712 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

75373–75377, 3 CFR, 2006 Comp., pp. 216– 

200. 

■ 2. Section 9301.5 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 9301.5 Accessing records without 

request 

Certain SIGAR records, including the 

agency’s Quarterly Report, audit reports, 

testimony, oversight plans, press 

releases, other public issuances, and 

records that are required by 5 U.S.C. 

552(a)(2) to be made publicly available 

are available electronically from 

SIGAR’s homepage at http://

www.sigar.mil. SIGAR encourages 

requesters to visit its Web site before 

making a request for records under 

§ 9301.6. 

■ 3. In § 9301.6, paragraphs (c)(1)(ii), 

(c)(3)(i), and (d)(1) are revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 9301.6 Requesting records. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) Request denied. If the FOIA 

Officer denies the request, in full or 

part, the FOIA Officer shall provide the 

requester written notice of the denial 

together with the approximate number 

of pages of information withheld and 

the exemption under which the 

information was withheld. SIGAR will 

indicate, if technically feasible, the 

amount of information deleted and the 

exemption under which the deletion is 

made at the place in the record where 

the deletion was made. SIGAR will also 

indicate the exemption under which a 

deletion is made on the released portion 

of the record, unless including that 

indication would harm an interest 

protected by the exemptions. The notice 

shall also describe the procedure for 

filing an appeal. SIGAR will further 

notify the requester of their right to seek 

assistance from SIGAR’s FOIA Public 

Liaison or dispute resolution services 

from the FOIA Public Liaison or the 

Office of Government Information 

Services. 

* * * * * 

(3) * * * 

(i) In general. If the FOIA Officer 

determines that unusual circumstances 

exist, the FOIA Officer may extend for 

no more than ten days (except 

Saturdays, Sundays and Federal 

holidays) the time limits described in 

paragraph (c)(1) of this section by 

providing written notice of the 

extension to the requester. The FOIA 

Officer shall include with the notice a 

brief statement of the reason for the 

extension and the date the FOIA Officer 

expects to make the determination. If 

the extension goes beyond ten working 

days, the FOIA Officer will include a 

notification of the requester’s right to 

seek dispute resolutions services from 

the Office of Government Information 

Services. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(1) Initiating appeals. Requesters not 

satisfied with the FOIA Officer’s written 

decision may request SIGAR’s FOIA 

Appellate Authority to review the 

decision. Appeals must be delivered in 

writing within 90 days of the date of the 

decision and shall be addressed to the 

FOIA Appellate Authority, Office of 

Privacy, Records & Disclosure, Special 

Inspector General for Afghanistan 

Reconstruction, 2530 Crystal Drive, 

Arlington, VA 22202. As there may be 

delays in mail delivery, it is advisable 

to Fax appeals to (703) 601–3804 or 

email to 

sigar.pentagon.gencoun.mbx.foia@

mail.mil. An appeal shall include a 

statement specifying the records that are 

the subject of the appeal and explaining 

why the Appellate Authority should 

grant the appeal. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. In § 9301.8, paragraph (f)(3) is 

added to read as follows: 

§ 9301.8 Fees in general. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(3) SIGAR determines that unusual 

circumstances apply to the processing of 

a request, provides timely notice the 

requester, and delay is excused for an 

additional ten days, but SIGAR still fails 

to respond within the timeframe 

established by the additional delay. This 

provision applies only to search fees. 

However, the following exceptions shall 

apply: 

(i) Notwithstanding § 9301.8(f)(3), if 

SIGAR determines that unusual 

circumstances apply and that 

responding to the request requires the 

production of more than 5,000 pages, 

SIGAR may continue to charge search 

fees, or duplication fees for requesters in 

preferred status, for as long as 

necessary, after timely written notice 

has been made to the requester and 

SIGAR has discussed with the requester 

how the requester could effectively limit 

the scope of the request via written 

mail, electronic mail, or telephone, or 

made three good-faith attempts to do so. 

(ii) Notwithstanding § 9301.8(f)(3), if a 

court determines that exceptional 

circumstances exist, SIGAR’s failure to 

comply with a time limit shall be 

excused for the length of time provided 

by the court order. 

[FR Doc. 2016–30775 Filed 1–3–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3710–L9–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0143; Directorate 

Identifier 2012–NM–113–AD; Amendment 

39–18753; AD 2016–25–27] 

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 B4–603, B4–620, 

B4–622, B4–605R, B4–622R, F4–605R, 

F4–622R, and C4–605R variant F 

airplanes. This AD was prompted by 

reports of cracks in the frame base 

fittings connecting the frame lower 

positions to the center wing box. This 

AD requires repetitive detailed 

inspections for cracking of the lower 

frame fittings of the frame foot, and 

replacement with a new frame foot if 

cracking is found. This AD also 

provides optional terminating action for 

the repetitive inspections. We are 

issuing this AD to address the unsafe 

condition on these products. 

DATES: This AD is effective February 8, 

2017. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in this AD 

as of February 8, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: 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: account.airwortheas@airbus.com; 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–2014–0143. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2014– 

0143; or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility between 9 a.m. 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 713 

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 Office (telephone: 800–647– 

5527) is 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 20590. 

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 supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to 

amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD 

that would apply to all Airbus Model 

A300 B4–603, B4–620, B4–622, B4– 

605R, B4–622R, F4–605R, F4–622R, and 

C4–605R variant F airplanes. The 

SNPRM published in the Federal 

Register on July 7, 2016 (81 FR 44241) 

(‘‘the SNPRM’’). We preceded the 

SNPRM with a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) that published in 

the Federal Register on March 19, 2014 

(79 FR 15266) (‘‘the NPRM’’). The 

NPRM was prompted by reports of 

cracks in the frame base fittings 

connecting the frame lower positions to 

the center wing box. The NPRM 

proposed to require repetitive detailed 

inspections of the lower frame fittings, 

related investigative actions, and 

corrective actions if necessary. The 

SNPRM proposed to replace the 

proposed requirements in the NPRM 

with new repetitive detailed inspections 

for cracking of the lower frame fittings 

of the frame foot, and replacement with 

a new frame foot if cracking is found. 

The SNPRM also proposed to provide 

optional terminating action for the 

repetitive inspections. We are issuing 

this AD to detect and correct cracking of 

the lower frame fittings, which could 

result in reduced structural integrity 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 2015–0217, 

dated October 30, 2015 (referred to after 

this as the Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the 

MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition 

on all Airbus Model A300 B4–603, B4– 

620, B4–622, B4–605R, B4–622R, F4– 

605R, F4–622R, and C4–605R variant F 

airplanes. The MCAI states: 

During accomplishment of Airbus Service 

Bulletin (SB) A300–53–6111 (EASA AD 

2012–0103), addressing detailed visual 

inspections of the lower frame fittings 

between Frame (FR) 41 and FR46, a crack 

was detected on one A300–600 aeroplane in 

the area 2 of the foot of FR46 at junction 

radius level. 

This frame, previously repaired due to a 

crack finding in the frame foot area 1, was 

not due to be inspected before reaching the 

post-repair inspection threshold, i.e. 45,400 

flight cycles since repair embodiment. 

Further investigation determined that the 

repairs specified in Airbus SB A300–53–6111 

were of limited effect to prevent cracking in 

the frame foot area 2. 

This condition, if not detected and 

corrected, could affect the structural integrity 

of the fuselage of all aeroplanes operated up 

to the extended service goal (ESG). 

As a temporary action and until an 

improvement of the existing repairs was 

made available, EASA issued AD 2012–0229 

[AD * * *] to require a one-time detailed 

inspection (DET) of the frame feet that were 

repaired in accordance with Airbus SB 

A300–53–6111, and the reporting of findings 

to Airbus. 

Since that [EASA] AD was issued, a 

detailed study was performed resulting in the 

development of a new inspection 

programme. 

Consequently, Airbus cancelled SB A300– 

53–6111 and replaced it with SB A300–53– 

6177, introducing repetitive DET of the lower 

frame fittings between FR41 and FR46 for the 

entire fleet. In addition to this new 

inspection programme, Airbus designed a 

new frame foot which can be installed on 

aeroplanes through Airbus SB A300–53– 

6176. 

For the reasons described above, this 

[EASA] AD supersedes EASA AD 2012–0103, 

not retaining its requirements, and instead 

requires the new inspection programme for 

the lower frame fittings. This [EASA] AD also 

introduces an optional terminating action for 

the repetitive inspections required by the 

[EASA] AD. 

Corrective actions include replacing 

any cracked lower frame fittings with a 

new frame foot. 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–2014–0143. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. The 

following presents the comments 

received on the SNPRM and the FAA’s 

response to each comment. 

Request To Extend Compliance Time 

for Reporting Requirement 

United Parcel Service (UPS) asked 

that the compliance time for submitting 

the inspection report specified in 

paragraph (h) of the proposed AD (in the 

SNPRM) be extended from 30 to 60 

days. UPS stated that accomplishing the 

inspection may occur many days before 

the final task signoff (i.e., restoring 

access due to other work in the area), 

risking noncompliance with the 30-day 

requirement. 

We agree to extend the compliance 

time for the reporting requirement in 

this AD to 60 days, because we have 

determined that this longer compliance 

time does not affect continued 

operational safety. We have changed 

paragraph (i) of this AD accordingly. 

Request for Clarification of Compliance 

Time 

Airbus asked that we clarify the 

compliance time for the inspections 

specified in paragraph (g) of the 

proposed AD (in the SNPRM). Airbus 

stated that unless Airbus Service 

Bulletin A300–53–6177, dated May 20, 

2015, specifies differently, the 

inspection thresholds should be 

counted from the first flight of the 

airplane, not from the effective date of 

the AD. Airbus added that the 

compliance time provided in the 

proposed AD could be confusing to 

operators. Airbus also stated that for 

airplanes on which the inspections have 

not been done as of the effective date of 

the AD, no grace period is provided, 

which is a burden on operators. 

We agree that clarification is 

necessary. 

We agree that the compliance time 

identified in the ‘‘Threshold’’ column of 

paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Airbus 

Service Bulletin A300–53–6177, dated 

May 20, 2015, refers to accumulated 

flight cycles or flight hours on the 

airplane since its first flight, but only if 

Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6177, 

dated May 20, 2015, does not specify 

differently. We redesignated paragraph 

(h) in the SNPRM as paragraph (i) of this 

AD, and redesignated subsequent 

paragraphs accordingly. We added 

clarification of the compliance times for 

the thresholds in paragraph (h)(1) of this 

AD. 

We acknowledge that a grace period 

was not provided for all configurations. 

We removed the grace period exception 

language from paragraph (g) of the 

proposed AD (in the SNPRM) and 

moved it to paragraph (h)(2) of this AD. 

Paragraph (h)(2) of this AD explains that 

where grace periods specified in Airbus 

Service Bulletin A300–53–6177, dated 

May 20, 2015, refer to the issue date of 

certain service information, those 

compliance times are after the effective 

date of the AD. The exception in 

paragraph (h)(2) of this AD does not 

apply to compliance times specified as 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
714 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

thresholds in Airbus Service Bulletin 

A300–53–6177, dated May 20, 2015. 

In addition, we have determined that 

the actions for Configuration 004 

airplanes identified in Airbus Service 

Bulletin A300–53–6177, dated May 20, 

2015, must be clarified. For 

Configuration 004 airplanes identified 

in Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53– 

6177, dated May 20, 2015, the actions 

required by paragraph (g) of this AD 

cannot be accomplished in accordance 

with the Accomplishment Instructions 

of Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53– 

6177, dated May 20, 2015. Paragraph 

1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Airbus Service 

Bulletin A300–53–6177, dated May 20, 

2015, specifies the action for 

Configuration 004 airplanes as 

contacting and reporting to Airbus. 

Therefore, we have added paragraph 

(h)(3) to this AD to require operators to 

contact 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), for corrective actions 

for Configuration 004 airplanes. 

Request for Clarification of Inspections 

for Airplanes With a Previously 

Replaced Frame Foot 

UPS asked for clarification of the 

inspection requirements specified in 

paragraph (g) of the proposed AD (in the 

SNPRM) for airplanes that previously 

replaced a frame foot per Airbus Service 

Bulletin A300–53–6111. UPS stated that 

if cracking was found during the 

inspections using that service 

information there were two options 

available: Installing a reinforcing 

doubler on the damaged fitting or 

replacing the fitting with a new part. 

UPS added that in Airbus Service 

Bulletin A300–53–6177, dated May 20, 

2015, the inspection requirements are 

defined for airplanes previously 

inspected and found with no cracks, or 

fittings repaired per Airbus Service 

Bulletin A300–53–6111. UPS noted that 

it is not clear how to address airplanes 

on which the cracked fittings were 

replaced instead of installing a 

reinforcing repair. UPS asked that 

fittings replaced with a new part per 

Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6111 

be treated as a previously inspected 

fitting with no crack findings, with 

repetitive inspections done per Airbus 

Service Bulletin A300–53–6177, dated 

May 20, 2015, using Configuration 001 

instructions. UPS stated that this 

proposal is conservative and exceeds 

the inspection requirements in the 

proposed AD (in the SNPRM). 

We agree that clarification is 

necessary. Airbus Service Bulletin 

A300–53–6177, dated May 20, 2015, 

defines four configurations: 

Configuration 001 for a frame foot that 

was never repaired, Configuration 002 

for a frame foot that was preventatively 

repaired, Configuration 003 for a frame 

foot repaired in Area 1 as specified in 

Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6111 

or with certain other repairs, and 

Configuration 004 for any frame foot not 

addressed by Configurations 1 through 

3. If a new frame foot is installed on an 

airplane, it would be classified as 

Configuration 001. 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 

with the changes described previously, 

and minor editorial changes. We have 

determined that these minor changes: 

• Are consistent with the intent that 

was proposed in the SNPRM for 

correcting the unsafe condition; and 

• Do not add any additional burden 

upon the public than was already 

proposed in the SNPRM. 

We also determined that these 

changes will not increase the economic 

burden on any operator or increase the 

scope of this AD. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

Airbus has issued Service Bulletin 

A300–53–6177, dated May 20, 2015. 

The service information describes 

procedures for repetitive detailed 

inspections for cracking of the lower 

frame fittings between FR41 and FR46. 

Airbus has also issued Service Bulletin 

A300–53–6176, dated May 20, 2015. 

The service information describes 

procedures for replacing all lower frame 

feet between frame FR41 and FR46 with 

new, improved frame feet. 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 123 

airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We estimate that it takes about 541 

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 workhour. Based on these figures, we 

estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. 

operators to be $5,666,610, or $46,070 

per product. 

We estimate that the optional 

terminating modification will take about 

529 work-hours and require parts 

costing $131,500, for a cost of $176,465. 

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. 

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; 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 715 

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. 

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 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

2016–25–27 Airbus: Amendment 39–18753; 

Docket No. FAA–2014–0143; Directorate 

Identifier 2012–NM–113–AD. 

(a) Effective Date 

This AD is effective February 8, 2017. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Airbus Model A300 B4– 

603, B4–620, B4–622, B4–605R, B4–622R, 

F4–605R, F4–622R, and C4–605R variant F 

airplanes; certificated in any category; all 

serial numbers. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by reports of cracks 

in the frame base fittings connecting the 

frame lower positions to the center wing box. 

We are issuing this AD to detect and correct 

cracking of the lower frame fittings, which 

could result in reduced structural integrity of 

the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Repetitive Inspections and Replacement 

At the applicable time specified in 

paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Airbus 

Service Bulletin A300–53–6177, dated May 

20, 2015, except as required by paragraphs 

(h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD: Perform a 

detailed inspection for cracking of the lower 

frame fittings between frame (FR) 41 and 

FR46 of the frame foot, and if any crack is 

found, before further flight, replace with a 

new frame foot, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Service Bulletin A300–53–6177, dated May 

20, 2015, except as required by paragraph 

(h)(3) of this AD. Repeat the inspection 

thereafter at the applicable intervals specified 

in paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Airbus 

Service Bulletin A300–53–6177, dated May 

20, 2015. 

(h) Service Information Exceptions 

(1) Where the threshold identified in the 

‘‘Threshold’’ column of paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Airbus Service Bulletin 

A300–53–6177, dated May 20, 2015, specifies 

flight cycles or flight hours without 

specifying from a repair, replacement, or last 

inspection, the specified compliance time is 

accumulated flight cycles or flight hours on 

the airplane since its first flight. 

(2) Where Airbus Service Bulletin A300– 

53–6177, dated May 20, 2015, specifies a 

compliance time ‘‘from issuance of revision 

04 of Service Bulletin No. A300–53–6111,’’ 

or ‘‘from issuance of Service Bulletin No. 

A300–53–6177,’’ this AD requires 

compliance within the specified compliance 

time after the effective date of this AD. 

(3) For Configuration 004 airplanes 

identified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300– 

53–6177, dated May 20, 2015: Within 6 

months after the effective date of this AD, 

contact 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), for corrective 

actions and accomplish all applicable 

corrective actions using a method approved 

by the Manager, International Branch, ANM– 

116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or 

EASA; or Airbus’s EASA DOA. 

(i) Reporting 

At the applicable time specified in 

paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD: Submit 

a report of the findings (both positive and 

negative) of each inspection required by 

paragraph (g) of this AD. Send the report to 

Airbus Service Bulletin Reporting Online 

Application on Airbus World (https://

w3.airbus.com). 

(1) If the inspection was done on or after 

the effective date of this AD: Submit the 

report within 60 days after the inspection. 

(2) If the inspection was done before the 

effective date of this AD: Submit the report 

within 60 days after the effective date of this 

AD. 

(j) Optional Terminating Action 

Replacement of all lower frame feet 

between FR41 and FR46, in accordance with 

the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Service Bulletin A300–53–6176, dated May 

20, 2015, terminates the repetitive 

inspections required by paragraph (g) 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 

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: 425–227–1405; fax: 425–227– 

2125. 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. 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. 

(l) Related Information 

Refer to Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA AD 

2015–0217, dated October 30, 2015, 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–2014–0143. 

(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. 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
716 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

(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 A300–53–6176, 

dated May 20, 2015. 

(ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–6177, 

dated May 20, 2015. 

(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 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/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

December 6, 2016. 

Dionne Palermo, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2016–30117 Filed 1–3–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2016–0733; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–SW–040–AD; Amendment 

39–18762; AD 2016–26–04] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Robinson 

Helicopter Company Helicopters 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for 

Robinson Helicopter Company 

(Robinson) Model R44, R44 II, and R66 

helicopters. This AD requires inspecting 

the main rotor blade (MRB). This AD 

was prompted by a determination that 

some MRBs may have reduced blade 

thickness due to blending out corrosion. 

The actions are intended to prevent the 

unsafe condition on these products. 

DATES: This AD is effective February 8, 

2017. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain documents listed in this AD 

as of February 8, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: For service information 

identified in this final rule, contact 

Robinson Helicopter Company, 2901 

Airport Drive, Torrance, CA 90505; 

telephone (310) 539–0508; fax (310) 

539–5198; or at http:// 

www.robinsonheli.com. You may review 

a copy of the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Office of the 

Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 

10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Room 6N–321, 

Fort Worth, TX 76177. It is also 

available on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2016– 

0733. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2016– 

0733; or in person at the Docket 

Operations Office between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this AD, any incorporated-byreference service information, the 

economic evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Operations 

Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations Office, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric 

Schrieber, Aviation Safety Engineer, Los 

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, 

California 90712; telephone (562) 627– 

5348; email eric.schrieber@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

On May 27, 2016, at 81 FR 33609, the 

Federal Register published our notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which 

proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 by 

adding an AD that would apply to 

Robinson Model R44 and R44 II 

helicopters with an MRB part number 

(P/N) C016–7, Revision N/C, A through 

Z, and AA through AE; and Model R66 

helicopters with an MRB P/N F016–2, 

Revision A through E. The NPRM 

proposed to require a one-time visual 

inspection of the MRB for a crack, 

corrosion, dent, nick, and scratch and 

either altering the MRB or removing it 

from service. 

The NPRM was prompted by a report 

of a fatigue crack on a Model R44 II 

helicopter at the MRB trailing edge that 

had grown to reach the blade spar. The 

FAA subsequently determined that 

some MRBs may have reduced blade 

fatigue resistance due to repair by 

blending out corrosion in the area of the 

crack site radius. The proposed 

requirements were intended to prevent 

an MRB fatigue crack, which could lead 

to MRB failure and subsequent loss of 

helicopter control. 

Comments 

After our NPRM (81 FR 33609, May 

27, 2016) was published, we received a 

comment from one commenter. 

Request 

Robinson requested we change the 

applicability of the AD for part number 

(P/N) C016–7 from ‘‘Revision N/C, A 

through Z, and AA through AE’’ to 

‘‘Revision AA through AE.’’ Robinson 

stated that P/N C016–7 did not exist 

until Revision AA and suggested that 

some technicians may wrongfully apply 

the proposed AD to P/N C016–5 

Revisions W thru Z. 

We agree and have revised the AD 

accordingly. 

FAA’s Determination 

We have reviewed the relevant 

information, considered the comment 

received, and determined that an unsafe 

condition exists and is likely to exist or 

develop on other products of these same 

type designs and that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting the AD 

requirements as proposed with the 

change previously described. This 

change is consistent with the intent of 

the proposals in the NPRM (81 FR 

33609, May 27, 2016) and will not 

increase the economic burden on any 

operator nor increase the scope of the 

AD. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

We reviewed Robinson R44 Service 

Bulletin SB–89, dated March 30, 2015 

(SB–89), for Model R44 and R44 II 

helicopters and Robinson R66 Service 

Bulletin SB–13, dated March 30, 2015 

(SB–13), for Model R66 helicopters. SB– 

89 and SB–13 provide a one-time 

procedure to inspect each MRB for 

cracks, corrosion, and damage that may 

indicate a crack. If there is a crack, 

corrosion, or any damage, SB–89 and 

SB–13 specify removing the MRB from 

service and contacting Robinson. 

Otherwise, SB–89 and SB–13 describe 

procedures to smooth the transition at 

the chord increase of each MRB to 

reduce the stress concentration. 

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. 


jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES