Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 15, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 38897 

As with all Federal promotion 

programs, reports and forms are 

periodically reviewed to reduce 

information requirements and 

duplication by industry and public 

sector agencies. Finally, USDA has not 

identified any relevant Federal rules 

that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with 

this rule. 

AMS is committed to complying with 

the E-Government Act, to promote the 

use of the Internet and other 

information technologies to provide 

increased opportunities for citizen 

access to Government information and 

services, and for other purposes. 

Regarding outreach efforts, the Board 

met on July 17, 2015, and unanimously 

recommended these changes to the 

Order. All of the Board’s meetings, 

including meetings held via 

teleconference, are open to the public 

and interested persons are invited to 

participate and express their views. 

A proposed rule concerning this 

action was published in the Federal 

Register on March 1, 2016 (81 FR 

10530). The proposal was made 

available through the Internet by USDA 

and the Office of the Federal Register. A 

15-day comment period ending March 

16, 2016, was provided to allow 

interested persons to submit comments. 

No comments were received. 

After consideration of all relevant 

matters presented, including the 

information and recommendation 

submitted by the Board and other 

available information, it is hereby found 

that this rule, as hereinafter set forth, is 

consistent with and will effectuate the 

purposes of the 1996 Act. 

It is further found that good cause 

exists for not postponing the effective 

date of this rule until 30 days after 

publication in the Federal Register (5 

U.S.C. 553) because this is the initial 

year for the collection of assessments 

under the Order, on the 2015 harvest, 

and assessments were due on February 

15, 2016. Importers are responsible for 

paying assessments directly to the Board 

30 calendar days after importation. The 

Board would like to implement this 

incentive as soon as possible to facilitate 

the initial collection of assessments. 

Additionally, this action was 

unanimously recommended by the 

Board. Further, a 15-day comment 

period was provided for in the proposed 

rule and no comments were received. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1214 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Advertising, Consumer 

information, Christmas trees, Marketing 

agreements, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 1214 is amended 

as follows: 

PART 1214—CHRISTMAS TREE 

PROMOTION, RESEARCH, AND 

INFORMATION ORDER 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 1214 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7411–7425; 7 U.S.C. 

7401. 

■ 2. Section 1214.5 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 1214.5 Crop year. 

Crop year means the period August 1 

through July 31 or such other period 

approved by the Secretary. 

■ 3. Section 1214.8 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 1214.8 Fiscal period. 

Fiscal period means the period 

August 1 through July 31 or such other 

period approved by the Secretary. 

■ 4. Subpart C, consisting of § 1214.520, 

is added to read as follows: 

Subpart C—Provisions Implementing 

the Christmas Tree Promotion, 

Research, and Information Order 

§ 1214.520 Late payment and interest 

charges for past due assessments. 

(a) A late payment charge shall be 

imposed on any producer or importer 

who fails to make timely remittance to 

the Board of the total assessments for 

which such producer or importer is 

liable. The late payment charge will be 

imposed on any assessments not 

received within 30 calendar days of the 

date they are due. This one-time late 

payment charge shall be $250 and will 

be increased to $500 after 90 days of 

delinquency. 

(b) In addition to the late payment 

charge, 1.5 percent per month interest 

on the outstanding balance, including 

any late payment charge and accrued 

interest, will be added to any accounts 

for which payment has not been 

received by the Board within 30 

calendar days after the date the 

assessments are due. Such interest will 

continue to accrue monthly until the 

outstanding balance is paid to the 

Board. 

Dated: June 10, 2016. 

Elanor Starmer, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2016–14150 Filed 6–14–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–3635; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–NM–037–AD; Amendment 

39–18553; AD 2016–12–04] 

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 A318 series airplanes; 

A319 series airplanes; A320–211, –212, 

–214, –231, –232, and –233 airplanes; 

and A321 series airplanes. This AD was 

prompted by an evaluation by the 

design approval holder (DAH) 

indicating that certain structural repair 

manual (SRM) inspection requirements 

for the fuselage skin repairs are 

insufficient to detect cracks. This AD 

requires an inspection to determine 

whether any fuselage external skin 

(doubler) repairs have been 

accomplished, an inspection for 

cracking of certain repaired external 

fuselage skin areas in the fuselage, and 

repair if necessary. We are issuing this 

AD to detect and correct fatigue 

cracking of the fuselage skin, which 

could result in reduced structural 

integrity of the airplane. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective July 

20, 2016. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in this AD 

as of July 20, 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– 

3635. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
38898 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 15, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2015– 

3635; 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 all Airbus Model A318 series 

airplanes; A319 series airplanes; A320– 

211, –212, –214, –231, –232, and –233 

airplanes; and A321 series airplanes. 

The NPRM published in the Federal 

Register on September 28, 2015 (80 FR 

58226) (‘‘the NPRM’’). The NPRM was 

prompted by an evaluation by the DAH 

indicating that the fuselage skin repairs 

are subject to WFD. The NPRM 

proposed to require an inspection to 

determine whether any fuselage external 

skin (doubler) repairs have been 

accomplished, an inspection for 

cracking of certain repaired external 

fuselage skin areas in the fuselage, and 

repair if necessary. We are issuing this 

AD to detect and correct fatigue 

cracking of the fuselage skin, which 

could result in reduced structural 

integrity of the airplane. 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness 

Directive 2015–0036R1, dated March 31, 

2015 (referred to after this as the 

Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness 

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

an unsafe condition on all Airbus Model 

A318 series airplanes; A319 series 

airplanes; A320–211, –212, –214, –231, 

–232, and –233 airplanes, and A321 

series airplanes. The MCAI states: 

During A320 family Extended Service Goal 

full scale fatigue tests, it was demonstrated 

that the inspection thresholds defined in the 

current Structural Repair Manual (SRM) for 

the A320 family skin repairs are insufficient 

to detect possible cracks becoming after 

repairs. The findings are limited to 1.2 

[millimeter] (mm) fuselage skin and cover for 

all cut-out external repairs. The internal 

repairs are not affected. 

This condition, if not detected and 

corrected, could affect the structural integrity 

of the fuselage at the repaired skin area(s). 

To address this potential unsafe condition, 

Airbus issued Alert Operators Transmission 

(AOT) A53N007–14 to provide inspection 

instructions. 

For the reasons described above, EASA 

issued AD 2015–0036 [http://

www.casa.gov.au/scripts/

nc.dll?WCMS:OLDASSET::svPath=/ADFiles/

over/a320/,svFileName=2015-0036.pdf] to 

require a one-time inspection of the affected 

areas and, depending on findings, 

accomplishment of applicable repair 

instructions. 

Since that [EASA] AD was issued, 

operators have questioned the inspection 

threshold for A318 aeroplanes (not yet in the 

Airbus AOT), which is actually identical to 

that for A319 aeroplanes. In addition, an 

error has been detected in paragraph (1) [of 

the EASA AD], since external doublers may 

have been installed in the affected area by a 

modification that may not be recorded as 

repair. 

Such doubler installations are also subject 

to the inspection requirements of this [EASA] 

AD, which is therefore revised to provide 

clarifications, correcting paragraph (1) [of the 

EASA AD] and introducing a Note. 

Required actions include an 

inspection to determine whether any 

fuselage external skin (doubler) repairs 

have been accomplished, an external 

ultrasonic inspection or an internal low/ 

high frequency eddy current inspection 

for cracking of certain repaired external 

fuselage skin areas in the fuselage, and 

repair if necessary. The compliance 

times vary depending on airplane 

configuration. The earliest compliance 

time is within 25,200 flight cycles since 

last repair, or within 350 flight cycles 

after the effective date of the AD, 

whichever occurs later. The latest 

compliance time is within 45,000 flight 

cycles since last repair; within 1,500 

flight cycles from the effective date of 

the AD, without exceeding 49,100 flight 

cycles since last repair; or within 350 

flight cycles since the effective date of 

the AD; whichever occurs latest. 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– 

3635. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

have considered the comments received. 

The following presents the comments 

received on the NPRM and the FAA’s 

response to each comment. 

Support for the NPRM 

Mr. Bryant Kerr stated that the NPRM 

is an excellent idea, and it is always 

worth improving safety on airplanes. 

Request To Revise Applicability 

United Airlines (UAL) requested that 

we revise the NPRM applicability to 

apply only to airplanes having repairs 

that were completed before May 1, 2015, 

the date of the revised service repair 

manual (SRM). UAL stated that any new 

airplane deliveries or external repairs 

accomplished after the updated SRM 

thresholds will presumably have the 

correct thresholds contained in the 

maintenance/inspection program. 

We partially agree with UAL’s 

request. We agree that airplanes with 

repairs accomplished using the updated 

SRM will be in compliance with certain 

sections of this AD, such as the 

timescale for the inspection, which is a 

subset of the AD requirements. 

However, the SRM update will not 

replace the remaining AD requirements, 

which must be applicable to all 

airplanes identified in paragraph (c) of 

this AD. We have not changed this AD 

in this regard. 

Request To Exclude Inspected 

Airplanes 

Delta Airlines (DAL) stated that since 

certain repairs and modifications on its 

airplanes have already had their first 

inspection prior to the compliance time 

specified in the NPRM, the NPRM 

requirements should not apply. DAL 

also stated that if an operator’s 

maintenance/inspection program is 

more stringent than the requirements of 

paragraph (m) of the proposed AD, the 

operator should be excluded from the 

NPRM requirements. 

We disagree with DAL’s request. 

Accomplishment of the first inspection 

is only part of the actions required by 

this AD. Paragraph (m) of this AD 

requires revision of the post-repair 

inspection threshold(s) in the operator’s 

maintenance program or inspection 

program. This AD includes the 

minimum requirements for mitigating 

the identified unsafe condition. 

However, under the provisions of 

paragraph (n)(1) of this AD, we will 

consider requests for approval of 

different methods of compliance if 

sufficient data are submitted to 

substantiate that the change would 

provide an acceptable level of safety. 

We have not changed this AD in this 

regard. 

Request To Revise Compliance Time 

DAL requested a compliance time 

extension from 350 flight cycles to 6 

months. DAL stated that depending on 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 15, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 38899 

the fleet utilization, an operator of a 

large, older fleet could be required to 

accomplish the compliance rework 

within a few months, thereby creating a 

significant impact on its available 

resources. DAL also stated that it is 

possible that several airplanes will be 

grounded because it may not have 

enough resources to comply with the 

350-flight-cycle limit. 

We do not agree with DAL’s request. 

DAL’s rationale for a compliance time 

extension does not provide an 

acceptable level of safety. The 

compliance time of this AD is based on 

a risk assessment. Some safety issues are 

more time sensitive than others. We 

have considered the compliance time 

established by EASA, and the overall 

risk to the fleet, including the severity 

of the identified unsafe condition and 

the likelihood of the occurrence of the 

unsafe condition, to determine the 

compliance time. However, under the 

provisions of paragraph (n)(1) of this 

AD, operators may apply for an 

extension of the compliance time by 

providing a satisfactory rationale 

explaining why a compliance time 

extension provides an acceptable level 

of safety. We have not changed this final 

rule in this regard. 

Request To Clarify Requirements and 

Approve Certain Repair Information 

Sources 

DAL requested that we make a 

distinction that the NPRM requirements 

apply only to external repair fasteners 

common to the 1.2-millimeter (mm) 

skin. DAL also stated that we should 

approve category B repairs done using 

the latest revision of the SRM and any 

repair design approval sheet (RDAS) 

approved after July 1, 2014. DAL stated 

that the applicable Airbus SRM repair 

inspection thresholds have been revised 

this year to address certain 

inadequacies. 

We do not agree with DAL’s requests. 

Paragraph (g) of this AD already requires 

an inspection to determine whether any 

fuselage doubler repairs have been 

accomplished on affected fuselage 

sections with a skin thickness of 1.2 

mm. DAL did not substantiate how the 

corrective actions in any RDAS for 

category ‘‘B’’ repairs approved after July 

1, 2014, and the latest revision of the 

SRMs would adequately address the 

unsafe condition. However, the 

commenter may use the provisions of 

paragraph (n)(2) of this AD for obtaining 

corrective actions from a manufacturer. 

We have not changed this AD in this 

regard. 

Request To Clarify Inspection 

Timeframes 

UAL requested clarification on how 

the NPRM addresses detection of 

cracking in the timeframe between the 

inspection threshold specified in the 

NPRM and Airbus Alert Operators 

Transmission A53N007–14, dated July 

22, 2014, and the repetitive inspections 

specified in the SRM. UAL stated that 

the compliance time has a short 

threshold if the repair records are 

inconclusive, which is as early as 350 

flight cycles from the effective date of 

the AD; therefore, the initial inspection 

could be accomplished much earlier 

than the crack detection period. 

We agree to clarify the inspection 

timeframes. The 350-flight-cycle 

compliance time is a second option to 

the compliance time specified in Airbus 

Alert Operators Transmission 

A53N007–14, dated July 22, 2014. The 

compliance time is based on a risk 

assessment that takes into consideration 

the fatigue crack length propagation. We 

have considered the compliance time 

established by EASA, and the overall 

risk to the fleet, including the severity 

of the identified unsafe condition and 

the likelihood of the occurrence of the 

unsafe condition. No change to the AD 

is necessary in this regard. 

Request To Correct Non-Destructive 

Testing Manual (NTM) Task Numbers 

DAL stated that Airbus Alert 

Operators Transmission A53N007–14, 

dated July 22, 2014, references incorrect 

formatting of NTM task numbers. DAL 

stated the formatting should be ‘‘51–10– 

15–270–801–A01’’ and ‘‘51–10–16–250– 

801–A01,’’ and not ‘‘51–10–15–270– 

801–A–01’’ and ‘‘51–10–16–250–801– 

A–01.’’ 

We disagree with DAL’s statement. 

NTM task numbers 51–10–15–270–801– 

A–01 and 51–10–16–250–801–A–01 are 

correctly referenced in Airbus Alert 

Operators Transmission A53N007–14, 

dated July 22, 2014, and in the Airbus 

A318/319/320/321 Non-Destructive 

Testing Manual. We have not changed 

this AD in this regard. 

Clarification of Unsafe Condition 

Language 

We revised the description of the 

precipitating event in the SUMMARY and 

paragraph (e) of this AD to correspond 

to the wording used in the MCAI AD. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the relevant data, 

considered the comments received, and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting this AD 

as proposed except for minor editorial 

changes. We have determined that these 

minor changes: 

• 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 

Airbus has issued Alert Operators 

Transmission A53N007–14, dated July 

22, 2014. The service information 

describes procedures for an inspection 

to detect cracking on repaired 1.2- 

millimeter fuselage skin areas on 

fuselage sections 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, and 

17 at external doubler repairs. 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 940 

airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it will take 

about 2 work-hours per product to 

comply with the basic requirements of 

this AD. 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 $159,800, or $170 per 

product. 

We have received no definitive data 

that would enable us to provide cost 

estimates for the on-condition actions 

specified in this AD. 

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. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
38900 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 15, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

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): 

2016–12–04 Airbus: Amendment 39–18553. 

Docket No. FAA–2015–3635; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–NM–037–AD. 

(a) Effective Date 

This AD becomes effective July 20, 2016. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes 

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

of this AD, certificated in any category, all 

manufacturer serial numbers. 

(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 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by an evaluation by 

the design approval holder (DAH) indicating 

that certain structural repair manual (SRM) 

inspection requirements for the fuselage skin 

repairs are insufficient to detect cracks. We 

are issuing this AD to detect and correct 

fatigue cracking of the fuselage skin, which 

could result in reduced structural integrity of 

the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Inspection To Determine Repair Areas 

At the applicable time specified in 

paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD: Do an 

inspection to determine whether any fuselage 

external skin (doubler) repairs have been 

accomplished on fuselage sections 11, 12, 13, 

14, 16, and 17 with a skin thickness of 1.2 

millimeters. A review of airplane 

maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of 

this inspection if the identification of 

applicable repairs can be conclusively 

determined from that review. 

(1) For Model A319, A320, and A321 series 

airplanes: Except as specified in paragraphs 

(h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD, at the applicable 

time specified in paragraphs 4.1.1.b. and 

4.1.1.c. of the ‘‘Accomplishment Timescale’’ 

of Airbus Alert Operators Transmission 

(AOT) A53N007–14, dated July 22, 2014, or 

within 350 flight cycles after the effective 

date of this AD, whichever occurs later. 

(2) For Model A318 series airplanes: 

Except as specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and 

(h)(2) of this AD, at the Model A319 airplane 

time specified in paragraphs 4.1.1.b. and 

4.1.1.c. of the ‘‘Accomplishment Timescale’’ 

of Airbus AOT A53N007–14, dated July 22, 

2014, or within 350 flight cycles after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 

later. 

(h) Exceptions to Service Information 

(1) Where paragraphs 4.1.1.b. and 4.1.1.c. 

of the ‘‘Accomplishment Timescale’’ of 

Airbus AOT A53N007–14, dated July 22, 

2014, specify ‘‘FC,’’ this AD specifies ‘‘flight 

cycles.’’ 

(2) Where paragraphs 4.1.1.b. and 4.1.1.c. 

of the ‘‘Accomplishment Timescale’’ of 

Airbus AOT A53N007–14, dated July 22, 

2014, specify ‘‘from AOT issuance,’’ this AD 

specifies ‘‘as of the effective date of this AD.’’ 

(i) Inspection for Cracking 

If, during the inspection required by 

paragraph (g) of this AD, it is determined that 

any fuselage external skin (doubler) repair 

has been accomplished on fuselage section 

11, 12, 13, 14, 16, or 17: At the applicable 

time specified paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of 

this AD, do an external ultrasonic inspection 

or an internal low frequency eddy current 

(LFEC) inspection for cracking of all of the 

repaired 1.2-millimeter (mm) fuselage skin 

areas, in accordance with the instructions 

specified in paragraph 4.2.2, ‘‘Inspection 

Requirements,’’ of Airbus AOT A53N007–14, 

dated July 22, 2014, except as provided by 

paragraph (j) of this AD. 

(j) Optional Inspection for Cracking 

As an optional method of compliance to 

the ultrasonic inspection or LFEC inspection 

required by paragraph (i) of this AD: Do a 

high frequency eddy current (HFEC) 

inspection for cracking in the cut-out 

surrounding the fastener area, at and in front 

(approximately 10–15 millimeters) of the 

fastener row, after doubler removal and 

before any new extended doubler 

installation, 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). 

(k) Optional Repetitive Inspections 

In lieu of doing the inspection required by 

paragraph (i) of this AD: Within the 

applicable compliance time specified in 

paragraph 4.1.1, ‘‘Accomplishment 

Timescale,’’ of Airbus AOT A53N007–14, 

dated July 22, 2014, after accomplishing the 

inspections required by paragraph (g) of this 

AD, do a detailed inspection or HFEC 

inspection and repeat the inspection 

thereafter within the applicable compliance 

times specified in paragraph 4.1.1, 

‘‘Accomplishment Timescale,’’ of Airbus 

AOT A53N007–14, dated July 22, 2014. The 

inspections must be done in accordance with 

the instructions of paragraph 4.2.2, 

‘‘Inspection Requirements,’’ of Airbus AOT 

A53N007–14, dated July 22, 2014. For Model 

A318 series airplanes, use the applicable 

compliance times and instructions specified 

in Airbus AOT A53N007–14, dated July 22, 

2014, that are specified for Model A319 

series airplanes. 

(l) Repair 

If any crack is found during any inspection 

required by paragraph (i), (j), or (k) of this 

AD: Before further flight, repair the cracking, 

in accordance with the instructions of 

paragraph 4.2.3, ‘‘Findings,’’ of Airbus AOT 

A53N007–14, dated July 22, 2014, except 

where Airbus AOT A53N007–14, dated July 

22, 2014, specifies to contact Airbus for a 

repair design approval sheet or for further 

instructions, this AD requires repair using a 

method approved by the Manager, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the EASA; or 

Airbus’s EASA DOA. 

(m) FAA-Approved Maintenance or 

Inspection Program Revision 

Concurrently with the accomplishment of 

any repair required by paragraph (l) of this 

AD, revise the post-repair inspection 

threshold(s) in the applicable FAA-approved 

maintenance program or inspection program, 

as applicable, in accordance with the 

instructions specified in paragraph 4.1.1, 

‘‘Accomplishment Timescale,’’ of Airbus 

AOT A53N007–14, dated July 22, 2014; 

except for Model A318 series airplanes use 

the instructions specified for Model A319 

series airplanes. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 15, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 38901 

(n) 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 EASA; or Airbus’s EASA DOA. If 

approved by the DOA, the approval must 

include the DOA-authorized signature. 

(o) Related Information 

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2015–0036R1, dated 

March 31, 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– 

2015–3635. 

(p) 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 

A53N007–14, dated July 22, 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 May 31, 

2016. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2016–13741 Filed 6–14–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2016–7057; Directorate 

Identifier 2016–CE–017–AD; Amendment 

39–18557; AD 2016–12–08] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; GROB 

Aircraft AG Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for GROB 

Aircraft AG Model G115EG airplanes. 

This AD results from mandatory 

continuing airworthiness information 

(MCAI) issued by the aviation authority 

of another country to identify and 

correct an unsafe condition on an 

aviation product. The MCAI describes 

the unsafe condition as cracks in the 

bonded joint of the rear horizontal 

stabilizer frame. We are issuing this AD 

to require actions to address the unsafe 

condition on these products. 

DATES: This AD is effective July 20, 

2016. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in the AD 

as of July 20, 2016. 

We must receive comments on this 

AD by August 1, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this AD, contact GROB Aircraft AG, 

Product Support, Lettenbachstrasse 9, 

D–86874 Tussenhausen-Mattsies, 

Germany, telephone: + 49 (0) 8268–998– 

105; fax: + 49 (0) 8268–998–200; email: 

productsupport@grob-aircraft.com; 

Internet: grob-aircraft.com. You may 

review copies of the referenced service 

information at the 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 

locating Docket No. FAA–2016–7057. 

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– 

7057; 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 in the ADDRESSES section. 

Comments will be available in the AD 

docket shortly after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karl 

Schletzbaum, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, 

Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, 

Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 

telephone: (816) 329–4123; fax: (816) 

329–4090; email: karl.schletzbaum@

faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued EASA AD No.: 

2016–0091, dated May 16, 2016 

(referred to after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to 

correct an unsafe condition for the 

specified products. The MCAI states: 

Cracks were found in the bonded joint of 

the rear horizontal stabiliser frame of G 115E 

aeroplanes. 

This condition, if not detected and 

corrected, may lead to crack propagation into 

primary structural elements, with 

detrimental effect on the structural integrity 

of the aeroplane. 

To address this potential unsafe condition, 

GROB issued Service Bulletin (SB) 

MSB1078–200 (hereafter referred to as ‘‘the 

SB’’ in this AD) to provide instructions for 

inspections and corrective action. 

For the reason described above, this AD 

requires repetitive inspections of the rear 

horizontal stabilizer frame and modification 

of the affected structure. 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES