71602 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 201 / Tuesday, October 18, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

(r) 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. 

(3) The following service information was 

approved for IBR on November 22, 2016. 

(i) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–0116, 

Revision 07, dated September 19, 2011, 

including Appendixes A and B. Only the first 

page of Appendixes A and B of this 

document are identified as appendixes. 

(ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–6005, 

Revision 06, dated November 14, 2013. 

(4) The following service information was 

approved for IBR on November 17, 1995 (60 

FR 53847, October 18, 1995). 

(i) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–116, 

Revision 6, dated July 16, 1993, which 

contains the following effective pages: Pages 

1 through 11 of this document are identified 

as Revision 6, dated July 16, 1993. 

(ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–128, 

Revision 3, dated January 26, 1990, which 

contains the following effective pages: Page 

1 is identified as Revision 3, dated January 

26, 1990; pages 2 through 5 are identified as 

Revision 1, dated February 7, 1986; and 

pages 6 through 14 are identified as the 

original issue, dated August 27, 1983. 

(iii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–141, 

Revision 7, dated July 16, 1993, which 

contains the following effective pages: Pages 

1 through 24 of this document are identified 

as Revision 7, dated July 16, 1993. 

(iv) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57– 

6005, Revision 2, dated December 16, 1993, 

which contains the following effective pages: 

Pages 1 through 4 are identified as Revision 

2, dated December 16, 1993; pages 5 through 

7 and 9 are identified as Revision 1, dated 

February 26, 1993; and page 8 is identified 

as the original issue, dated August 13, 1986. 

(v) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–6006, 

Revision 4, dated July 25, 1994, which 

contains the following effective pages: Pages 

1, 2, 5, and 7 are identified as Revision 4, 

dated July 25, 1994; and pages 3, 4, 6, and 

8 through 20 are identified as Revision 3, 

dated December 16, 1993. 

(5) 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. 

(6) 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. 

(7) 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 

September 19, 2016. 

Dionne Palermo, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2016–23261 Filed 10–17–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–8132; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–NM–127–AD; Amendment 

39–18663; AD 2016–19–14] 

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 A318 and A319 series 

airplanes; Model A320–211, –212, –214, 

–231, –232, and –233 airplanes; and 

Model A321 series airplanes. This AD 

was prompted by a report of cracks 

found during maintenance inspections 

on certain lugs of the 10VU rack side 

fittings in the cockpit. This AD requires 

repetitive inspections for cracking of the 

lugs on the 10VU rack side fittings, and 

repair of any cracking. We are issuing 

this AD to prevent reading difficulties of 

flight-critical information displayed to 

the flightcrew during a critical phase of 

flight, such as an approach or takeoff, 

which could result in loss of airplane 

control at an altitude insufficient for 

recovery. 

DATES: This AD is effective November 

22, 2016. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in this AD 

as of November 22, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: For service information 

identified in this final rule, contact 

Airbus, Airworthiness Office—EIAS, 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. 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– 

8132. 

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–2015– 

8132; 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: 

Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; telephone 425–227–1405; 

fax 425–227–1149. 

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 A318, 

A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes. 

The NPRM published in the Federal 

Register on December 31, 2015 (80 FR 

81792) (‘‘the NPRM’’). The NPRM was 

prompted by a report of cracks found 

during maintenance inspections on 

certain lugs of the 10VU rack side 

fittings in the cockpit. The NPRM 

proposed to require repetitive 

inspections for cracking of the lugs on 

the 10VU rack side fittings, and repair 

of any cracking. We are issuing this AD 

to prevent reading difficulties of flightcritical information displayed to the 

flightcrew during a critical phase of 

flight, such as an approach or takeoff, 

which could result in loss of airplane 

control at an altitude insufficient for 

recovery. 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness 

Directive 2015–0170, dated August 18, 

2015 (referred to after this as the 

Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness 

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

an unsafe condition for certain Airbus 

Model A318 and A319 series airplanes; 

Model A320–211, –212, –214, –231, 

–232, and –233 airplanes; and Model 

A321 series airplanes. The MCAI states: 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 201 / Tuesday, October 18, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 71603 

During an unscheduled maintenance 

operation on an A330 aeroplane, the 10VU 

rack was removed for access and cracks were 

discovered on 10VU rack side fittings on lugs 

1, 3, and 4. As a similar design is installed 

on A320 family aeroplanes, a sampling 

review was done to determine the possible 

fleet impact. The result showed that several 

aeroplanes had cracked or broken 10VU rack 

side fittings. 

This condition, if not detected and 

corrected, could lead to a high vibration level 

on the primary flight- and navigation 

displays during critical flight phases (takeoff 

and landing), possibly creating reading 

difficulties for the crew. 

Prompted by these findings, Airbus 

developed mod 35869 to reinforce the 

affected rack fitting lugs. For in-service 

aeroplanes, Airbus published Service 

Bulletin (SB) A320–92–1087 to provide 

inspection and repair instructions. 

For the reasons described above, this 

[EASA] AD requires repetitive detailed 

inspections (DET) of the affected 10VU rack 

fitting lugs and, depending on findings, 

accomplishment of a repair. 

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–2015– 

8132. 

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. 

Request To Clarify the Description of 

the Unsafe Condition 

Airbus asked that we revise the unsafe 

condition by stating that the NPRM is 

intended to prevent ‘‘reading difficulties 

of flight-critical information,’’ and not 

‘‘loss of flight-critical information.’’ 

Airbus stated that this clarification 

would correspond with the language 

specified in EASA AD 2015–0170, dated 

August 18, 2015. 

We agree with the commenter’s 

request, for the reason provided. We 

have clarified the unsafe condition in 

the SUMMARY and SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION Discussion sections in the 

preamble of this final rule and in 

paragraph (e) of the AD. 

Request To Extend Compliance Time 

Delta Airlines (DAL) asked that the 

compliance time specified in the NPRM 

be extended from 24 to 36 months. DAL 

stated that the subject cracking issue has 

been known for over five years; 

however, the FAA just recently took 

regulatory action. DAL added that there 

have been no in-service reports of issues 

related to safety of flight due to the 

cracking condition. DAL noted that the 

unsafe condition of vibration during a 

critical phase of flight is theoretical and 

not based on actual testing or 

experience. In light of this, DAL stated 

that the 24-month time limit is 

unwarranted, and should be extended to 

36 months to allow more time so the 

inspection can be accomplished during 

a hangar visit. 

We do not agree with the commenter’s 

request. In developing an appropriate 

compliance time for the actions 

specified in this AD, we considered the 

safety implications and normal 

maintenance schedules for the timely 

accomplishment of the specified 

actions. We have determined that the 

proposed 24-month compliance time 

will ensure an acceptable level of safety 

and allow the actions to be done during 

scheduled maintenance intervals for 

most affected operators. However, 

affected operators may request an 

alternative method of compliance 

(AMOC) for an extension of the 

compliance time under the provisions of 

paragraph (i)(1) of this AD by submitting 

data and analysis substantiating that the 

change would provide an acceptable 

level of safety. We have not changed 

this AD in this regard. 

Request To Remove Reporting 

Requirement 

DAL asked that the proposed 

mandatory reporting requirement in 

paragraph (h) of the proposed AD be 

removed. DAL understands that Airbus 

wants to gather necessary in-service 

information; however, the airworthiness 

of the airplane does not depend on 

mandatory reporting. DAL stated that 

the airplane would be airworthy and 

public safety would be maintained 

without the mandatory reporting 

requirement. DAL added that requiring 

reporting places an unfair burden on 

operators of Airbus airplanes compared 

to operators of airplanes produced by 

other manufacturers, particularly when 

there are no findings, because reporting 

is mandated for the benefit of the 

original equipment manufacturer. DAL 

concluded that the reporting should not 

be mandated through this regulatory 

action. 

We do not agree with the commenter’s 

request to remove the reporting 

requirement in paragraph (h) of this AD. 

We disagree that public safety would be 

maintained without the mandatory 

reporting requirement. Reporting is 

necessary for the airframe manufacturer 

to determine the extent of the cracking 

of the lugs on the 10VU rack side 

fittings, and to ascertain any necessary 

follow-up actions. Therefore, we have 

not changed this AD in this regard. 

Request To Clarify Reporting 

Requirements 

DAL asked for clarification of the 

format necessary to report the 

inspection results specified in 

paragraph (h) of the proposed AD. DAL 

asked if the reporting form located in 

the back of Airbus Service Bulletin 

A320–92–1087, Revision 02, dated 

November 25, 2014, must be used or if 

the report can be submitted using 

another format. 

While we recommend that operators 

use the form in Figure A–FRAAA— 

Sheet 02, titled ‘‘Inspection Report,’’ of 

Airbus Service Bulletin A320–92–1087, 

Revision 02, dated November 25, 2014, 

this AD does not require use of that 

form. We have changed paragraph (h) of 

this AD to clarify our intent. 

DAL also noted that it disagrees with 

having to determine and report the 

supplemental type certificate (STC) 

status for equipment attached to the 

10VU rack, as specified in Figure A– 

FRAAA—Sheet 02, titled ‘‘Inspection 

Report,’’ of Airbus Service Bulletin 

A320–92–1087, Revision 02, dated 

November 25, 2014. DAL stated that 

STC equipment should be addressed in 

a separate regulatory action. 

We agree with the comment. As 

previously indicated, the referenced 

form is not specifically required by this 

AD, and we have changed paragraph (h) 

of this AD to clarify our intent. 

Request for Clarification on Returning 

Damaged Parts 

DAL and United Airlines (UAL) asked 

for clarification on returning damaged 

parts to Airbus. DAL stated that if the 

reporting form must be used, it 

disagrees with sending all damaged 

parts to Airbus. UAL stated that the 

NPRM proposes requiring reporting 

inspection findings to Airbus, and 

Figure A–FRAAA—Sheet 02, titled 

‘‘Inspection Report’’ of Airbus Service 

Bulletin A320–92–1087, Revision 02, 

dated November 25, 2014, specifies that 

damaged lugs are to be sent to Airbus 

for investigation. UAL noted that it will 

try to deliver damaged parts, but added 

that this should not be an AD 

requirement since parts shipment will 

increase cost and the operator cannot 

guarantee delivery. 

We agree that clarification is 

necessary. Although the note contained 

in Figure A–FRAAA—Sheet 02, titled 

‘‘Inspection Report,’’ of Airbus Service 

Bulletin A320–92–1087, Revision 02, 

dated November 25, 2014, specifies ‘‘If 

lugs have been replaced the removed 

part should be sent to Airbus for 

investigation,’’ this AD does not include 

that requirement. We have included this 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
71604 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 201 / Tuesday, October 18, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

exception in the reporting requirement 

in paragraph (h) of this AD. 

Request To Use a Certain Drawing 

UAL asked that we approve using the 

current version of the Airbus repair 

drawing, as called out in Airbus Service 

Bulletin A320–92–1087, Revision 02, 

dated November 25, 2014. UAL noted 

that this repair drawing is the latest 

version and may be revised without 

revision of Airbus Service Bulletin 

A320–92–1087, Revision 02, dated 

November 25, 2014. 

For clarification, we agree that the 

current version of the repair drawing 

can be used. We have not changed this 

AD in this regard. 

Request To Change Costs of Compliance 

Section 

DAL asked that we change the repair 

estimate in the ‘Costs of Compliance’ 

section of the NPRM, as specified in 

Airbus Service Bulletin A320–92–1087, 

Revision 02, dated November 25, 2014. 

DAL stated that the service information 

does not provide the cost of the parts, 

and Airbus does have the price of each 

part listed in the COMPA01 

components. DAL added that the parts 

cost is $9,140 per airplane to 

accomplish the repair work. DAL asked 

that this cost be included in the cost of 

the repair, for a total of $16,280 per 

airplane. 

We agree with the commenter’s 

request, for the reason provided. We 

have changed the repair estimate in the 

‘Costs of Compliance’ section of this 

final rule 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 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 Airbus Service Bulletin 

A320–92–1087, Revision 02, dated 

November 25, 2014. The service 

information describes procedures for 

repetitive inspections for cracking of the 

lugs on the 10VU rack side fittings, and 

repair of any cracking. 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 959 

airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it takes about 2 

work-hours per product to comply with 

the basic requirements of this AD, and 

1 work-hour per product to report 

inspection findings. The average labor 

rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on 

these figures, we estimate the cost of 

this AD on U.S. operators to be 

$244,545, or $255 per product. 

In addition, we estimate that any 

necessary repair takes about 84 workhours and require parts costing $9,140, 

for a cost of $16,280 per product. We 

have no way of determining the number 

of aircraft that might need these 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. 

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): 

2016–19–14 Airbus: Amendment 39–18663; 

Docket No. FAA–2015–8132; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–NM–127–AD. 

(a) Effective Date 

This AD is effective November 22, 2016. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes 

identified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4) 

of this AD, certificated in any category; 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 201 / Tuesday, October 18, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 71605 

except airplanes on which Airbus 

Modification 35869 has been embodied in 

production. 

(1) Airbus Model A318–111, –112, –121, 

and –122 airplanes. 

(2) Airbus Model A319–111, –112, –113, 

–114, –115, –131, –132, and –133 airplanes. 

(3) Airbus Model A320–211, –212, –214, 

–231, –232, and –233 airplanes. 

(4) Airbus Model A321–111, –112, –131, 

–211, –212, –213, –231, and –232 airplanes. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 25, Equipment/Furnishings. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by a report of 

cracks found during maintenance inspections 

on certain lugs of the 10VU rack side fittings 

in the cockpit. We are issuing this AD to 

prevent reading difficulties of flight-critical 

information displayed to the flightcrew 

during a critical phase of flight, such as an 

approach or takeoff, which could result in 

loss of airplane control at an altitude 

insufficient for recovery. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Repetitive Inspections and Repair 

At the later of the times specified in 

paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD: Do a 

detailed inspection for cracking of the lugs 

on the 10VU rack side fittings in the cockpit, 

in accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320– 

92–1087, Revision 02, dated November 25, 

2014. If any crack is found, before further 

flight, repair in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Service Bulletin A320–92–1087, Revision 02, 

dated November 25, 2014. Repeat the 

inspection thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 20,000 flight cycles or 40,000 flight 

hours, whichever occurs first. Repair of the 

10VU rack lugs does not terminate the 

repetitive inspections required by this 

paragraph. 

(1) Before the accumulation of 30,000 total 

flight cycles or 60,000 total flight hours, 

whichever occurs first since the airplane’s 

first flight. 

(2) Within 24 months after the effective 

date of this AD. 

(h) Reporting Requirement 

Submit a report of any findings (positive 

and negative) of any inspection required by 

paragraph (g) of this AD to Airbus Service 

Bulletin Reporting Online Application on 

Airbus World (https://w3.airbus.com/), at the 

applicable time specified in paragraph (h)(1) 

or (h)(2) of this AD. Where Figure A– 

FRAAA—Sheet 02, titled ‘‘Inspection 

Report,’’ of Airbus Service Bulletin A320– 

92–1087, Revision 02, dated November 25, 

2014, specifies sending removed lugs to 

Airbus for investigation, this AD does not 

include that requirement. The form 

contained in Figure A–FRAAA—Sheet 02, 

titled ‘‘Inspection Report,’’ of Airbus Service 

Bulletin A320–92–1087, Revision 02, dated 

November 25, 2014, may be used to meet this 

reporting requirement. 

(1) If the inspection was done on or after 

the effective date of this AD: Submit the 

report within 90 days after the inspection. 

(2) If the inspection was done before the 

effective date of this AD: Submit the report 

within 90 days after the effective date of this 

AD. 

(i) 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: 

Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; 

telephone 425–227–1405; fax 425–227–1149. 

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. 

(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. 

(4) Required for Compliance (RC): If any 

service information contains procedures or 

tests that are identified as RC, those 

procedures and tests must be done to comply 

with this AD; any procedures or tests that are 

not identified as RC are recommended. Those 

procedures and tests that are not identified 

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 procedures and tests identified as RC can 

be done and the airplane can be put back in 

an airworthy condition. Any substitutions or 

changes to procedures or tests identified as 

RC require approval of an AMOC. 

(j) Related Information 

Refer to Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information (MCAI) European 

Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) 

Airworthiness Directive 2015–0170, dated 

August 18, 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–2015–8132. 

(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 this AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) Airbus Service Bulletin A320–92–1087, 

Revision 02, dated November 25, 2014. 

(ii) Reserved. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Airbus, Airworthiness 

Office—EIAS, 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 

September 14, 2016. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2016–22837 Filed 10–17–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

17 CFR Part 1 

Order Establishing De Minimis 

Threshold Phase-In Termination Date 

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission. 

ACTION: Order. 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES