of this AD, and 1 work-hour per 
product for reporting. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. 
Required parts will cost about $2,100 per product. Based on these 
figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. operators to be 
$454,140, or $2,610 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions will 
take about 15 work-hours and require parts costing $10,000, for a cost 
of $11,275 per product. We have no way of determining the number of 
aircraft that might need these actions.

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

[[Page 12412]]

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.

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.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2015-0243; or in person at the 
Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the 
regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. 
The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section.

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):

2016-05-05 Airbus: Amendment 39-18423. Docket No. FAA-2015-0243; 
Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-114-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective April 13, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes specified in paragraphs 
(c)(1) through (c)(6) of this AD, certificated in any category, all 
manufacturer serial numbers.
    (1) Airbus Model A300 B2-1A, B2-1C, B2K-3C, B2-203, B4-2C, B4-
103, and B4-203 airplanes.
    (2) Airbus Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, and B4-622 
airplanes.
    (3) Airbus Model A300 B4-605R and B4-622R airplanes.
    (4) Airbus Model A300 F4-605R and F4-622R airplanes.
    (5) Airbus Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes.
    (6) Airbus Model A310-203, -204, -221, -222, -304, -322, -324, 
and -325 airplanes.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracked aluminum support 
struts of the trimmable horizontal stabilizer (THS) caused by stress 
corrosion. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracked THS 
support struts, which could lead to the rupture of all four support 
struts making the remaining structure unable to carry limit loads, 
which could result in loss of the THS and reduced control of the 
airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspection for Part Number

    For airplanes in pre-modification 06101 configuration: Within 12 
months after the effective date of this AD, do an inspection to 
identify the part number of each support strut installed on the THS 
at frame (FR) 91, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions 
of the applicable service bulletin identified in paragraphs (g)(1) 
through (g)(3) of this AD. A review of airplane maintenance records 
is acceptable in lieu of this inspection, provided those records can 
be relied upon for that purpose and the part number can be 
positively identified from that review. If no aluminum strut(s) 
having part number (P/N) R21449, R21449D, R21449G, or R21449H is 
found during any inspection required by this paragraph, no further 
action is required by this AD for that horizontal stabilizer, except 
for paragraph (l) of this AD.
    (1) For Airbus Model A300 series airplanes: Airbus Service 
Bulletin A300-53-0395, dated February 14, 2014.
    (2) For Airbus Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series 
airplanes, and A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called 
Model A300-600 series airplanes): Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-
6174, dated February 14, 2014.
    (3) For Airbus Model A310 series airplanes: Airbus Service 
Bulletin A310-53-2137, dated February 14, 2014.

(h) Repetitive High Frequency Eddy Current (HFEC) Inspections

    For airplanes in post-modification 06101 configuration; and for 
airplanes in pre-modification 06101 configuration on which any 
aluminum support strut(s) having P/N R21449, P/N R21449D, P/N 
R21449G, or P/N R21449H is found: Within the applicable compliance 
times specified in paragraph (h)(1), (h)(2), or (h)(3) of this AD, 
do an HFEC inspection for cracking of the aluminum THS support strut 
ends at FR 91, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of 
the applicable service bulletin identified in paragraphs (g)(1) 
through (g)(3) of this AD. Reinforcing clamps already installed on 
strut ends must be removed before accomplishing the HFEC inspection 
and re-installed after the inspection, in accordance with the 
Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service bulletin 
specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(3) of this AD. Repeat the 
inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 24 months.
    (1) For airplanes having manufacturer serial number (MSN) 0499 
through MSN 0747 inclusive (post-mod 06101): Within 12 months after 
the effective date of this AD.
    (2) For airplanes having MSN 0748 through MSN 0878 inclusive 
(post-mod 06101): Within 18 months after the effective date of this 
AD.
    (3) For airplanes having MSN 0001 through MSN 0498 inclusive 
(pre-mod 06101) having one or more aluminum struts: Within 24 months 
after the effective date of this AD.

(i) Installation of Reinforcing Clamps

    Concurrently with the initial HFEC inspection required by 
paragraph (h) of this AD, identify struts having P/N R21449, P/N 
R21449D, P/N R21449G, or P/N R21449H with no reinforcing clamps 
previously installed, and before next flight, install reinforcing 
clamps on each strut end, in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of the applicable service bulletin specified in 
paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(3) of this AD.
    (1) For Airbus Model A300 series airplanes: Airbus Service 
Bulletin A300-53-0394, dated February 14, 2014.
    (2) For Airbus Model A300 B4-600, B4600R, and F4-600R series 
airplanes, and A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called 
Model A300-600 series airplanes): Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-
6172, dated February 14, 2014.

[[Page 12413]]

    (3) For Airbus Model A310 series airplanes: Airbus Service 
Bulletin A310-53-2136, dated February 14, 2014.

(j) Corrective Actions

    If, during any inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD, 
any cracking is found, before further flight, replace the affected 
THS support strut(s) with serviceable struts and install clamps on 
each strut end, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions 
of the applicable service bulletin identified in paragraphs (g)(1) 
through (g)(3) of this AD.

(k) Clarification

    Installation of reinforcing clamps as required by paragraph (i) 
of this AD, and the replacement of support struts and/or the 
installation of clamps as required by paragraph (j) of this AD, do 
not constitute terminating action for the repetitive inspections 
required by paragraph (h) of this AD.

(l) Reporting

    At the applicable time specified in paragraphs (l)(1) and (l)(2) 
of this AD: After accomplishment of any inspection required by 
paragraph (g) of this AD, report all inspection results to Airbus, 
including no findings, in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of the applicable service bulletins specified in 
paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(3) of this AD.
    (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.

(m) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, 
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 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 Branch, send it to ATTN: Dan Rodina, 
Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport 
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; telephone 425-227-2125; fax 425-227-1149. 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. The 
AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (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 
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 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 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.

(n) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) 
EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0164, dated July 11, 2014, for 
related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the 
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2015-
0243-0002.

(o) 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 A300-53-0394, dated February 14, 
2014.
    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0395, dated February 14, 
2014.
    (iii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6172, dated February 14, 
2014.
    (iv) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6174, dated February 14, 
2014.
    (v) Airbus Service Bulletin A310-53-2136, dated February 14, 
2014.
    (vi) Airbus Service Bulletin A310-53-2137, dated February 14, 
2014.
    (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 [email protected]; 
Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport 
Airplane Directorate, 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.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 23, 2016.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-04545 Filed 3-8-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

The complete text was extracted from the official GovInfo HTML edition for this publication. Acquired 2026-10-09T02:29:29.394498+00:00. Text extraction preserves the recorded source wording; it does not determine current requirements.

Open the captured official edition

Source SHA-256

a7730b5e0ce819a3fc7357a5f26040d73d2d6b763681b76d84d91ab9ef1e852b

Text SHA-256

b4161e6dcf1a1d09e2eff71024caafa2dc172e10ab0b1a61a357913735879ba8