Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 41 / Friday, March 3, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 12397 

(j) 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) United Instruments, Inc. Service 

Bulletin No. 13, dated March 25, 2016. 

(ii) Reserved. 

(3) For United Instruments, Inc. service 

information identified in this AD, contact 

United Instruments, Inc., 3625 Comotara 

Avenue, Wichita, KS 67226; telephone (316) 

636–9203; fax: (316) 636–9243; email: 

customerservice@unitedinst.com; Internet: 

www.unitedinst.com or http://

www.unitedinst.com/Products/ 

SpecificationsSheets/d132811.aspx. 

(4) You may view this service information 

at FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 

Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call (816) 329–4148. It 

is also available on the internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for and 

locating Docket No. FAA–2016–9345. 

(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 Kansas City, Missouri, on 

February 6, 2017. 

Kelly A. Broadway, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2017–03488 Filed 3–2–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2016–4225; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–NM–139–AD; Amendment 

39–18817; AD 2017–05–07] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for The 

Boeing Company Model 777–200 and 

–300 series airplanes equipped with 

Rolls-Royce Model Trent 800 engines. 

This AD was prompted by reports of 

damage to the upper bifurcation forward 

fire seal and seal deflector, and 

localized damage to the insulation 

blanket installed just aft of the fire seal. 

This AD requires installing serviceable 

thrust reverser (T/R) halves on the left 

and right engines. We are issuing this 

AD to address the unsafe condition on 

these products. 

DATES: This AD is effective April 7, 

2017. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in this AD 

as of April 7, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: For service information 

identified in this final rule, contact 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes, 

Attention: Contractual & Data Services 

(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 

110–SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740–5600; 

telephone: 562–797–1717; Internet: 

https://www.myboeingfleet.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–2016– 

4225. 

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– 

4225; 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 address for the 

Docket Office (phone: 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: 

Kevin Nguyen, Aerospace Engineer, 

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office 

(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6501; 

fax: 425–917–6590; email: 

kevin.nguyen@faa.gov. 

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 The Boeing Company Model 

777–200 and –300 series airplanes 

equipped with Rolls-Royce Model Trent 

800 engines. The NPRM published in 

the Federal Register on March 17, 2016 

(81 FR 14402). The NPRM was 

prompted by reports of damage to the 

upper bifurcation forward fire seal and 

seal deflector, and localized damage to 

the insulation blanket installed just aft 

of the fire seal. The NPRM proposed to 

require installing serviceable left and 

right T/R halves on the left and right 

engines. We are issuing this AD to 

prevent a breach in the engine firewall 

due to a failed upper bifurcation 

forward fire seal. A breach could delay 

or prevent the fire detection and 

suppression system from functioning 

properly, and could result in an 

increased risk of a fire, prolonged 

burning, and breach of the fire zone; and 

could allow fire to reach unprotected 

areas of the engine, the strut, and wing 

after engine shutdown. Also, fan air 

bypassing the fire seal could cause 

localized damage to the T/R insulation 

blanket installed just aft of the fire seal, 

which could allow limited thermal 

degradation of the T/R inner wall. This 

could aggravate existing damage and 

cause the T/R’s inner wall to fail. 

Actions Since the NPRM Was Issued 

In the Other Relevant Rulemaking 

section of the NPRM we mentioned 

additional proposed rulemaking related 

to the T/Rs for Model 777–200 and –300 

series airplanes equipped with RollsRoyce Model RB211–Trent 800 engines. 

That action was subsequently issued as 

a supplemental NPRM (SNPRM), Docket 

Number FAA–2011–0027, Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NM–127–AD, which 

was published in the Federal Register 

on September 25, 2015 (80 FR 57744). 

The final rule for that SNPRM has been 

issued and was published in the Federal 

Register on June 17, 2016 (81 FR 39547), 

as AD 2016–11–16, Amendment 39– 

18543. 

Since the NPRM was issued, the 

European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA) issued EASA AD 2016–0084, 

dated April 28, 2016, for Rolls-Royce 

RB211-Trent 800 engines; and the 

Engine Certification Office (ECO), 

Engine and Propeller Directorate, FAA, 

issued a corresponding NPRM, Docket 

No. FAA–2016–6692, Directorate 

Identifier 2016–NE–13–AD, which was 

published in the Federal Register on 

July 15, 2016 (81 FR 46000). In the 

EASA AD and FAA ECO NPRM, damage 

(cracking, missing materials, and hole/ 

openings) to the engine upper 

bifurcation fairing panel creates a 

breach of the engine fire wall, which 

may decrease the effectiveness of the 

engine fire detection and suppression 

systems due to excess fan air entering 

the engine compartment fire zone. The 

unsafe condition and resulting effects 

mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES

12398 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 41 / Friday, March 3, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

from EASA AD 2016–0084 and FAA 

ECO Directorate Identifier 2016–NE–13– 

AD are the same issues presented in this 

FAA final rule issued by the Transport 

Airplane Directorate (TAD). However 

EASA AD 2016–0084 and FAA ECO 

Directorate Identifier 2016–NE–13–AD 

are specific to the engine upper 

bifurcation fairing panel where the T/R 

upper bifurcation forward fire seal (the 

subject of this TAD final rule) mates and 

press against. Both sets of hardware 

create a complete firewall feature on the 

airplane type design. EASA AD 2016– 

0084 and FAA ECO Directorate 

Identifier 2016–NE–13–AD address the 

cracking and or missing material from 

the engine upper bifurcation fairing 

panel and this TAD final rule addresses 

the airplane side—the damage to the T/ 

R upper bifurcation forward fire seal. 

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. 

Supportive Comments 

Connor Blevins, Michael Rambo, The 

Air Line Pilots Association, 

International (ALPA), and a commenter 

identified as ‘‘gg’’ supported the intent 

of the NPRM. 

Request To Refer to Revised Service 

Information 

Boeing requested that the service 

information specified in paragraph (g) of 

the proposed AD be revised to refer to 

Boeing Special Attention Service 

Bulletin 777–78–0101, Revision 2, dated 

July 22, 2016 (‘‘SASB 777–78–0101, 

R2’’). Paragraph (g) of the proposed AD 

referred to Boeing Special Attention 

Service Bulletin 777–78–0101, Revision 

1, dated October 30, 2015 (‘‘SASB 777– 

78–0101, R1’’). Boeing stated that SASB 

777–78–0101, R1, contained errors in 

figures 2 and 5 regarding installation of 

the fire seal support and retainer. 

Boeing notified operators of these errors 

through Boeing Service Bulletin 

Information Notice 777–78–0101 IN 01, 

dated November 30, 2015 (‘‘IN 777–78– 

0101 IN 01’’), and released SASB 777– 

78–0101, R2, to incorporate the 

information from IN 777–78–0101 IN 

01. 

We agree with the commenter’s 

request to refer to SASB 777–78–0101, 

R2, as the appropriate source of service 

information for accomplishing the 

actions required by this AD. SASB 777– 

78–0101, R2, clarifies the installation 

instructions for the new seal support; 

and the adjustment of the shim below 

the lower curved retainer by extending 

it to the lower edge of the new seal 

support so that the gap under the seal 

retainer is filled. This clarification 

instruction is similar to the information 

in IN 777–78–0101 IN 01. We have 

revised paragraph (g) of this AD 

accordingly. 

Request To Provide Credit for Actions 

Done Using Earlier Revision of Service 

Information 

Boeing requested that a new 

paragraph be included in the proposed 

AD to provide credit for actions 

accomplished prior to the effective date 

of the proposed AD using the 

Accomplishment Instructions specified 

in SASB 777–78–0101, R1. Boeing 

stated that despite the errors in SASB 

777–78–0101, R1, as discussed 

previously, completion of the actions 

specified in SASB 777–78–0101, R1, 

still corrects the unsafe condition 

addressed in paragraph (e) of the 

proposed AD. 

We agree with the commenter’s 

request to provide credit for actions 

done using the Accomplishment 

Instructions of SASB 777–78–0101, R1. 

Although SASB 777–78–0101, R2, 

provides better clarification for the work 

instructions, SASB 777–78–0101, R1, 

still provides sufficient instructions to 

correct the unsafe condition. We have 

added new paragraph (h) to this AD to 

provide credit for actions done using the 

Accomplishment Instructions of SASB 

777–78–0101, R1, and redesignated the 

subsequent paragraphs accordingly. 

Request for Global Alternative Method 

of Compliance (AMOC) 

American Airlines (AAL) requested 

that the final rule require 

accomplishment of the actions specified 

in the Accomplishment Instructions of 

SASB 777–78–0101, R1, and include a 

global AMOC for operators that have 

incorporated the actions in both SASB 

777–78–0101, R1, and IN 777–78–0101 

IN 01. 

We acknowledge the commenter’s 

request; however this AD does not 

require accomplishment of the actions 

specified in the Accomplishment 

Instructions of SASB 777–78–0101, R1. 

This AD requires operators to use SASB 

777–78–0101, R2, which includes 

clarification actions specified in IN 777– 

78–0101 IN 01. As stated previously, we 

have also given credit for actions done 

using the Accomplishment Instructions 

of SASB 777–78–0101, R1; therefore an 

AMOC approval is not necessary. We 

have not changed this AD regarding this 

issue. 

Request To Reduce the Compliance 

Time 

ALPA recommended that the 

compliance time in the proposed rule be 

reduced from 60 months to 36 months. 

The commenter did not specifically 

provide justification for this request, but 

we infer that they are implying that a 

reduced compliance time is warranted 

due to the significance of the unsafe 

condition. 

We do not agree with the commenter’s 

request to reduce the compliance time. 

In developing an appropriate 

compliance time for this action, we 

considered not only the degree of 

urgency associated with addressing the 

subject unsafe condition, but the 

manufacturer’s recommendation for an 

appropriate compliance time, the time 

required for the rulemaking process, the 

availability of required parts, and the 

practical aspects of installing the 

required modification within an interval 

of time that corresponds to the typical 

scheduled maintenance for the majority 

of affected operators. Most ADs, 

including this one, permit operators to 

accomplish the requirements at a time 

earlier than the specified compliance 

time; therefore, an operator may choose 

to do the installation of serviceable T/ 

R halves on each engine prior to 60 

months after the effective date of this 

AD. If additional data are presented that 

would justify a shorter compliance time, 

we may consider further rulemaking on 

this issue. We have not changed this AD 

in this regard. 

Request To Impose Penalty for NonCompliance 

One commenter, Connor Blevins, 

suggested that a penalty be included in 

the NPRM in case an airline does not 

comply with the proposed regulations. 

The commenter also stated that the 

airlines should be given a reasonable 

amount of time to install the serviceable 

T/R halves prior to enforcing the 

penalty. We infer that the commenter is 

requesting the NPRM be revised to 

include a penalty for non-compliance. 

We agree that there should be a 

penalty if an operator does not comply 

with the requirements of an AD. The 

FAA expects all affected operators to 

comply with ADs, which are issued to 

address unsafe conditions. Failure to 

comply with any FAA regulation, 

including an AD, might result in a civil 

penalty action against an operator. An 

AD is not the appropriate vehicle for 

addressing civil penalties for noncompliance with the requirements of an 

AD. Therefore, we have not changed 

this AD in this regard. 

mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 41 / Friday, March 3, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 12399 

Request To Allow Use of All 

Subsequent Revisions of Service 

Information 

AAL requested that the final language 

of the proposed AD allow all subsequent 

revisions to SASB 777–78–0101, R1, as 

acceptable methods of compliance. AAL 

stated that it was making this request 

due to the high regulatory load already 

in place for T/Rs on the Boeing 777 

Rolls-Royce Trent 892-powered fleet. 

We infer that the ‘‘high regulatory load’’ 

refers to the high number of ADs that 

have been published in response to 

unsafe conditions identified on the T/R 

inner walls of Rolls-Royce Trent 892 

engines installed on Boeing Model 777 

airplanes. 

We do not agree with the commenter’s 

request to allow the use of all 

subsequent revisions to SASB 777–78– 

0101, R1, as acceptable methods of 

compliance. We cannot allow use of 

‘‘later FAA-approved revisions’’ in an 

AD when referring to a service 

document. Doing so violates Office of 

the Federal Register (OFR) regulations 

for approval of materials ‘‘incorporated 

by reference,’’ as specified in 1 CFR 

51.1(f). In general terms, we are required 

by these OFR regulations to either 

publish the service document contents 

as part of the actual AD language; or 

submit the service document to OFR for 

approval as ‘‘referenced’’ material, in 

which case we may only refer to such 

material in the text of an AD. The AD 

may refer to the service document only 

if OFR approved it for ‘‘incorporation by 

reference.’’ To allow operators to use 

later revisions of the referenced 

document (issued after publication of 

the AD), either we must revise the AD 

to reference specific later revisions, or 

operators must request approval to use 

later revisions as an AMOC under the 

provisions of paragraph (i) of this AD. 

We have not changed this AD regarding 

this issue. 

Request To Delay Issuance of Final 

Rule 

Cathay Pacific and Delta Air Lines 

(DAL) requested that issuance of the 

final rule be delayed. Cathay Pacific 

requested that the issuance of the final 

rule be delayed until the next revision 

to SASB 777–78–0101, R1, is published. 

DAL requested that either IN 777–78– 

0101 IN 01 be included in the final rule, 

or issuance of the final rule be delayed 

until the next revision to SASB 777–78– 

0101, R1, is considered. 

Cathay Pacific pointed out that there 

is a technical issue when an operator 

attempts to complete the actions in 

steps 2 and 3 of Figure 5 in SASB 777– 

78–0101, R1. Cathay Pacific explained 

that the length of the new seal support 

is shorter than the retainer, which 

resulted in insufficient space to drill 

and ream the 12 fastener holes specified 

in SASB 777–78–0101, R1. Boeing was 

contacted and accepted alternative 

actions to those specified in the service 

bulletin. Also, we infer from the 

commenter that Boeing provided 

instructions to shim under the lower 

curved retainer and extend it up and 

under the flat retainer. We infer from 

the commenter that the above Boeing 

instructions are equivalent to the 

procedures in IN 777–78–0101 IN 01. 

Cathay Pacific is concerned that every 

time an operator tries to follow the 

actions specified in SASB 777–78–0101, 

R1, it will have to contact Boeing for 

deviation approval, and an AMOC. 

DAL noted that Boeing issued IN 777– 

78–0101 IN 01, to provide additional 

information needed to incorporate 

SASB 777–78–0101, R1. DAL also 

mentioned that the information notice 

indicated that a revision to SASB 777– 

78–0101, R1, was in work. 

We agree with the commenters 

requests to delay issuing this final rule 

until Boeing published a revision to 

SASB 777–78–0101, R1. As discussed in 

the above comment, ‘‘Request to Refer to 

Revised Service Information,’’ we are 

now requiring SASB 777–78–0101, R2, 

as the appropriate source of service 

information for accomplishing the 

actions required by this AD since it 

contains the clarifications described by 

the commenters. 

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 NPRM for 

correcting the unsafe condition; and 

• Do not add any additional burden 

upon the public than was already 

proposed in the NPRM. 

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 

We reviewed SASB 777–78–0101, R2. 

The service information describes 

procedures for installing serviceable left 

and right T/R halves on the left and 

right engines. 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 55 

airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We estimate the following costs to 

comply with this AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

Cost on U.S. 

operators 

Install serviceable T/R halves ............... Up to 91 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

$7,735.

Up to $7,338 ......... Up to $15,073 per 

airplane.

Up to $829,015. 

According to the manufacturer, some 

of the costs of this AD may be covered 

under warranty, thereby reducing the 

cost impact on affected individuals. We 

do not control warranty coverage for 

affected individuals. As a result, we 

have included all costs in our cost 

estimate. 

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 

mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES

12400 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 41 / Friday, March 3, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

This AD will not have federalism 

implications under Executive Order 

13132. This AD will not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that this AD: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under 

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): 

2017–05–07 The Boeing Company 

Amendment 39–18817; Docket No. 

FAA–2016–4225; Directorate Identifier 

2015–NM–139–AD. 

(a) Effective Date 

This AD is effective April 7, 2017. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to The Boeing Company 

Model 777–200 and –300 series airplanes, 

certificated in any category, equipped with 

Rolls-Royce Model Trent 800 engines. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 78, Engine Exhaust. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by reports of 

damage to the upper bifurcation forward fire 

seal and seal deflector, and localized damage 

to the insulation blanket installed just aft of 

the fire seal. We are issuing this AD to 

prevent a breach in the engine firewall due 

to a failed upper bifurcation forward fire seal. 

A breach could delay or prevent the fire 

detection and suppression system from 

functioning properly, and could result in an 

increased risk of a fire, prolonged burning, 

and breach of the fire zone; and could allow 

fire to reach unprotected areas of the engine, 

the strut, and wing after engine shutdown. 

Also, fan air bypassing the fire seal could 

cause localized damage to the thrust reverser 

(T/R) insulation blanket installed just aft of 

the fire seal, which could allow limited 

thermal degradation of the T/R inner wall. 

This could aggravate existing damage and 

cause the T/R’s inner wall to fail. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Installation of Serviceable T/R Halves on 

Each Engine 

Within 60 months after the effective date 

of this AD: Install serviceable left and right 

T/R halves on the left and right engines, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Special Attention 

Service Bulletin 777–78–0101, Revision 2, 

dated July 22, 2016 (‘‘SASB 777–78–0101, 

R2’’). A serviceable T/R half is defined in the 

Accomplishment Instructions of SASB 777– 

78–0101, R2. 

(h) Credit for Previous Action 

This paragraph provides credit for the 

action required by paragraph (g) of this AD 

if it was accomplished before the effective 

date of this AD using Boeing Special 

Attention Service Bulletin 777–78–0101, 

Revision 1, dated October 30, 2015. 

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), 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 ACO, send it to the 

attention of the person identified in 

paragraph (j)(1) of this AD. Information may 

be emailed to: 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOCRequests@faa.gov. 

(2) 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. 

(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair, 

modification, or alteration required by this 

AD if it is approved by the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) that has 

been authorized by the Manager, Seattle 

ACO, to make those findings. To be 

approved, the repair method, modification 

deviation, or alteration deviation must meet 

the certification basis of the airplane and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

(4) For service information that contains 

steps that are labeled as Required for 

Compliance (RC), the provisions of 

paragraphs (i)(4)(i) and (i)(4)(ii) apply. 

(i) The steps labeled as RC, including 

substeps under an RC step and any figures 

identified in an RC step, must be done to 

comply with the AD. If a step or sub-step is 

labeled ‘‘RC Exempt,’’ then the RC 

requirement is removed from that step or 

sub-step. An AMOC is required for any 

deviations to RC steps, including substeps 

and identified figures. 

(ii) Steps not labeled 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 RC steps, 

including substeps and identified figures, can 

still be done as specified, and the airplane 

can be put back in an airworthy condition. 

(j) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Kevin Nguyen, Aerospace Engineer, 

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, FAA, Seattle 

ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6501; fax: 425– 

917–6590; email: kevin.nguyen@faa.gov. 

(2) Service information identified in this 

AD that is not incorporated by reference is 

available at the addresses specified in 

paragraphs (k)(3) and (k)(4) of this AD. 

(k) 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 the AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) Boeing Special Attention Service 

Bulletin 777–78–0101, Revision 2, dated July 

22, 2016. 

(ii) Reserved. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data 

Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., 

MC 110–SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740–5600; 

telephone: 562–797–1717; Internet: https://

www.myboeingfleet.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. 

mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 41 / Friday, March 3, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 12401 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 

17, 2017. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2017–03968 Filed 3–2–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2016–9298; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–NM–161–AD; Amendment 

39–18811; AD 2017–05–01] 

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. 

This AD was prompted by an evaluation 

by the design approval holder (DAH) 

that indicates that a section of the wing 

and aft fuselage is subject to widespread 

fatigue damage (WFD). This AD requires 

an inspection to determine if certain 

modifications have been done. We are 

issuing this AD to address the unsafe 

condition on these products. 

DATES: This AD is effective April 7, 

2017. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in this AD 

as of April 7, 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: 

continued.airworthiness-wb.external@

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–2016–9298. 

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– 

9298; 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 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 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 October 26, 2016 

(81 FR 74354) (‘‘the NPRM’’). The 

NPRM was prompted by an evaluation 

by the DAH that indicates that a section 

of the wing and aft fuselage is subject to 

WFD. The NPRM proposed to require an 

inspection to determine if certain 

modifications have been done. For 

airplanes on which the specified 

modifications have not been done, this 

AD requires accomplishing those 

modifications, including doing related 

investigative and corrective actions if 

necessary. We are issuing this AD to 

prevent reduced structural integrity of 

these airplanes due to the failure of 

certain structural components. 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Union, has issued EASA AD 2015– 

0173R1, dated August 31, 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: 

A widespread fatigue damage (WFD) 

analysis conducted on A300 aeroplanes 

identified areas which are susceptible to 

crack development. 

This condition, if not corrected, could 

affect the structural integrity of the 

aeroplane. 

To address this issue, Airbus developed a 

modification (mod) to reinforce the structure 

of the aeroplane. Airbus issued Service 

Bulletin (SB) A300–53–0271 to provide 

instructions for a cold expansion of the foot 

attachment holes of certain fuselage frames, 

and DGAC [Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation 

Civile] France issued AD F–2004–001 to 

require this mod [which corresponds with 

certain requirements in FAA AD 2004–23– 

20, Amendment 39–13875 (69 FR 68779, 

November 26, 2004)]. 

Since that [DGAC] AD was issued, Airbus 

released twelve other mods with 

corresponding SBs, to complete the set of 

inspections and repairs in the frame of the 

A300 WFD campaign. EASA issued AD 

2015–0115 to require ten of these mods 

through section 3 of ALS [Airworthiness 

Limitations Section] Part 2, and decision is 

made to delete section 3 from ALS Part 2. 

For the reasons described above, EASA 

issued AD 2015–0173, retaining the 

requirements of DGAC France AD F–2004– 

001, which was superseded, to require 

implementation of the additional inspection, 

modification and/or repair actions, as 

applicable to aeroplane model. 

This [EASA] AD is revised to give credit 

for previous use of any earlier revision of an 

affected Airbus SB, based on the fact that no 

additional work is included in the later SB 

revisions. 

Required actions include an 

inspection to determine if certain 

modifications have been done. For 

airplanes on which the specified 

modifications have not been done, this 

AD requires accomplishing those 

modifications, including doing related 

investigative and corrective actions if 

necessary. Depending on airplane 

configuration, the compliance times for 

modifying the airplane structure range 

between 13,300 flight cycles and 48,000 

flight cycles since first flight of the 

airplane. 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– 

9298. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

received no comments on the NPRM or 

on the determination of the cost to the 

public. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the relevant data 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. 

mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES