Document ID: FAA-2016-7425-0001
Agency: faa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Airworthiness Directives: Airbus Airplanes
Posted Date: 2016-07-07T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 130 (Thursday, July 7, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44232-44235]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15910]

 ========================================================================
 Proposed Rules
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
 the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
 notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
 the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 130 / Thursday, July 7, 2016 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 44232]]

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-7425; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-244-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2011-17-
05, for certain Airbus Model A300 B2-1C, A300 B2-203, A300 B2K-3C, 
A300-B4-103, A300 B4-203, and A300 B4-2C airplanes. AD 2011-17-05 
currently requires repetitive inspections in sections 13 through 18 of 
the fuselage between rivets of the longitudinal lap joints between 
frames (FR) 18 and 80 for cracking, and repair or modification if 
necessary. Since we issued AD 2011-17-05, we have determined that a 
revised inspection program is necessary. This proposed AD would include 
a revised repetitive inspection program of all longitudinal lap joints 
and repairs between frames 18 and 80 to address this widespread fatigue 
damage (WFD). We are proposing this AD to detect and correct fatigue 
cracking of the longitudinal lap joints of the fuselage, which could 
result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 22, 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, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, 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.

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-
7425; 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 proposed 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. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after 
receipt.

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: 

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or 
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address 
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2016-7425; 
Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-244-AD'' at the beginning of your 
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We 
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend 
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We 
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we 
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On September 23, 2011, we issued AD 2011-17-05, Amendment 39-16769 
(76 FR 63177, October 12, 2011) (``AD 2011-17-05''). AD 2011-17-05 
requires actions intended to address an unsafe condition on certain 
Airbus Model A300 B2-1C, A300 B2-203, A300 B2K-3C, A300-B4-103, A300 
B4-203, and A300 B4-2C airplanes.
    Since we issued AD 2011-17-05, we have determined it is necessary 
to require a revised inspection program for the longitudinal lap joints 
and repairs between FR 18 and FR 80 because additional cracking was 
found in an expanded area.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical 
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA 
Airworthiness Directive 2014-0265, dated December 9, 2014 (referred to 
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or 
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified 
products. The MCAI states:

    Cracks were found on in-service aeroplanes in sections 13 to 18 
of the fuselage between rivets of longitudinal lap joints between 
frames (FR) 18 and FR80.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could affect the 
structural integrity of the aeroplane.
    To address this unsafe condition, Airbus developed an inspection 
programme for the longitudinal lap joints and repairs between FR18 
and FR80, and EASA issued AD 2007-0091 [which corresponds to FAA AD 
2011-17-05] to require the implementation of that programme.
    Since EASA AD 2007-0091 was issued, [a] new Widespread Fatigue 
Damage regulation has been issued. This new regulation led to the 
revision of the maintenance programme for the longitudinal lap 
joints and repairs between FR18 and FR80.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD retains the 
requirements of EASA AD 2007-0091, which is superseded, and requires 
implementation of the revised inspection programme.

    Required actions include repetitive inspections of the bonded inner

[[Page 44233]]

doublers of the longitudinal lap joints in sections 13 through 18 for 
disbonding or corrosion, and repairing any disbonding and corrosion; a 
follow-on rototest or ultrasonic inspection to verify cracking, and 
repair of any cracking. The repetitive inspection interval ranges from 
3,000 flight cycles up to 8,000 flight cycles, depending on airplane 
configuration. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the 
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating it 
in Docket No. FAA-2016-7425.

Widespread Fatigue Damage

    Fatigue damage can occur locally, in small areas or structural 
design details, or globally, in widespread areas. Multiple-site damage 
is widespread damage that occurs in a large structural element such as 
a single rivet line of a lap splice joining two large skin panels. 
Widespread damage can also occur in multiple elements such as adjacent 
frames or stringers. Multiple-site damage and multiple-element damage 
cracks are typically too small initially to be reliably detected with 
normal inspection methods. Without intervention, these cracks will 
grow, and eventually compromise the structural integrity of the 
airplane. This condition is known as widespread fatigue damage. It is 
associated with general degradation of large areas of structure with 
similar structural details and stress levels. As an airplane ages, WFD 
will likely occur, and will certainly occur if the airplane is operated 
long enough without any intervention.
    The FAA's WFD final rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) became 
effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD rule requires certain actions to 
prevent structural failure due to WFD throughout the operational life 
of certain existing transport category airplanes and all of these 
airplanes that will be certificated in the future. For existing and 
future airplanes subject to the WFD rule, the rule requires that DAHs 
establish a limit of validity (LOV) of the engineering data that 
support the structural maintenance program. Operators affected by the 
WFD rule may not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, unless an extended LOV 
is approved.
    The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) does not require 
identifying and developing maintenance actions if the DAHs can show 
that such actions are not necessary to prevent WFD before the airplane 
reaches the LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend on accomplishment of 
future maintenance actions. As stated in the WFD rule, any maintenance 
actions necessary to reach the LOV will be mandated by airworthiness 
directives through separate rulemaking actions.
    In the context of WFD, this action is necessary to enable DAHs to 
propose LOVs that allow operators the longest operational lives for 
their airplanes, and still ensure that WFD will not occur. This 
approach allows for an implementation strategy that provides 
flexibility to DAHs in determining the timing of service information 
development (with FAA approval), while providing operators with 
certainty regarding the LOV applicable to their airplanes.
    We are issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of 
the longitudinal lap joints of the fuselage, which could result in 
reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another 
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant 
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have 
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service 
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we 
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition 
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same 
type design.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service 
Information

    Unlike the procedures described in the service information, this 
proposed AD would not permit further flight if cracks are detected. We 
have determined that, because of the safety implications and 
consequences associated with that cracking, any cracked upper shell 
structure must be repaired before further flight.
    The MCAI refers to Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0211, Revision 
08, dated November 26, 2013, for compliance times and for the new 
inspections. However, paragraph (l) of this proposed AD would require 
operators to do the initial inspections within 180 days after the 
effective date of this AD, in 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); and thereafter at intervals approved by 
the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane 
Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. We find that 180 days 
is an appropriate amount of time to accomplish the initial inspections 
and address the unsafe condition.
    These differences have been coordinated with the EASA and Airbus.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 4 airplanes of U.S. 
registry.

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                    Action                                 Labor cost                 product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Retained actions from AD 2011-17-05 (5          3,735 work-hours x $85 per hour         $317,475      $1,587,375
 airplanes).                                     = $317,475.
New proposed inspections (4 airplanes)........  140 work-hours x $85 per hour =           11,900          47,600
                                                 $11,900.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide 
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this proposed 
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.

[[Page 44234]]

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would 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 proposed 
regulation:
    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.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 
2011-17-05, Amendment 39-16769 (76 FR 63177, October 12, 2011), and 
adding the following new AD:

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2016-7425; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-
244-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by August 22, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2011-17-05, Amendment 39-16769 (76 FR 63177, 
October 12, 2011) (``AD 2011-17-05'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Model A300 B2-1C, A300 B2-203, A300 
B2K-3C, A300-B4-103, A300 B4-203, and A300 B4-2C airplanes; 
certificated in any category; all manufacturer serial numbers, 
except those on which Airbus Modification 2611 has been embodied in 
production.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by an evaluation done by the design 
approval holder indicating that certain sections of the longitudinal 
lap joints are subject to widespread fatigue damage. We are issuing 
this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the longitudinal 
lap joints of the fuselage, 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) Retained Fuselage Inner Doubler Inspections and Repair, With 
Revised Formatting

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (l) of AD 
2011-17-05, with revised formatting. For airplanes on which any 
inspections of the fuselage bonded inner doublers of the 
longitudinal lap joints in Sections 13 through 18 (except Sections 
16 and 17 at Stringer 31 left-hand and right-hand) for disbonding 
and cracking have not been done as of November 16, 2011 (the 
effective date of AD 2011-17-05), as specified by Airbus Service 
Bulletin A300-53-229: Prior to the accumulation of 24,000 total 
flight cycles or within 15 years since new, whichever occurs first; 
or within 60 days after November 16, 2011; whichever occurs later; 
do a detailed inspection of the fuselage bonded inner doublers of 
the longitudinal lap joints in Sections 13 through 18 (except 
Sections 16 and 17 at Stringer 31 left-hand and right-hand) for 
disbonding and cracking, in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, 
dated April 8, 1997. If no disbonding and no cracking are found, 
repeat the inspection thereafter at the applicable intervals 
specified in paragraph (h) of this AD.
    (1) If no cracking is found, and ``minor'' disbonding, as 
defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated 
April 8, 1997, is found: Repeat the inspection thereafter at 
intervals not to exceed 1 year for areas below stringer 22, and at 
intervals not to exceed 2 years for areas above and including 
stringer 22.
    (2) If no cracking is found, and ``major'' disbonding, as 
defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated 
April 8, 1997, is found: Within 1,000 flight cycles after doing the 
inspection, repair, in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, 
dated April 8, 1997.
    (3) If any cracking is found, repair prior to further flight, in 
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, 
dated April 8, 1997.

(h) Retained Repetitive Intervals for Inspections for Disbonding and 
Cracking

    This paragraph restates the repetitive intervals specified in 
table 1 of AD 2011-17-05. At the applicable time specified in 
paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD, repeat the inspection 
required by paragraph (g) of this AD.
    (1) For Sections 13 and 14 as specified in Airbus Service 
Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997: Repeat the 
inspection at intervals not to exceed 7 years or 12,000 flight 
cycles, whichever occurs first.
    (2) For Sections 15 through 18 as specified in Airbus Service 
Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997: Repeat the 
inspection within 8.5 years or 12,000 flight cycles, whichever 
occurs first.

(i) Retained Fuselage Inner Doubler Inspections and Repair

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (m) of AD 
2011-17-05. For airplanes on which any inspections of the fuselage 
bonded inner doublers of the longitudinal lap joints in Sections 13 
through 18 (except Sections 16 and 17 at Stringer 31 left-hand and 
right-hand) for disbonding and cracking have been done as of 
November 16, 2011 (the effective date of AD 2011-17-05), as 
specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229; except for 
airplanes on which a repair of that area has been done as specified 
in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229: Within 7 years or 12,000 
flight cycles (for Sections 13 and 14), or within 8.5 years or 
12,000 flight cycles (for Sections 15 and 18), after doing the 
inspection, whichever occurs first; or within 60 days after November 
16, 2011, whichever occurs later, do a detailed inspection of the 
fuselage bonded inner doublers of the longitudinal lap joints in 
Sections 13 through 18 (except Sections 16 and 17 at Stringer 31 
left-hand and right-hand) for disbonding and cracking, in accordance 
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin 
A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997. If no disbonding and 
no cracking are found, repeat the inspection at the applicable time 
specified in paragraph (h) of this AD.
    (1) If no cracking is found, and ``minor'' disbonding, as 
defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated 
April 8, 1997, is found: Repeat the inspection thereafter at 
intervals not to exceed 1 year for areas below stringer 22, and at 
intervals not to exceed 2 years for areas above and including 
stringer 22.
    (2) If no cracking is found, and ``major'' disbonding, as 
defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated 
April 8, 1997, is found: Within 1,000 flight cycles after doing the 
inspection, repair, in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, 
dated April 8, 1997.
    (3) If any cracking is found, repair prior to further flight, in 
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, 
dated April 8, 1997.

(j) Retained Fuselage Inner Doubler Inspections and Repair, With No 
Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (n) of AD 
2011-17-05, with no changes. For airplanes on which any inspections 
of the fuselage bonded inner doublers of the longitudinal lap joints 
in Sections 16 and 17 at Stringer 31 left-hand

[[Page 44235]]

and right-hand for disbonding and cracking have not been done as of 
November 16, 2011 (the effective date of AD 2011-17-05), as 
specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229: Prior to the 
accumulation of 24,000 total flight cycles or within 12 years since 
new, whichever occurs first; or within 60 days after November 16, 
2011, whichever occurs later, do a detailed inspection of the 
fuselage bonded inner doubles of the longitudinal lap joints in 
Sections 16 and 17 at Stringer 31 left-hand and right-hand for 
disbonding and cracking, in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, 
dated April 8, 1997. If no disbonding and no cracking are found, 
repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 7 years 
or 12,000 flight cycles, whichever occurs first.
    (1) If no cracking is found, and ``minor'' disbonding, as 
defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated 
April 8, 1997, is found: Repeat the inspection thereafter at 
intervals not to exceed 1 year for areas below stringer 22, and at 
intervals not to exceed 2 years for areas above and including 
stringer 22. Doing a repair in accordance with Airbus Service 
Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997, terminates 
the repetitive inspections required by this paragraph for that area.
    (2) If no cracking is found, and ``major'' disbonding, as 
defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated 
April 8, 1997, is found: Within 1,000 flight cycles after doing the 
inspection, repair, in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, 
dated April 8, 1997.
    (3) If any cracking is found, repair prior to further flight, in 
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, 
dated April 8, 1997.

(k) Retained Fuselage Inner Doubler Inspections and Repair, With No 
Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (o) of AD 
2011-17-05, with no changes. For airplanes on which any inspections 
of the fuselage bonded inner doublers of the longitudinal lap joints 
in Sections 16 and 17 at Stringer 31 left-hand and right-hand for 
disbonding and cracking have been done as of November 16, 2011, as 
specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229; except airplanes 
on which a repair of that area has been done as specified in Airbus 
Service Bulletin A300-53-229: Within 7 years or 12,000 flight cycles 
after doing the inspection, whichever occurs first; or within 60 
days after November 16, 2011; whichever occurs later; do a detailed 
inspection of the fuselage bonded inner doubles of the longitudinal 
lap joints in Sections 16 and 17 at Stringer 31 left-hand and right-
hand for disbonding and cracking, in accordance with the 
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, 
Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997. If no disbonding and no corrosion 
are found, repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to 
exceed 7 years or 12,000 flight cycles, whichever occurs first.
    (1) If no cracking is found, and ``minor'' disbonding, as 
defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated 
April 8, 1997, is found: Repeat the inspection thereafter at 
intervals not to exceed 1 year for areas below stringer 22, and at 
intervals not to exceed 2 years for areas above and including 
stringer 22. Doing a repair, in accordance with Airbus Service 
Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated April 8, 1997, terminates 
the repetitive inspections required by this paragraph for that area.
    (2) If no cracking is found, and ``major'' disbonding, as 
defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, dated 
April 8, 1997, is found: Within 1,000 flight cycles after doing the 
inspection, repair, in accordance with the Accomplishment 
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, 
dated April 8, 1997.
    (3) If any cracking is found, repair prior to further flight, in 
accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-229, Revision 5, 
dated April 8, 1997.

(l) New Repetitive Inspections and Repair

    Within 180 days after the effective date of this AD, do rototest 
and ultrasonic inspections, as applicable, for cracking of all 
longitudinal lap joints and repairs between frames 18 and 80; and 
repair any cracking before further flight; 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). Repeat the 
applicable inspection, including post-repair inspections, thereafter 
at intervals approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, 
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. 
Accomplishing the initial inspection and applicable repairs required 
by this paragraph terminates the actions required by paragraphs (g) 
through (k) 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: As of the effective date of 
this AD, 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.

(n) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information 
(MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0265, dated December 9, 
2014, 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-2016-7425.
    (2) 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. 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.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 23, 2016.
Dorr M. Anderson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-15910 Filed 7-6-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P