57630 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 180 / Friday, September 16, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–1045; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NM–101–AD; Amendment 

39–16809; AD 2011–19–04] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model 

A318, A319, A320, and A321 Series 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are superseding an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD) 

that applies to the products listed above. 

This AD results from mandatory 

continuing airworthiness information 

(MCAI) originated by an aviation 

authority of another country to identify 

and correct an unsafe condition on an 

aviation product. The MCAI describes 

the unsafe condition as: 

One case of elevator servo-control 

disconnection has been experienced on an 

aeroplane of the A320 family. Investigation 

has revealed that the failure occurred at the 

servo-control rod eye-end. 

Further to this finding, additional 

inspections have revealed cracking at the 

same location on a number of other servocontrol rod eye-ends. In several cases, both 

actuators of the same elevator surface were 

affected. The root cause of the cracking has 

not yet been determined and tests are 

ongoing. 

A dual servo-control disconnection on the 

same elevator could result in an uncontrolled 

surface, the elevator surface being neither 

actuated nor damped, which could lead to 

reduced control of the aeroplane. 

* * * * * 

We are issuing this AD to require 

actions to correct the unsafe condition 

on these products. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

October 21, 2011. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in this AD 

as of October 21, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in person at the 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Docket Operations, M–30, West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington 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 to include an AD that would 

apply to the specified products. That 

NPRM was published in the Federal 

Register on November 8, 2010 (75 FR 

68548), and proposed to supersede AD 

2009–17–04, Amendment 39–15995 (74 

FR 41611, August 18, 2009). That NPRM 

proposed to correct an unsafe condition 

for the specified products. The MCAI 

states: 

One case of elevator servo-control 

disconnection has been experienced on an 

aeroplane of the A320 family. Investigation 

has revealed that the failure occurred at the 

servo-control rod eye-end. 

Further to this finding, additional 

inspections have revealed cracking at the 

same location on a number of other servocontrol rod eye-ends. In several cases, both 

actuators of the same elevator surface were 

affected. The root cause of the cracking has 

not yet been determined and tests are 

ongoing. 

A dual servo-control disconnection on the 

same elevator could result in an uncontrolled 

surface, the elevator surface being neither 

actuated nor damped, which could lead to 

reduced control of the aeroplane. 

To address this unsafe condition, EASA 

[The European Aviation Safety Agency] AD 

2008–0149 [which corresponds to FAA AD 

2009–17–04] was issued to require a one-time 

inspection of the elevator servo-control rod 

eye-ends for aeroplanes which have 

accumulated more than 10,000 total FlightCycles (FC) since aeroplane first flight and, 

in case of findings, the accomplishment of 

corrective actions. As a result of this onetime inspection campaign, a significant 

number of rod eye-ends have been found 

cracked. In addition, some cracks have been 

reported on rod eye-ends that had not yet 

accumulated the 10,000 FC of the established 

threshold. 

For the reason described above, this 

[EASA] AD partially retains the initial 

inspection requirement of EASA AD 2008– 

0149, which is superseded, reduces the 

compliance time of the initial inspections 

and introduces a repetitive inspection 

program. 

The corrective actions include 

replacing any cracked rod eye-end with 

a serviceable unit and re-adjusting the 

elevator servo-control. You may obtain 

further information by examining the 

MCAI in the AD docket. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. The 

following presents the comments 

received on the proposal and the FAA’s 

response to each comment. 

Support for NPRM 

US Airways stated that the NPRM (75 

FR 68548, November 8, 2010) will help 

prevent a possible dual servo control 

disconnection on the same elevator, 

which would result in an uncontrolled 

surface. 

Request To Change Compliance Time 

Delta Air Lines (Delta) recommended 

that paragraph (g) of the NPRM (75 FR 

68548, November 8, 2010) be simplified 

to accept the compliance specified in 

Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 

A320–27A1186, Revision 05, dated 

March 10, 2010. Delta stated that the 

current NPRM wording is difficult to 

correlate between service bulletin 

instructions and the wording of the AD, 

and as written, it appears the operators 

are responsible for compliance to both 

the FAA AD wording and the service 

bulletin wording. Delta also stated that 

the FAA AD wording does not give 

acceptance to the compliance times for 

OPTION 2 specified in the tables on 

pages 22 and 23 of Airbus Mandatory 

Service Bulletin A320–27A186, 

Revision 05, dated March 10, 2010. 

Delta stated it has used both options 

that are allowed under Airbus All 

Operators Telex (AOT) A320–27A1186 

Revision 04, dated April 3, 2009. 

We disagree with the request to revise 

the compliance time specified in 

paragraph (g) of this AD. This AD allows 

incorporation of Task 271186–832–803– 

001, referenced as OPTION 2 in Airbus 

Mandatory Service Bulletin A320– 

27A1186, Revision 05, dated March 10, 

2010, as a method for doing the 

inspection of inboard and outboard 

servo control rod eye-ends required by 

this AD; however, the task must be done 

at the compliance time mandated in this 

AD. In developing an appropriate 

compliance time for paragraph (g) of 

this AD, we considered the safety issues 

as well as the recommendations of 

EASA. Delta agreed with the FAA 

position during a teleconference on June 

17, 2011. We have not changed the AD 

in this regard. 

Request To Use New Revision of 

Service Information 

Delta requested that we allow Airbus 

Mandatory Service Bulletin A320– 

27A1186, Revision 06, dated December 

14, 2010, as an acceptable means of 

compliance with the NPRM (75 FR 

68548, November 8, 2010). 

We agree. In addition, we have 

received Airbus Mandatory Service 

Bulletin A320–27A1186, Revision 07, 

dated March 2, 2011. We have revised 

paragraphs (g), (h), (j), and (m), in this 

final rule to reference Airbus Mandatory 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 180 / Friday, September 16, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 57631 

Service Bulletin A320–27A1186, 

Revision 07, dated March 2, 2011. We 

have also added table 2 of this AD to 

provide credit for certain actions done 

before the effective date of this AD in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Mandatory 

Service Bulletin A320–27A1186, 

Revision 05, dated March 10, 2010, 

which was cited in the NPRM (75 FR 

68548, November 8, 2010) as the 

appropriate source of service 

information; and Airbus Mandatory 

Service Bulletin A320–27A1186, 

Revision 06, dated December 14, 2010. 

Request To Provide Clearer Service 

Information or Allow Deviation From 

the Service Information Without an 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) Request 

Delta stated that Airbus Mandatory 

Service Bulletin A320–27A1186, 

Revision 05, dated March 10, 2010, as 

written, is confusing and difficult to 

comply with. Delta stated that it is 

poorly written for actual maintenance 

usage and it intermixes tasks that are 

accomplished on-wing with tasks that 

are performed in the shop environment. 

This makes literal compliance with 

Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 

A320–27A1186, Revision 05, dated 

March 10, 2010 (and thus the AD) 

difficult and unnecessarily places the 

operator at risk of non-compliance. To 

support its position, this commenter 

mentioned that, for example, the 

instructions in Figure A–FBEAA of 

Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 

A320–27A1186, Revision 05, dated 

March 10, 2010, for re-installing the 

crack-free rod-end using the same 

number of turns previously recorded 

when the rod-end was removed is 

meaningless as the rod-end will be 

installed on a different aircraft, and the 

number of turns most likely will be 

different in order to maintain aircraft rig 

on the new airplane. Delta wanted us to 

provide clearer language within the 

service information or allow operators 

to deviate from Airbus Mandatory 

Service Bulletin A320–27A1186, 

Revision 05, dated March 10, 2010, as 

written such that the operator can 

perform the required work without 

requesting an AMOC. 

We disagree with the request. The 

example given in Figure A–FBEAA of 

Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 

A320–27A1186, Revision 05, dated 

March 10, 2010, for re-installing the 

crack-free rod-end specifies installation 

of a spare rod eye-end using the same 

number of turns previously recorded 

when the rod eye-end was removed. 

Therefore recording and re-installing 

using the same number of turns is 

necessary. We conclude that the service 

information is adequate and we have 

not changed this AD in this regard. 

However, under the provisions of 

paragraph (l) of this AD, we will 

consider requests for approval of an 

AMOC if sufficient data are submitted to 

substantiate that a deviation from the 

service information would provide an 

acceptable level of safety. 

Requests To Remove Reporting 

Requirements 

Delta, US Airways, and Airbus 

request the removal of the reporting 

requirement of paragraph (g)(3) of the 

NPRM (75 FR 68548, November 8, 2010) 

because Airbus has announced that it is 

no longer using the reported data to 

form a technical solution. 

Because Airbus no longer needs the 

reported data to form a technical 

solution, we agree it is not necessary for 

operators to submit a report of 

inspection findings. We have removed 

paragraphs (g)(3) and (l)(3) of this AD. 

Request To Change Servo Repetitive 

Inspection Initial Compliance Time 

Delta requested we add a statement 

regarding the servos (and the associated 

rod-end) that are replaced for failure 

prior to the 10,000 flight-cycle threshold 

be placed on the repetitive 5,000 flightcycle period rather than the ‘‘first’’ 

inspection period after the aircraft 

reached the 10,000 flight-cycle initial 

level. Delta stated that the NPRM (75 FR 

68548, November 8, 2010) would 

require the inspection be delayed for 

aircraft under/less than the 10,000 

flight-cycle threshold. Delta stated as 

the servo ‘‘mean time between removals’’ 

is currently about 11,000 flight hours, it 

makes little sense to inspect a 

replacement rod-end only a few 

hundred or 1,000 flight cycles after 

installation. Delta stated it makes sense 

to apply the 5,000 flight-cycle limit to 

the rod-end on the replaced servo. 

We disagree. If the servos are replaced 

before accumulating 10,000 total 

airplane flight cycles as of September 

22, 2009 (the effective date of AD 2009– 

17–04, Amendment 39–15995 (74 FR 

41611, August 18, 2009)), then the first 

inspection in accordance with 

paragraph (g)(2) of this AD is required 

at the later of the times specified in 

paragraphs (g)(2)(ii)(A) and (g)(2)(ii)(B), 

i.e., before the airplane accumulates 

7,500 total flight cycles, or within 40 

months after the effective date of this 

AD, whichever occurs later, but no later 

than 13,000 total flight cycles on the 

airplane, followed by repeat inspection 

in accordance with paragraph (h) of this 

AD. Therefore, no foreseeable scenario 

can necessitate an inspection after a few 

hundred or 1,000 airplane flight cycles. 

We have not changed this AD in this 

regard. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the relevant data, 

considered the comments received, and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting the AD 

with the changes described previously. 

We also determined that these changes 

will not increase the economic burden 

on any operator or increase the scope of 

the AD. 

Differences Between This AD and the 

MCAI or Service Information 

We have reviewed the MCAI and 

related service information and, in 

general, agree with their substance. But 

we might have found it necessary to use 

different words from those in the MCAI 

to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. 

operators and is enforceable. In making 

these changes, we do not intend to differ 

substantively from the information 

provided in the MCAI and related 

service information. 

We might also have required different 

actions in this AD from those in the 

MCAI in order to follow our FAA 

policies. Any such differences are 

highlighted in a Note within the AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD will affect 

about 770 products of U.S. registry. 

The actions that are required by AD 

2009–17–04, Amendment 39–15995 (74 

FR 41611, August 18, 2009), and 

retained in this AD, take about 13 workhours per product, at an average labor 

rate of $85 per work-hour. Based on 

these figures, the estimated cost of the 

currently required actions is $1,105 per 

product. 

We estimate that it will take about 12 

work-hours per product to comply with 

the new basic requirements of this AD. 

The average labor rate is $85 per workhour. Based on these figures, we 

estimate the cost of these AD 

requirements to the U.S. operators to be 

$785,400, or $1,020 per product. 

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 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
57632 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 180 / Friday, September 16, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

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 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); and 

3. 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. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this AD and placed it in the AD docket. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains the NPRM (75 FR 68548, 

November 8, 2010), 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. Comments will be available in 

the AD docket shortly after receipt. 

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 

removing Amendment 39–15995 (74 FR 

41611, August 18, 2009) and adding the 

following new AD: 

2011–19–04 Airbus: Amendment 39–16809. 

Docket No. FAA–2010–1045; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NM–101–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This airworthiness directive (AD) 

becomes effective October 21, 2011. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This AD supersedes AD 2009–17–04, 

Amendment 39–15995 (74 FR 41611, August 

18, 2009). 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A318– 

111, –112, –121, and –122 airplanes; Model 

A319–111, –112, –113, –114, –115, –131, 

–132, and –133 airplanes; Model A320–111, 

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

airplanes; and Model A321–111, –112, –131, 

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

certificated in any category; all manufacturer 

serial numbers. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 27: Flight controls. 

Reason 

(e) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states: 

One case of elevator servo-control 

disconnection has been experienced on an 

aeroplane of the A320 family. Investigation 

has revealed that the failure occurred at the 

servo-control rod eye-end. 

Further to this finding, additional 

inspections have revealed cracking at the 

same location on a number of other servocontrol rod eye-ends. In several cases, both 

actuators of the same elevator surface were 

affected. The root cause of the cracking has 

not yet been determined and tests are 

ongoing. 

A dual servo-control disconnection on the 

same elevator could result in an uncontrolled 

surface, the elevator surface being neither 

actuated nor damped, which could lead to 

reduced control of the aeroplane. 

* * * * * 

Compliance 

(f) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Restatement of Requirements of AD 2009– 

17–04, Amendment 39–15995 (74 FR 41611, 

August 18, 2009), With Reduced and Revised 

Compliance Times and Revised Service 

Information: 

(g) Unless already done, do the following 

actions. 

(1) At the applicable times specified in 

paragraphs (g)(1)(i) and (g)(1)(ii) of this AD: 

Inspect both the left-hand and right-hand 

inboard elevator servo-control rod eye-ends 

for cracking, in accordance with the 

instructions of Airbus All Operators Telex 

(AOT) A320–27A1186, Revision 04, dated 

April 3, 2009; or the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Mandatory Service 

Bulletin A320–27A1186, Revision 07, dated 

March 2, 2011. As of the effective date of this 

AD, use Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 

A320–27A1186, Revision 07, dated March 2, 

2011. 

(i) For airplanes that have accumulated 

10,000 total flight cycles or more as of 

September 22, 2009 (the effective date of AD 

2009–17–04, Amendment 39–15995 (74 FR 

41611, August 18, 2009)): At the later of the 

times specified in paragraphs (g)(1)(i)(A) and 

(g)(1)(i)(B) of this AD. 

(A) Within 1,500 flight cycles after 

September 22, 2009. 

(B) Within 1,500 flight cycles after 

accumulating 10,000 total flight cycles since 

first flight of the airplane. 

(ii) For airplanes that have accumulated 

less than 10,000 total flight cycles as of 

September 22, 2009: At the later of the times 

specified in paragraphs (g)(1)(ii)(A) and 

(g)(1)(ii)(B) of this AD. 

(A) Before the accumulation of 5,000 total 

flight cycles. 

(B) Within 20 months after the effective 

date of this AD but no later than before the 

accumulation of 11,500 total flight cycles. 

(2) At the applicable time specified in 

paragraphs (g)(2)(i) and (g)(2)(ii) of this AD: 

Inspect both the left-hand and right-hand 

outboard elevator servo-control rod eye-ends 

for cracking, in accordance with the 

instructions of Airbus AOT A320–27A1186, 

Revision 04, dated April 3, 2009; or the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Mandatory Service Bulletin A320–27A1186, 

Revision 07, dated March 2, 2011. As of the 

effective date of this AD, use Airbus 

Mandatory Service Bulletin A320–27A1186, 

Revision 07, dated March 2, 2011. 

(i) For airplanes that have accumulated 

10,000 total flight cycles or more as of 

September 22, 2009: At the later of the times 

specified in paragraphs (g)(2)(i)(A) and 

(g)(2)(i)(B) of this AD. 

(A) Within 3,000 flight cycles after 

September 22, 2009. 

(B) Within 3,000 flight cycles after 

accumulating 10,000 total flight cycles since 

first flight of the airplane. 

(ii) For airplanes that have accumulated 

less than 10,000 total flight cycles as of 

September 22, 2009: At the later of the times 

specified in paragraphs (g)(2)(ii)(A) and 

(g)(2)(ii)(B) of this AD. 

(A) Before the accumulation of 7,500 total 

flight cycles. 

(B) Within 40 months after the effective 

date of this AD but no later than before the 

accumulation of 13,000 total flight cycles. 

New Requirements of This AD: 

Repetitive Inspections and Corrective Action 

(h) Repeat the inspections of the left-hand 

and right-hand inboard and outboard elevator 

servo-control rod eye-ends for cracking as 

required by paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of 

this AD at the later of the times specified in 

paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD. Repeat 

the inspections thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 5,000 flight cycles. 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 180 / Friday, September 16, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 57633 

(1) Within 5,000 flight cycles after the last 

inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) or 

(g)(2) of this AD as applicable. 

(2) Within 6 months after the effective date 

of this AD. 

(i) If any cracking is found during any 

inspection required by this AD, before further 

flight, accomplish all applicable corrective 

actions, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions and figures of 

Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A320– 

27A1186, Revision 07, dated March 2, 2011. 

Parts Installation 

(j) As of the effective date of this AD, no 

person may install on any airplane an 

elevator servo-control rod eye-end unless it is 

new or has been inspected in accordance 

with the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A320– 

27A1186, Revision 07, dated March 2, 2011, 

with no crack findings. 

Credit for Actions Accomplished in 

Accordance With Previous Service 

Information 

(k) Actions done before the effective date 

of this AD in accordance with the service 

information specified in table 1 of this AD 

are acceptable for compliance with the 

corresponding requirements of paragraphs 

(g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD. Actions done 

before the effective date of this AD in 

accordance with the service information 

specified in table 2 of this AD are acceptable 

for compliance with the corresponding 

requirements of paragraph (h) of this AD. 

TABLE 1—CREDIT SERVICE INFORMATION FOR PARAGRAPH (G) OF THIS AD 

Airbus AOT— Revision— Dated— 

A320-27A1186 ...................................................................... Original ................................................................................. June 23, 2008. 

A320-27A1186 ...................................................................... 01 ......................................................................................... August 11, 2008. 

A320-27A1186 ...................................................................... 02 ......................................................................................... March 30, 2009. 

A320-27A1186 ...................................................................... 03 ......................................................................................... April 1, 2009. 

A320-27A1186 ...................................................................... 04 ......................................................................................... April 3, 2009. 

TABLE 2—CREDIT SERVICE INFORMATION FOR PARAGRAPH (H) OF THIS AD 

Airbus Service Bulletin— Revision— Dated— 

A320-27A1186 ...................................................................... 05 ......................................................................................... March 10, 2010. 

A320-27A1186 ...................................................................... 06 ......................................................................................... December 14, 2010. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: No 

differences. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(l) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, International 

Branch, 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, Washington 98057– 

3356; telephone (425) 227–1405; fax (425) 

227–1149. Information may be e-mailed 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. AMOCs approved previously in 

accordance with AD 2009–17–04, 

Amendment 39–15995 (74 FR 41611, August 

18, 2009), are approved as AMOCs for the 

corresponding provisions of this AD. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any 

requirement in this AD to obtain corrective 

actions from a manufacturer or other source, 

use these actions if they are FAA-approved. 

Corrective actions are considered FAAapproved if they are approved by the State 

of Design Authority (or their delegated 

agent). You are required to assure the product 

is airworthy before it is returned to service. 

Related Information 

(m) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness 

Directive 2010–0046, dated March 19, 2010; 

and Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 

A320–27A1186, Revision 07, dated March 2, 

2011; for related information. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(n) You must use Airbus Mandatory 

Service Bulletin A320–27A1186, Revision 07, 

including Appendices 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, 

dated March 2, 2011, to do the actions 

required by this AD, unless the AD specifies 

otherwise. 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference of 

this service information under 5 U.S.C. 

552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Airbus, Airworthiness 

Office—EAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 

31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 

5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; e-mail: 

account.airworth-eas@airbus.com; Internet 

http://www.airbus.com. 

(3) You may review copies of the service 

information at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

425–227–1221. 

(4) You may also review copies of the 

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/

code_of_federal_regulations/

ibr_locations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 7, 2011. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–23468 Filed 9–15–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–0515; Airspace 

Docket No. 11–ANM–11] 

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Miles 

City, MT 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action modifies Class E 

airspace at Miles City, MT, to 

accommodate aircraft using a new Area 

Navigation (RNAV) Global Positioning 

System (GPS) standard instrument 

approach procedures at Frank Wiley 

Field. Additionally, the geographic 

coordinates for Frank Wiley Field are 

being adjusted. This improves the safety 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES