Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 245 / Tuesday, December 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 79469 

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 Fort Worth, Texas, on December 

11, 2015. 

Lance T. Gant, 

Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–31849 Filed 12–21–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–0675; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–NM–213–AD; Amendment 

39–18340; AD 2015–25–02] 

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 certain 

Airbus Model A330–200, –200 

Freighter, and –300 series airplanes; and 

all Airbus Model A340–200, –300, –500, 

and –600 series airplanes. This AD was 

prompted by reports of cracks at certain 

frames of the forward cargo door. This 

AD requires a detailed inspection for 

cracking of certain forward cargo doors, 

and repair if necessary. We are issuing 

this AD to detect and correct cracking at 

certain frames, which could result in the 

loss of structural integrity of the forward 

cargo door. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

January 26, 2016. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in this AD 

as of January 26, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http://www.

regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA2015-0675; 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 AD, contact Airbus SAS, 

Airworthiness Office—EAL, 1 Rond 

Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac 

Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 

96; fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email 

airworthiness.A330-A340@airbus.com; 

Internet http://www.airbus.com. 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– 

0675. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; telephone 425–227–1138; 

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 certain Airbus Model A330– 

200, –200 Freighter, and –300 series 

airplanes; and all Airbus Model A340– 

200, –300, –500, and –600 series 

airplanes. The NPRM published in the 

Federal Register on March 31, 2015 (80 

FR 17000). We are issuing this AD to 

detect and correct cracking at certain 

frames, which could result in the loss of 

structural integrity of the forward cargo 

door. 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness 

Directive 2014–0228, dated October 20, 

2014 (referred to after this as the 

Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness 

Information, or ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct 

an unsafe condition for certain Airbus 

Model A330–200, –200 Freighter, and 

–300 series airplanes; and all Airbus 

Model A340–200, –300, –500, and –600 

series airplanes. The MCAI states: 

An A330 aeroplane operator reported 

recently cases of crack findings on two 

different aeroplanes, at frame 20A and at 

frame 20B close to beam 3 of the forward 

cargo door. The first finding was detected 

during scheduled maintenance, while the 

second one was found during an inspection 

prompted by the first finding. Subsequent 

analyses of these cracks identified that the 

first crack initiated at frame 20B, which is the 

first primary load path, leading to excessive 

loads at frame 20A and consequent cracking. 

Nevertheless, on the other aeroplane, a crack 

was detected on frame 20A only. Rupture of 

both frames 20A and 20B could lead to frame 

21 failure after a limited number of flight 

cycles (FC). 

This condition, if not detected and 

corrected, may potentially result in the loss 

of structural integrity of the forward cargo 

door, which could ultimately jeopardise the 

aeroplane’s safe flight. 

Prompted by these findings, Airbus issued 

Alert Operators Transmission (AOT) 

A52L010–14 to provide instructions for a 

one-time inspection of frames 20A, 20B and 

21 in the area of beam 3, until the half pitch 

between beam 2 and beam 3. 

For the reasons described above, this 

[EASA] AD requires identification of the Part 

Number (P/N) of the affected forward cargo 

doors, a one-time detailed inspection (DET) 

of each affected door and, depending on 

findings, accomplishment of applicable 

corrective action(s) [contacting Airbus]. 

This [EASA] AD is considered to be an 

interim action and further AD action may 

follow. 

Required actions also include sending 

inspection results to Airbus. You may 

examine the MCAI in the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://www.regulations.

gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2015- 

0675-0002. 

Correction for Service Information 

Typo 

On page 1 of Airbus AOT A52L010– 

14, dated September 30, 2014, at section 

‘‘2. Referenced Documentation,’’ ‘‘Ref. 

5’’ specifies page block ‘‘PB.801,’’ which 

is incorrect. This page block should be 

‘‘PB.401’’ instead. We have added new 

paragraph (k) to this AD to account for 

this correction, and have redesignated 

subsequent paragraphs. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. The 

following presents the comments 

received on the NPRM (80 FR 17000, 

March 31, 2015) and the FAA’s response 

to each comment. 

Request To Revise Part Number List 

Sequencing 

American Airlines (AA) requested 

that we revise the proposed AD (80 FR 

17000, March 31, 2015) by swapping the 

part numbers listed in paragraphs 

(g)(1)(ii) and (g)(1)(x) of the proposed 

AD to maintain alphanumeric order. 

American Airlines reasoned that the 

flow of the list is confusing. 

We agree to revise paragraphs (g)(1)(ii) 

and (g)(1)(x) of this AD for the reasons 

requested by American Airlines. 

Request for Justification 

AA asked whether a root cause has 

been determined that justifies the 

proposed inspection threshold. AA 

noted that paragraph (g)(1) of the 

proposed AD (80 FR 17000, March 31, 

2015) proposed that inspections on all 

affected doors be completed within 200 

flight cycles from the effective date of 

the AD. AA further noted from Airbus 

AOT A52L010–14, dated September 30, 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
79470 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 245 / Tuesday, December 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

2014, that the service events that led to 

the issuance of this inspection occurred 

on airplanes with 16,170 and 16,556 

total accumulated flight cycles. 

Following release of Airbus AOT 

A52L010–14, dated September 30, 2014, 

AA reported that it completed four 

inspections in accordance with Airbus 

AOT A52L010–14, dated September 30, 

2014, with no findings, and those 

inspected airplanes had accumulated 

8,849 to 9,093 total flight cycles. 

We infer that AA considers the 

proposed compliance times to be 

unjustifiably short. We disagree to 

revise the compliance times in this AD. 

At the time of issuance of EASA AD 

2014–0228, dated October 20, 2014, it 

had been determined that fatigue 

calculations were showing low life 

factors at frame C20B. After a failure of 

frame C20B, the edge member C20A 

would be overloaded and could 

potentially fail within 800 flight cycles, 

according to damage tolerance 

calculations. The failure of the tow 

frame would be catastrophic. Therefore 

the decision was made to mandate a 

one-time inspection with a compliance 

time of within 200 flight cycles after the 

effective date of this AD, which 

corresponds to the compliance time 

specified in EASA AD 2014–0228, dated 

October 20, 2014. We have made no 

changes to this AD in this regard. 

Request for Credit for Reporting 

AA requested that we revise 

paragraph (i)(2) of the proposed AD (80 

FR 17000, March 31, 2015) to allow 

credit for reporting that has already 

been accomplished before the effective 

date of this AD. AA explained that the 

proposed AD would require operators to 

submit a report within 30 days after the 

AD effective date if the inspection was 

done before the effective date of the AD. 

AA reasoned that this does not allow for 

credit to be taken for reports that were 

submitted in accordance with Airbus 

AOT A52L010–14, dated September 30, 

2014, prior to the AD effective date. AA 

requested that paragraph (i)(2) of the 

proposed AD state, ‘‘[i]f the inspection 

was done before the effective date of 

this AD: Submit the report within 30 

days after the effective date of this AD, 

unless the inspection report was 

previously submitted.’’ 

We agree to allow credit for reporting 

that has already been accomplished 

before the effective date of this AD. The 

compliance time in paragraph (i)(2) of 

this AD is within 30 days after the 

effective date of this AD. Reports 

submitted before that compliance time, 

including those submitted before the 

effective date of this AD (as specified in 

paragraph (f) of this AD), are acceptable 

for compliance with paragraph (i)(2) of 

this AD. We have made no changes to 

this AD in this regard. 

Request To Revise Applicability 

Delta requested that we limit the 

applicability of the proposed AD to 

airplanes equipped with any of the 

forward cargo doors with the 

manufacturer part numbers (MPNs) 

listed in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) through 

(g)(1)(xii) of the proposed AD. Delta 

noted that paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of 

the proposed AD would apply to the 

identified airplane models, unless 

Modification 202702 had been 

embodied in production on certain 

airplanes. 

Delta stated it had requested 

clarification from Airbus about the 

relationship between the MPNs 

identified in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) through 

(g)(1)(xii) of the proposed AD and 

airplanes in the pre-Mod 50528 

configuration, as specified in Airbus 

AOT A52L010–14, dated September 30, 

2014. According to Delta, Airbus 

confirmed via Airbus Message 

80036162, dated April 1, 2015, that 

because cargo doors are components 

and can be swapped during in-service 

life, Airbus had intentionally extended 

the affected airplanes for the required 

inspections to include pre-Mod 202702 

airplanes that may have affected doors. 

Delta then reasoned that since operators 

can track the modification status only 

by the individual airplane, the 

applicability should be written to 

include the MPNs to ensure that 

operators understand which airplanes 

are affected by the AD. 

We disagree with the request to limit 

the applicability of this AD (paragraph 

(c) of this AD) to airplanes having the 

MPNs identified in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) 

through (g)(1)(xii) of this AD. The ‘‘Parts 

Installation Prohibition’’ specified in 

paragraph (j) of this AD applies to all 

airplanes identified in the paragraph (c) 

of this AD to ensure the affected MPNs 

are not installed on those airplanes. 

However, the inspection required by 

paragraph (g) of this AD is limited to 

airplanes having the affected MPNs. We 

have therefore made no changes to this 

AD in this regard. 

Request To Revise Cost 

Delta requested that we revise the 

‘‘Costs of Compliance’’ paragraph in the 

NPRM (80 FR 17000, March 31, 2015) to 

state, ‘‘However, Airbus has confirmed 

that out of qty (260) affected MPN Fwd 

cargo doors inspected, all were reported 

with NIL [no findings] findings.’’ Delta 

agreed that there is no way of 

determining the number of aircraft that 

might need the corrective actions for 

inspection findings, but added that the 

compliance window of 200 flight cycles 

for the inspection is a fairly short 

compliance window and may likely 

need to be accomplished in a line 

environment. Delta expressed that it 

may be prudent to communicate to 

operators that out of a quantity of 260 

forward cargo doors already inspected, 

there have been NIL findings (as noted 

in Airbus Message 80036162, dated 

April 1, 2015). 

We agree with Delta’s request and 

have revised the ‘‘Costs of Compliance’’ 

paragraph accordingly in this final rule. 

Request for Records Review 

Delta requested that we revise 

paragraph (g)(1) of the proposed AD (80 

FR 17000, March 31, 2015) to allow for 

a records review if the part number can 

be conclusively determined from that 

review. Delta reasoned that without this 

provision, the operators may consider a 

physical review of each forward cargo 

door to be required. 

For the reason stated by Delta, we 

agree to allow for a review of airplane 

maintenance records to verify whether 

cargo doors with part numbers listed in 

paragraphs (g)(1)(i) through (g)(1)(xii) of 

this AD are installed on the airplane. 

We have revised paragraph (g)(1) of this 

AD accordingly. 

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 (80 FR 

17000, March 31, 2015) for correcting 

the unsafe condition; and 

• Do not add any additional burden 

upon the public than was already 

proposed in the NPRM (80 FR 17000, 

March 31, 2015). 

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 51C 

Airbus has issued AOT A52L010–14, 

dated September 30, 2014. The service 

information describes procedures for an 

inspection for and repair of cracking of 

certain forward cargo doors. 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. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 245 / Tuesday, December 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 79471 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD affects 89 

airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it will take 

about 1 work-hour per product to 

comply with the basic requirements of 

this AD. The average labor rate is $85 

per work-hour. Required parts will cost 

$0 per product. Based on these figures, 

we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. 

operators to be $7,565, or $85 per 

product. 

In addition, we estimate that any 

necessary follow-on actions will take 

about 32 work-hours and require parts 

costing $654,850, for a cost of $657,570 

per product. We have no way of 

determining the number of airplanes 

that might need these actions. However, 

Airbus has confirmed that out of 260 

affected MPN forward cargo doors 

already inspected, all were reported 

with NIL findings; therefore, we 

anticipate that few, if any, airplanes will 

require these follow-on actions. 

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; 

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-2015-0675; 

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 

■ 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): 

2015–25–02 Airbus: Amendment 39–18340. 

Docket No. FAA–2015–0675; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–NM–213–AD. 

(a) Effective Date 

This AD becomes effective January 26, 

2016. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to the airplanes identified 

in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, 

certificated in any category. 

(1) Airbus Model A330–201, –202, –203, 

–223, –223F, –243, –243F, –301, –302, –303, 

–321, –322, –323, –341, –342, and –343 

airplanes, all manufacturer serial numbers, 

except those on which Airbus Modification 

202702 has been embodied in production. 

(2) Airbus Model A340–211, –212, –213, 

–311, –312, –313, –541, and –642 airplanes, 

all manufacturer serial numbers. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 52, Doors. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by reports of cracks 

at certain frames of the forward cargo door. 

We are issuing this AD to detect and correct 

cracking at certain frames, which could result 

in the loss of structural integrity of the 

forward cargo door. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Inspection and Repair 

(1) Within 200 flight cycles after the 

effective date of this AD, do a detailed 

inspection for cracking of an affected forward 

cargo door, having a part number identified 

in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) through (g)(1)(xii) of 

this AD, at frames 20A, 20B, and 21 areas 

located above beam 3, from outside and 

inside, in accordance with Airbus Alert 

Operators Transmission (AOT) A52L010–14, 

dated September 30, 2014, except as required 

by paragraph (k) of this AD. A review of 

airplane maintenance records is acceptable to 

determine if an affected forward cargo door 

is installed provided that the part number of 

the forward cargo door can be conclusively 

determined from that review. 

(i) F523–70500–000. 

(ii) F523–70500–004. 

(iii) F523–70500–006. 

(iv) F523–70500–008. 

(v) F523–70500–010. 

(vi) F523–70500–012. 

(vii) F523–70500–014. 

(viii) F523–70550–000. 

(ix) F523–70550–002. 

(x) F523–70550–004. 

(xi) F523–70550–008. 

(xii) F523–70550–050. 

(2) If any crack is found during the 

inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) of 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
79472 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 245 / Tuesday, December 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

this AD, before further flight, repair 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). 

(h) Definition of Detailed Inspection 

For the purposes of this AD, a detailed 

inspection is an intensive examination of a 

specific item, installation, or assembly to 

detect damage, failure, or irregularity. 

Available lighting is normally supplemented 

with a direct source of good lighting at an 

intensity deemed appropriate. Inspection 

aids such as a mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., 

may be necessary. Surface cleaning and 

elaborate procedures may be required. 

(i) Reporting Requirement 

Submit a report of the findings (both 

positive and negative) of the inspection 

required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD to 

Serge KIYMAZ, Structure Engineer, Structure 

Engineering—SEES1 CUSTOMER SERVICES, 

Phone: +33(0)5 82 05 10 33, Fax: +33(0)5 61 

93 36 14, email: serge.kiymaz@airbus.com, at 

the applicable time specified in paragraph 

(i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD. The report must 

include the information identified in Airbus 

AOT A52L010–14, dated September 30, 

2014. 

(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. 

(j) Parts Installation Limitation 

As of the effective date of this AD, 

installation of a forward cargo door having 

any part number specified in paragraphs 

(g)(1)(i) through (g)(1)(xii) of this AD is 

permitted on any airplane, provided that 

prior to installation, the door is inspected 

and, depending on the findings, corrected, in 

accordance with Airbus AOT A52L010–14, 

dated September 30, 2014, except as required 

by paragraph (k) of this AD. 

(k) Exception to the Service Information 

On page 1 of Airbus AOT A52L010–14, 

dated September 30, 2014, at section ‘‘2. 

Referenced Documentation,’’ ‘‘Ref. 5’’ 

specifies page block ‘‘PB.801,’’ which is 

incorrect. This page block should be 

‘‘PB.401’’ instead. 

(l) 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: 

Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM 116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; 

telephone 425–227–1138; fax 425–227–1149. 

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 EASA; or Airbus’s EASA DOA. If 

approved by the DOA, the approval must 

include the DOA-authorized signature. 

(3) Reporting Requirements: A federal 

agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a 

person is not required to respond to, nor 

shall a person be subject to a penalty for 

failure to comply with a collection of 

information subject to the requirements of 

the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that 

collection of information displays a current 

valid OMB Control Number. The OMB 

Control Number for this information 

collection is 2120–0056. Public reporting for 

this collection of information is estimated to 

be approximately 5 minutes per response, 

including the time for reviewing instructions, 

completing and reviewing the collection of 

information. All responses to this collection 

of information are mandatory. Comments 

concerning the accuracy of this burden and 

suggestions for reducing the burden should 

be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence 

Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn: 

Information Collection Clearance Officer, 

AES 200. 

(m) Related Information 

Refer to Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2014–0228, dated 

October 20, 2014, for related information. 

This MCAI may be found in the AD docket 

on the Internet at http://www.regulations.

gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2015-0675- 

0002. 

(n) Material Incorporated by Reference 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

(IBR) of the service information listed in this 

paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. 

(2) You must use this service information 

as applicable to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) Airbus Alert Operators Transmission 

A52L010–14, dated September 30, 2014. 

(ii) Reserved. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness 

Office—EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 

31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 

5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email 

airworthiness.A330-A340@airbus.com; 

Internet http://www.airbus.com. 

(4) You may view this service information 

at the FAA, Transport 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 

November 25, 2015. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–30820 Filed 12–21–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 73 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–7213; Airspace 

Docket No. 15–ASO–12] 

RIN 2120–AA66 

Amendment of Restricted Areas R– 

2932, R–2933, R–2934 and R–2935; 

Cape Canaveral, FL 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action updates the using 

agency information for restricted areas 

R–2932, R–2933, R–2934 and R–2935; 

Cape Canaveral, FL. This is an 

administrative change to reflect the 

current organization tasked with using 

agency responsibilities for the restricted 

areas. It does not affect the boundaries, 

designated altitudes, time of designation 

or activities conducted within the 

restricted areas. 

DATES: Effective date: 0901 UTC, March 

31, 2016. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

Gallant, Airspace Policy Group, Office 

of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone: (202) 267–8783. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the United States Code. 

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. 

This rulemaking is promulgated 

under the authority described in 

Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 

40103. Under that section, the FAA is 

charged with prescribing regulations to 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES