Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 12409 

the life limit established by the manufacturer 

for that generator. 

(k) Credit for Previous Actions 

This paragraph provides credit for the 

applicable actions required by paragraphs (g), 

(h), and (i) of this AD, if those actions were 

performed before the effective date of this AD 

using Airbus AOT A35L007–14, dated 

December 18, 2014. 

(l) Parts Installation Limitation 

As of the effective date of this AD, no 

person may install a passenger chemical 

oxygen generator on any airplane, unless the 

passenger chemical oxygen generator is 

determined to be a serviceable unit, as 

defined in paragraph (j) of this AD. 

(m) Other FAA AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, International 

Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, FAA, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your 

request to your principal inspector or local 

Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: 

Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; 

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

Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-116- 

AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. Before using 

any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate 

principal inspector, or lacking a principal 

inspector, the manager of the local flight 

standards district office/certificate holding 

district office. The AMOC approval letter 

must specifically reference this AD. 

(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any 

requirement in this AD to obtain corrective 

actions from a manufacturer, the action must 

be accomplished using a method approved 

by the Manager, International Branch, ANM– 

116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or 

the 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. 

(n) Related Information 

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2015–0119, dated 

June 24, 2015, correction January 12, 2016, 

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–2015–3149. 

(2) Service information identified in this 

AD that is not incorporated by reference is 

available at the addresses specified in 

paragraphs (o)(3) and (o)(5) of this AD. 

(o) 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 

(AOT) A35L007–14, Revision 01, June 17, 

2015; including Appendix A, Revision 01, 

dated June 17, 2015. The revision date is not 

shown on Appendix A. 

(ii) B/E Aerospace Service Bulletin 

117042–35–001, dated December 10, 2014. 

(3) For Airbus service information 

identified in this AD, contact Airbus SAS, 

Airworthiness Office—EAL, 1 Rond Point 

Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, 

France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 

5 61 93 45 80; email airworthiness.A330- 

A340@airbus.com; Internet http://

www.airbus.com. 

(4) For B/E Aerospace service information 

identified in this AD, contact B/E Aerospace 

Inc., 10800 Pflumm Road, Lenexa, KS 66215; 

telephone 913–338–9800; fax 913–469–8419; 

Internet http://beaerospace.com/home/global

support. 

(5) 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. 

(6) 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 February 

19, 2016. 

Dorr M. Anderson, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2016–04538 Filed 3–8–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–0243; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–NM–114–AD; Amendment 

39–18423; AD 2016–05–05] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for all 

Airbus Model A300 series airplanes; 

Model A300 B4–600, B4–600R, and F4– 

600R series airplanes, and A300 C4– 

605R Variant F airplanes (collectively 

called Model A300–600 series 

airplanes); and Model A310 series 

airplanes. This AD was prompted by 

reports of cracked aluminum support 

struts of the trimmable horizontal 

stabilizer (THS) caused by stress 

corrosion. This AD requires inspections 

to identify the part number of each 

support strut, repetitive inspections for 

cracking of the THS support strut ends, 

installation of reinforcing clamps on 

strut ends, and replacement of support 

struts, if necessary. We are issuing this 

AD to detect and correct cracked THS 

support struts, which could lead to the 

rupture of all four support struts making 

the remaining structure unable to carry 

limit loads, which could result in loss 

of the THS and reduced control of the 

airplane. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective April 

13, 2016. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in this AD 

as of April 13, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov/#!docket

Detail;D=FAA-2015-0243 or in person at 

the Docket Management Facility, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC. 

For service information identified in 

this final rule, contact Airbus SAS, 

Airworthiness Office—EAW, 1 Rond 

Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac 

Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 

96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email 

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– 

0243. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan 

Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; telephone 425–227–2125; 

fax 425–227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 by adding an AD that would 

apply to all Airbus Model A300 series 


Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
12410 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

airplanes; Model A300 B4–600, B4– 

600R, and F4–600R series airplanes, and 

A300 C4–605R Variant F airplanes 

(collectively called Model A300–600 

series airplanes); and Model A310 series 

airplanes. The NPRM published in the 

Federal Register on February 18, 2015 

(80 FR 8571). 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness 

Directive 2014–0164, dated July 11, 

2014 (referred to after this as the 

Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness 

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

an unsafe condition for all Airbus 

Model A300 series airplanes; Model 

A300 B4–600, B4–600R, and F4–600R 

series airplanes, and A300 C4–605R 

Variant F airplanes (collectively called 

Model A300–600 series airplanes); and 

Model A310 series airplanes. The MCAI 

states: 

During scheduled maintenance, several 

Trimmable Horizontal Stabilizer (THS) 

support struts were found cracked at the strut 

ends. The THS is supported and articulated 

at frame (FR) 91 in the tail cone. Lateral 

movement is prevented by four diagonal 

support struts. 

Investigations revealed that the cracks were 

caused by stress corrosion and propagated 

from the inside to the outside of the strut. 

This condition, if not detected and 

corrected, could lead to the rupture of all 

four THS support struts at FR91, which 

would make the remaining structure unable 

to carry limit loads, potentially resulting in 

loss of the Horizontal Tail Plane. 

To address this unsafe condition, EASA 

issued AD 2014–0121 [http://

ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2014-0121] to require 

repetitive High Frequency Eddy Current 

(HFEC) inspections of the THS support strut 

ends, installation of reinforcing clamps on 

strut ends and, depending on findings, 

replacement of damaged support struts. 

Installation of reinforcing clamps on strut 

ends is considered a temporary solution 

pending introduction of a re-designed 

support strut. 

Since that [EASA] AD was issued, it was 

discovered that the [EASA] AD appeared to 

also require HFEC inspections of steel struts, 

which are not prone to cracking. The unsafe 

condition exists only on support struts made 

of aluminum, which were introduced 

through Airbus modification (mod) 06101, 

but may also have been installed in service 

as replacement parts on aeroplanes in premod 06101 configuration. 

For the reason described above, this 

[EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA 

AD 2014–0121, which is superseded, and 

clarifies the need for an initial identification 

of the support struts installed on aeroplanes 

in pre-mod 06101 configuration. The related 

Airbus Service Bulletins (SB) remain 

unchanged. 

You may examine the MCAI in the 

AD docket on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov/#!document

Detail;D=FAA-2015-0243-0002. 

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 (80 FR 8571, 

February 18, 2015) (‘‘the NPRM’’) and 

the FAA’s response to each comment. 

Request To Remove Repetitive 

Inspections From the NPRM 

FedEx stated that Airbus Service 

Bulletin A300–53–6172, dated February 

14, 2014 and Airbus Service Bulletin 

A310–53–2136, dated February 14, 

2014, require an application of sealant 

and installation of a clamp over the 

affected area. FedEx stated periodic reinspections for cracking of the THS 

support strut ends would induce further 

damage since it requires removal of the 

reinforcing clamps and sealant before 

accomplishing the HFEC inspection. 

We infer from the commenter’s 

statement that FedEx requests removal 

of the repetitive inspection requirement 

from the proposed AD. We disagree 

because if operators follow established 

procedures, removal of the sealant 

should not introduce damage to the 

support struts installed on the THS. We 

have not changed this final rule in this 

regard. 

Request To Remove Installation 

Requirement From the NPRM 

FedEx and United Parcel Service 

(UPS) stated they disagree with the 

requirement to install the clamping. 

Both commenters claimed that installing 

reinforcing clamps will not resolve any 

stress mitigation and crack progression. 

UPS stated that the NPRM proposed to 

require repair prior to further flight, if 

cracking is identified. FedEx and UPS 

stated that repetitive inspections 

provide a sufficient level of safety on 

the struts and that the installation of 

reinforcement clamps does not enhance 

the support strut installation, but adds 

an additional cost without a 

corresponding safety benefit. FedEx and 

UPS requested removal of the clamp 

installation requirement specified by 

paragraphs (i) and (j) of the proposed 

AD. 

We disagree to remove the 

requirement to install clamping from 

paragraphs (i) and (j) of this AD. The 

clamping reduces the circumferential 

stresses in the rod-ends and supports 

the circular shape of the rod ends. As a 

result, stress corrosion of the rod is 

stopped, or partially reduced, due to the 

lower circumferential stresses. We have 

not changed this final rule in this 

regard. 

Request To Remove Certain References 

From Paragraph (l) of the NPRM 

UPS requested that we remove 

reference to paragraphs (i)(1) through 

(i)(3) of the proposed AD from 

paragraph (l) of the proposed AD. UPS 

stated the service bulletins identified in 

paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(3) of the 

proposed AD do not include an 

inspection form or inspection 

requirements within the 

accomplishment instructions of the 

service information and therefore these 

documents should not be referenced in 

paragraph (l) of the proposed AD, which 

specifies reporting inspection results. 

We agree with the request because 

paragraph (l) of this AD only requires 

the reporting of certain inspections 

results. Paragraph (i) of this AD requires 

an installation of reinforcing clamps. 

We have revised paragraph (l) of this AD 

to remove the reference to paragraphs 

(i)(1) through (i)(3) of this AD. 

We have also revised paragraph (l) of 

this AD by removing a reference to 

paragraph (h) of this AD in order to 

match the reporting requirement 

specified in the MCAI. Paragraph (l) of 

the proposed AD refers to inspections 

required by both paragraphs (g) and (h) 

of the proposed AD. However, reporting 

is only required for inspections required 

by paragraph (g) of this AD. 

Request To Revise Costs of Compliance 

FedEx requested that we revise the 

Costs of Compliance paragraph of the 

proposed AD to accurately reflect the 

cost of replacing cracked struts. FedEx 

stated it agrees that struts that are 

determined to be cracked should be 

replaced but finds that this adds an 

additional financial burden to the 

airlines. FedEx stated there are no 

warranty provisions stated in the 

manufacturer’s service information to 

mitigate the additional expense of 

replacing struts, nor is it accounted for 

in the NPRM. 

We disagree because the conditional 

cost of replacing the struts was 

accounted for in the NPRM by using the 

standard part cost for non-avionics parts 

of $10,000 and an estimate that any 

necessary follow-on actions would take 

about 15 work-hours. Further, we do not 

control warranty coverage for affected 

individuals. We have not changed this 

final rule in this regard. 

Request To Include Installation of Steel 

Struts as Terminating Action 

FedEx requested that we revise the 

NPRM to state that the installation of 

steel struts constitutes a terminating 


Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 12411 

action for the repetitive inspections 

specified by paragraph (h) of the 

proposed AD. FedEx noted that Airbus 

may be developing a solution that 

would terminate the repetitive 

inspections, but as of yet, Airbus has not 

published any service information that 

would eliminate the need for the 

repetitive inspections specified by 

paragraph (h) of the proposed AD. 

We disagree to change this final rule 

because terminating action is not 

available at this time. When terminating 

action becomes available, the FAA may 

consider installation of the new design 

struts as an alternative method of 

compliance (AMOC) to this AD once the 

manufacturer’s design solution is 

released. We have not changed this final 

rule in this regard. 

Request To Extend the Repetitive 

Inspection Interval 

UPS requested that we extend the 

repetitive inspection interval required 

by paragraph (h) of the proposed AD. 

UPS stated that a manufacturer’s 

investigation identified the cracking to 

be the result of inter-granular stress 

corrosion and that for cracking to 

develop, three factors need to be 

present: a material flaw at the granular 

level, an environmental condition for 

corrosion to develop, and a tensile load 

to induce damage development/

propagation at the material flaw. UPS 

added that the area is already protected 

with anti-corrosion materials. UPS 

stated that based on the low occurrence 

of cracking, the propagation properties 

of cracking due to stress corrosion, and 

the age of the fleet, fleet airworthiness 

can be maintained using all three 

operational parameters—flight hours, 

flight cycles, and calendar time. UPS 

requested that we revise the repetitive 

inspection interval from 24 months to 

5,000 flight hours, 2,500 flight cycles, or 

36 months, whichever occurs first. 

We do not agree with the request to 

extend the repetitive inspection 

required by paragraph (h) of this AD 

because the UPS proposal is not 

supported by analysis or data. In 

developing an appropriate compliance 

time for the actions specified in 

paragraph (h) of 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 interval 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 AMOC to request an 

extension of the repetitive inspection 

interval under the provisions of 

paragraph (m)(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 final rule in 

this regard. 

Request To Delay Rule Due to Pending 

Release of New Design of Support Strut 

and Service Information 

FedEx and UPS requested that the 

release date of the NPRM be suspended 

pending Airbus’s release of a newly 

designed support strut that, if installed, 

would be terminating action for the 

repetitive inspections proposed by the 

NPRM. FedEx stated the manufacturer is 

working on service information that 

contains a terminating action for the 

repetitive inspections proposed in the 

NPRM, but as of yet, has not been 

published. UPS stated that suspending 

the release of the NPRM would prevent 

extra work for the FAA and operators. 

We disagree with delaying issuance of 

this final rule until new service 

information or a new design becomes 

available. We consider that to delay this 

AD action would be inappropriate, in 

light of the identified unsafe condition. 

When new service information or a new 

design becomes available, we may 

consider additional rulemaking. We 

may also consider new service 

information and/or installation of the 

new design struts as an AMOC to this 

AD. Operators may apply for an AMOC 

in accordance with the provisions of 

paragraph (m)(1) of this AD. We have 

not changed this final rule in this 

regard. 

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. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

Airbus has issued the following 

service information. 

• Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53– 

0394, dated February 14, 2014. This 

service information describes 

procedures for reinforcing the support 

struts of the THS at frame 91 in the 

fuselage tail section of Airbus Model 

A300 series airplanes. 

• Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53– 

0395, dated February 14, 2014. This 

service information describes 

procedures for inspecting for cracking of 

the support struts of the THS at frame 

91 in the fuselage tail section of Airbus 

Model A300 series airplanes. 

• Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53– 

6172, dated February 14, 2014. This 

service information describes 

procedures for reinforcing the support 

struts of the THS at frame 91 in the 

fuselage tail section of Airbus Model 

A300–600 series airplanes. 

• Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53– 

6174, dated February 14, 2014. This 

service information describes 

procedures for inspecting for cracking of 

the support struts of the THS at frame 

91 in the fuselage tail section of Airbus 

Model A300–600 series airplanes. 

• Airbus Service Bulletin A310–53– 

2136, dated February 14, 2014. This 

service information describes 

procedures for reinforcing the support 

struts of the THS at frame 91 in the 

fuselage tail section of Airbus Model 

A310 series airplanes. 

• Airbus Service Bulletin A310–53– 

2137, dated February 14, 2014. This 

service information describes 

procedures for inspecting for cracking of 

the support struts of the THS at frame 

91 in the fuselage tail section of Airbus 

Model A310 series airplanes. 

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 174 

airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it will take 

about 5 work-hours per product to 

comply with the basic requirements of 

this AD, and 1 work-hour per product 

for reporting. The average labor rate is 

$85 per work-hour. Required parts will 

cost about $2,100 per product. Based on 

these figures, we estimate the cost of 

this AD on U.S. operators to be 

$454,140, or $2,610 per product. 

In addition, we estimate that any 

necessary follow-on actions will take 

about 15 work-hours and require parts 

costing $10,000, for a cost of $11,275 

per product. We have no way of 

determining the number of aircraft that 

might need these actions. 

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 


Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
12412 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this AD will not 

have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD will 

not have a substantial direct effect on 

the States, on the relationship between 

the national government and the States, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that this AD: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 

3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in 

Alaska; and 

4. Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov/#!docket

Detail;D=FAA-2015-0243; or in person 

at the Docket Management Facility 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

The AD docket contains this AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Operations 

office (telephone 800–647–5527) is in 

the ADDRESSES section. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as 

follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

2016–05–05 Airbus: Amendment 39–18423. 

Docket No. FAA–2015–0243; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–NM–114–AD. 

(a) Effective Date 

This AD becomes effective April 13, 2016. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes 

specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(6) 

of this AD, certificated in any category, all 

manufacturer serial numbers. 

(1) Airbus Model A300 B2–1A, B2–1C, 

B2K–3C, B2–203, B4–2C, B4–103, and B4– 

203 airplanes. 

(2) Airbus Model A300 B4–601, B4–603, 

B4–620, and B4–622 airplanes. 

(3) Airbus Model A300 B4–605R and B4– 

622R airplanes. 

(4) Airbus Model A300 F4–605R and F4– 

622R airplanes. 

(5) Airbus Model A300 C4–605R Variant F 

airplanes. 

(6) Airbus Model A310–203, –204, –221, 

–222, –304, –322, –324, and –325 airplanes. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by reports of 

cracked aluminum support struts of the 

trimmable horizontal stabilizer (THS) caused 

by stress corrosion. We are issuing this AD 

to detect and correct cracked THS support 

struts, which could lead to the rupture of all 

four support struts making the remaining 

structure unable to carry limit loads, which 

could result in loss of the THS and reduced 

control of the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Inspection for Part Number 

For airplanes in pre-modification 06101 

configuration: Within 12 months after the 

effective date of this AD, do an inspection to 

identify the part number of each support 

strut installed on the THS at frame (FR) 91, 

in accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of the applicable service bulletin 

identified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(3) 

of this AD. A review of airplane maintenance 

records is acceptable in lieu of this 

inspection, provided those records can be 

relied upon for that purpose and the part 

number can be positively identified from that 

review. If no aluminum strut(s) having part 

number (P/N) R21449, R21449D, R21449G, or 

R21449H is found during any inspection 

required by this paragraph, no further action 

is required by this AD for that horizontal 

stabilizer, except for paragraph (l) of this AD. 

(1) For Airbus Model A300 series 

airplanes: Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53– 

0395, dated February 14, 2014. 

(2) For Airbus Model A300 B4–600, B4– 

600R, and F4–600R series airplanes, and 

A300 C4–605R Variant F airplanes 

(collectively called Model A300–600 series 

airplanes): Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53– 

6174, dated February 14, 2014. 

(3) For Airbus Model A310 series 

airplanes: Airbus Service Bulletin A310–53– 

2137, dated February 14, 2014. 

(h) Repetitive High Frequency Eddy Current 

(HFEC) Inspections 

For airplanes in post-modification 06101 

configuration; and for airplanes in premodification 06101 configuration on which 

any aluminum support strut(s) having P/N 

R21449, P/N R21449D, P/N R21449G, or P/ 

N R21449H is found: Within the applicable 

compliance times specified in paragraph 

(h)(1), (h)(2), or (h)(3) of this AD, do an HFEC 

inspection for cracking of the aluminum THS 

support strut ends at FR 91, in accordance 

with the Accomplishment Instructions of the 

applicable service bulletin identified in 

paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(3) of this AD. 

Reinforcing clamps already installed on strut 

ends must be removed before accomplishing 

the HFEC inspection and re-installed after 

the inspection, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of the 

applicable service bulletin specified in 

paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(3) of this AD. 

Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals 

not to exceed 24 months. 

(1) For airplanes having manufacturer 

serial number (MSN) 0499 through MSN 

0747 inclusive (post-mod 06101): Within 12 

months after the effective date of this AD. 

(2) For airplanes having MSN 0748 through 

MSN 0878 inclusive (post-mod 06101): 

Within 18 months after the effective date of 

this AD. 

(3) For airplanes having MSN 0001 through 

MSN 0498 inclusive (pre-mod 06101) having 

one or more aluminum struts: Within 24 

months after the effective date of this AD. 

(i) Installation of Reinforcing Clamps 

Concurrently with the initial HFEC 

inspection required by paragraph (h) of this 

AD, identify struts having P/N R21449, P/N 

R21449D, P/N R21449G, or P/N R21449H 

with no reinforcing clamps previously 

installed, and before next flight, install 

reinforcing clamps on each strut end, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of the applicable service bulletin 

specified in paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(3) of 

this AD. 

(1) For Airbus Model A300 series 

airplanes: Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53– 

0394, dated February 14, 2014. 

(2) For Airbus Model A300 B4–600, 

B4600R, and F4–600R series airplanes, and 

A300 C4–605R Variant F airplanes 

(collectively called Model A300–600 series 

airplanes): Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53– 

6172, dated February 14, 2014. 


Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 12413 

(3) For Airbus Model A310 series 

airplanes: Airbus Service Bulletin A310–53– 

2136, dated February 14, 2014. 

(j) Corrective Actions 

If, during any inspection required by 

paragraph (h) of this AD, any cracking is 

found, before further flight, replace the 

affected THS support strut(s) with 

serviceable struts and install clamps on each 

strut end, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of the 

applicable service bulletin identified in 

paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(3) of this AD. 

(k) Clarification 

Installation of reinforcing clamps as 

required by paragraph (i) of this AD, and the 

replacement of support struts and/or the 

installation of clamps as required by 

paragraph (j) of this AD, do not constitute 

terminating action for the repetitive 

inspections required by paragraph (h) of this 

AD. 

(l) Reporting 

At the applicable time specified in 

paragraphs (l)(1) and (l)(2) of this AD: After 

accomplishment of any inspection required 

by paragraph (g) of this AD, report all 

inspection results to Airbus, including no 

findings, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of the 

applicable service bulletins specified in 

paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(3) of this AD. 

(1) If the inspection was done on or after 

the effective date of this AD: Submit the 

report within 30 days after the inspection. 

(2) If the inspection was done before the 

effective date of this AD: Submit the report 

within 30 days after the effective date of this 

AD. 

(m) 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: 

Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; 

telephone 425–227–2125; fax 425–227–1149. 

Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-116- 

AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. Before using 

any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate 

principal inspector, or lacking a principal 

inspector, the manager of the local flight 

standards district office/certificate holding 

district office. The AMOC approval letter 

must specifically reference this AD. 

(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any 

requirement in this AD to obtain corrective 

actions from a manufacturer, the action must 

be accomplished using a method approved 

by the Manager, International Branch, ANM– 

116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or 

the 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. 

(n) Related Information 

Refer to Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2014–0164, dated 

July 11, 2014, for related information. This 

MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/ 

#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2015-0243-0002. 

(o) 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 A300–53–0394, 

dated February 14, 2014. 

(ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53–0395, 

dated February 14, 2014. 

(iii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53– 

6172, dated February 14, 2014. 

(iv) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–53– 

6174, dated February 14, 2014. 

(v) Airbus Service Bulletin A310–53–2136, 

dated February 14, 2014. 

(vi) Airbus Service Bulletin A310–53– 

2137, dated February 14, 2014. 

(3) 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. 

(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 February 

23, 2016. 

Dionne Palermo, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2016–04545 Filed 3–8–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0529; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NM–260–AD; Amendment 

39–18420; AD 2016–05–02] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are superseding 

Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2011–13– 

11 and AD 2013–16–09 for all Airbus 

Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 

series airplanes. AD 2011–13–11 

required an amendment of the airplane 

flight manual (AFM), repetitive checks 

of specific centralized fault display 

system (CFDS) messages, an inspection 

of the opening sequence of the main 

landing gear (MLG) door for 

discrepancies if certain messages are 

found, and corrective actions if 

necessary. AD 2013–16–09 required an 

inspection to determine airplane 

configuration and part numbers of the 

landing gear control interface unit and 

MLG door actuators; and, for affected 

airplanes, repetitive inspections of the 

opening sequence of the MLG door, and 

replacement of the MLG door actuator if 

necessary. AD 2013–16–09 also 

provided optional terminating action for 

the repetitive inspections. This new AD 

reduces the interval of the MLG door 

opening sequence inspection, requires 

replacing or modifying certain MLG 

door actuators, and also requires a 

flushing procedure to be performed 

when installing a new MLG door 

actuator. This AD was prompted by a 

determination that the interval of the 

MLG door opening sequence inspection 

must be reduced. We are issuing this AD 

to detect and correct deterioration of the 

damping ring and associated retaining 

ring of the MLG door actuator, which 

can sufficiently increase the friction 

inside the actuator to restrict opening of 


Lhorne on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES