Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes, 16255-16259 [2015-06583]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 59 / Friday, March 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations When a statement identical to that in figure 1 to this paragraph has been included in the general revisions of the AFM, the general revisions may be inserted into the AFM, and the copy of this AD may be removed from the AFM. Accomplishing the revision required by paragraph (h) of this AD terminates the requirements of this paragraph, and after the revision required by paragraph (h) of this AD has been done, before further flight, remove the revision required by this paragraph. FIGURE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (g) OF THIS AD—RETAINED AFM LANGUAGE If radio-altimeter #1 lock-up conditions occur in flight, revert to the correct radioaltimeter output, in accordance with the instructions of Falcon 7X AFM procedure 3–140–65B and 3–140–70A. Dispatch of the airplane with any radio-altimeter inoperative is prohibited. (h) New Requirement of This AD: Revision of the AFM For airplanes on which M0566 or Dassault Service Bulletin Falcon 7X–100 has been accomplished: Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, do the actions specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD. (1) Revise the Limitations Section of the Dassault Falcon 7X AFM to include the statement in figure 2 to this paragraph. This may be done by inserting a copy of this AD in the AFM. Doing this revision terminates the requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD and the revision required by paragraph (g) of this AD must be removed. When a statement identical to that in figure 2 to this paragraph has been included in the general revisions of the AFM, the general revisions may be inserted into the AFM, and the copy of this AD may be removed from the AFM. FIGURE 2 TO PARAGRAPH (h)(1) OF THIS AD—NEW AFM LANGUAGE asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES If radio-altimeter miscompare indication occurs in flight, revert to the correct radioaltimeter output, in accordance with the instructions of Falcon 7X AFM procedure 3–140–70A. Dispatch of the airplane with any radio-altimeter inoperative is prohibited. (2) Revise the Abnormal Procedures section to include Procedure 3–140–70A, ‘‘Avionics—Sensor miscompare (A/C with M566),’’ Issue 2, of Section 3—Abnormal Procedures, of the Dassault Falcon 7X Airplane Flight Manual, DGT 105608, Revision 15, dated January 30, 2012; or Procedure 3–140–70A, ‘‘Avionics—Sensor miscompare,’’ Issue 4, of Section 3— Abnormal Procedures, of the Dassault Falcon 7X Airplane Flight Manual, DGT105608, Revision 18, dated November 15, 2013; into the AFM. (i) Other FAA AD Provisions The following provisions also apply to this AD: (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:44 Mar 26, 2015 Jkt 235001 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: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; telephone 425–227–1137; fax 425–227–1149. Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-116AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. (i) 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. (ii) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2011–13–07, Amendment 39–16730 (76 FR 36283, June 22, 2011), are approved as alternative methods of compliance with 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 European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Dassault Aviation’s EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature. (j) Related Information Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2009–0208R2, dated May 22, 2012, for related information. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/ #!documentDetail;D=FAA-2013-1032-0002. (k) Material Incorporated by Reference (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise. (i) Procedure 3–140–70A, ‘‘Avionics— Sensor miscompare (A/C with M566),’’ Issue 2, of Section 3—Abnormal Procedures, of the Dassault Falcon 7X Airplane Flight Manual, DGT 105608, Revision 15, dated January 30, 2012. (ii) Procedure 3–140–70A, ‘‘Avionics— Sensor miscompare,’’ Issue 4, of Section 3— Abnormal Procedures, of the Dassault Falcon 7X Airplane Flight Manual, DGT105608, Revision 18, dated November 15, 2013. (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Dassault Falcon Jet, P.O. Box 2000, South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone 201–440–6700; Internet http:// www.dassaultfalcon.com. (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 16255 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 March 13, 2015. Jeffrey E. Duven, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 2015–06615 Filed 3–26–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2014–0229; Directorate Identifier 2013–NM–186–AD; Amendment 39–18123; AD 2015–06–05] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Airbus Model A300 and A310 series airplanes, and certain Model A300 B4– 600, B4–600R, and F4–600R series airplanes, and Model A300 C4–605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called Model A300–600 series airplanes). This AD was prompted by a review of certain repairs, which revealed that the structural integrity of the airplane could be negatively affected if those repairs are not re-worked. This AD requires an inspection to identify certain repairs, and corrective action if necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct certain repairs on the floor cross beams flange. If those repairs are not reworked, the structural integrity of the airplane could be negatively affected. DATES: This AD becomes effective May 1, 2015. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of May 1, 2015. ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov/ #!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0229; or in person at the Docket Management SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\27MRR1.SGM 27MRR1 16256 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 59 / Friday, March 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 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 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 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–2014– 0229. Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, ANM–116, International Branch, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98507–3356; telephone 425–227–2125; fax 425–227– 1149. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 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 and A310 series airplanes, and certain Model A300 B4–600, B4–600R, and F4– 600R series airplanes, and Model A300 C4–605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called Model A300–600 series airplanes). The NPRM published in the Federal Register on April 16, 2014 (79 FR 21413). The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2013–0220, dated September 18, 2013 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Model A300 and A310 series airplanes, and certain Model A300 B4–600, B4– 600R, and F4–600R series airplanes, and Model A300 C4–605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called Model A300–600 series airplanes). The MCAI states: In the frame of the Extended Service Goal (ESG) activity, all existing Structural Repair Manual (SRM) repairs were reviewed. This analysis, which consisted in new static and fatigue calculations, revealed that some repairs were no longer applicable to some specific areas. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:44 Mar 26, 2015 Jkt 235001 These repairs, if not reworked, could affect the structural integrity of the aeroplane. To address the repairs on the floor cross beams flange, Airbus issued Alert Operator Transmission (AOT) A300–53A0392, AOT A300–53A6171 and AOT A310–53A2135. To address this unsafe condition, and further to the implementation of the Aging Aircraft Safety Rule (AASR), this [EASA] Airworthiness Directive requires a [general visual] inspection of the floor cross beams flange at frame (FR)11 and FR12A to identify SRM repairs and, depending on findings, accomplishment of corrective action [reworking the SRM repairs]. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov/ #!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-02290002. Comments We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM (79 FR 21413, April 16, 2014) and the FAA’s response to each comment. Request To Change the Compliance Time Expression From Months to Flight Cycles United Parcel Service (UPS) requested that the compliance time proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 21413, April 16, 2014) for doing the general visual inspection be changed from a compliance time based on months to a compliance time based on the accumulation of flight cycles since certain structural repair manual (SRM) repairs were incorporated on an airplane. UPS stated that all documentation related to the NPRM indicated that the reported damage is fatigue-related; therefore the inspection compliance time should reflect a typical fatigue-related issue, which is expressed in flight cycles. UPS explained that it did not provide a proposed compliance time because it did not have data and suggested that the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) could establish compliance times for the instructions for continued airworthiness based on the data used in the SRM repair evaluation to determine extended service goals. We do not agree to change the compliance time expression from months to accumulated flight cycles since certain SRM repairs were done. The OEM does not have documentation for all the SRM repairs accomplished on each airplane, thus it is unable to establish compliance times because of the incomplete data. The FAA and EASA have determined that a 30-month compliance time is sufficient to accomplish the inspection and all applicable corrective actions. No change PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 has been made to this AD regarding this issue. However, under the provisions of paragraph (i) of this AD, we may approve requests for adjustments to the compliance time if data are submitted to substantiate that such an adjustment would provide an acceptable level of safety. Request To Omit References to the AD in Repair Approvals UPS requested that paragraphs (h) and (i)(2) of the NPRM (79 FR 21413, April 16, 2014) be revised to omit the statement ‘‘[F]or a repair method to be approved, the repair approval must specifically refer to this AD.’’ UPS stated that the FAA included this sentence in the NPRM because there is a ‘‘potential’’ for operators to do repairs that do not adequately address the unsafe condition. UPS commented that adding a reference to the applicable AD on repair documentation does not address the root cause of repair documentation availability. Previously approved repairs for an AD should have been vetted as part of the corrective action and AD development process. However, if a repair is not identified during that process, the operator is still responsible for adhering to the Airworthy Product provision in an AD. The Airworthy Product provision, in conjunction with FAA Advisory Circular 120–77, ‘‘Maintenance and Alteration Data,’’ dated October 7, 2002 (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_ Guidance_Library/ rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/ 199e798c7ee4347786256c4d004ae5dc/ $FILE/AC%20120-77.pdf), provides sufficient guidance and clarification for repairs accomplished during compliance with the requirements of an AD. We concur with the commenter’s request to remove from this AD the requirement that repair approvals specifically refer to this AD. Since late 2006, we have included a standard paragraph titled ‘‘Airworthy Product’’ in all MCAI ADs in which the FAA develops an AD based on a foreign authority’s AD. The MCAI or referenced service information in an FAA AD often directs the owner/operator to contact the manufacturer for corrective actions, such as a repair. Briefly, the Airworthy Product paragraph allowed owners/ operators to use corrective actions provided by the manufacturer if those actions were FAA approved. In addition, the paragraph stated that any actions approved by the State of Design Authority (or its delegated agent) are considered to be FAA approved. In the NPRM (79 FR 21413, April 16, 2014), we proposed to prevent the use E:\FR\FM\27MRR1.SGM 27MRR1 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 59 / Friday, March 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations of repairs that were not specifically developed to correct the unsafe condition by requiring that the repair approval provided by the State of Design Authority or its delegated agent specifically refer to this FAA AD. This change was intended to clarify the method of compliance and to provide operators with better visibility of repairs that are specifically developed and approved to correct the unsafe condition. In addition, we proposed to change the phrase ‘‘its delegated agent’’ to include ‘‘the Design Approval Holder (DAH) with a State of Design Authority’s design organization approval (DOA)’’ to refer to a DAH authorized to approve required repairs for the AD. Comments were provided to another NPRM (Directorate Identifier 2012–NM– 101–AD (79 FR 21413, April 16, 2014)) about these proposed changes. UPS commented on that NPRM as follows: ‘‘The proposed wording, being specific to repairs, eliminates the interpretation that Airbus messages are acceptable for approving minor deviations (corrective actions) needed during accomplishment of an AD mandated Airbus service bulletin.’’ That comment has made the FAA aware that some operators have misunderstood or misinterpreted the Airworthy Product paragraph to allow the owner/operator to use messages provided by the manufacturer as approval of deviations during the accomplishment of an AD-mandated action. The Airworthy Product paragraph does not approve messages or other information provided by the manufacturer for deviations to the requirements of the AD-mandated actions. The Airworthy Product paragraph only addresses the requirement to contact the manufacturer for corrective actions for the identified unsafe condition and does not cover deviations from other AD requirements. However, deviations to AD-required actions are addressed in 14 CFR 39.17, and anyone may request approval of an alternative method of compliance to the AD-required actions using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. To address this misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the Airworthy Product paragraph, we have changed that paragraph and retitled it ‘‘Contacting the Manufacturer.’’ This paragraph now clarifies that for any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the actions must be accomplished using a method approved by the FAA, or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), or Airbus’s EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:44 Mar 26, 2015 Jkt 235001 The Contacting the Manufacturer paragraph also clarifies that, if approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature. The DOA signature indicates that the data and information contained in the document are EASA approved, which is also FAA approved. Messages and other information provided by the manufacturer that do not contain the DOA-authorized signature approval are not EASA approved, unless EASA directly approves the manufacturer’s message or other information. This clarification does not remove flexibility afforded previously by the Airworthy Product paragraph. Consistent with long-standing FAA policy, such flexibility was never intended for required actions. This is also consistent with the recommendation of the AD Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee to increase flexibility in complying with ADs by identifying those actions in manufacturers’ service instructions that are ‘‘Required for Compliance’’ with ADs. We continue to work with manufacturers to implement this recommendation. But once we determine that an action is required, any deviation from the requirement must be approved as an alternative method of compliance. Other commenters pointed out that in many cases the foreign manufacturer’s service bulletin and the foreign authority’s MCAI may have been issued some time before the FAA AD. Therefore, the DOA may have provided U.S. operators with an approved repair, developed with full awareness of the unsafe condition, before the FAA AD is issued. Under these circumstances, to comply with the FAA AD, the operator would be required to go back to the manufacturer’s DOA and obtain a new approval document, adding time and expense to the compliance process with no safety benefit. Based on these comments, we removed the requirement from this AD that the DAH-provided repair specifically refer to this AD. Before adopting such a requirement in the future, the FAA will coordinate with affected DAHs and verify they are prepared to implement means to ensure that their repair approvals consider the unsafe condition addressed in an AD. Any such requirements will be adopted through the normal AD rulemaking process, including notice-and-comment procedures, when appropriate. We have also decided not to include a generic reference to either the ‘‘delegated agent’’ or the ‘‘DAH with State of Design Authority design organization approval,’’ but instead we PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 16257 will provide the specific delegation approval granted by the State of Design Authority for the DAH. Additional Changes to This AD In this AD, we have corrected a formatting error in the subparagraphs of paragraph (g)(1) of the NPRM (79 FR 21413, April 16, 2014). The subparagraphs were incorrectly identified as (g)(1)(a), (g)(1)(b), and (g)(1)(c), and should have been identified as paragraphs (g)(1)(i), (g)(1)(ii), and (g)(1)(iii) of this AD. Conclusion We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes: • Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 21413, April 16, 2014) for correcting the unsafe condition; and • Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 21413, April 16, 2014). We also determined that these changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD. Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51 Airbus has issued the following service information, which describes procedures for doing general visual inspections of the floor cross beams flange at certain frames and contacting the manufacturer for corrective actions: • Airbus All Operator Telex A300– 53A0392, dated March 14, 2012 (for Model A300 series airplanes); • Airbus All Operator Telex A300– 53A617, dated March 14, 2012 (for Model A300 B4–601, B4–603, B4–620, and B4–622 airplanes; Model A300 B4– 605R and B4–622R airplanes; Model A300 F4–605R and F4–622R airplanes; and Model A300 C4–605R Variant F airplanes); and • Airbus All Operator Telex A310– 53A2135, dated March 14, 2012 (for Model A310 series airplanes). This service information is reasonably available; see ADDRESSES for ways to access this service information. Costs of Compliance We estimate that this AD affects 177 airplanes of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $85 E:\FR\FM\27MRR1.SGM 27MRR1 16258 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 59 / Friday, March 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. operators to be $15,045, or $85 per product. We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this AD. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA’s authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more detail the scope of the Agency’s authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.’’ Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES 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/ #!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0229; 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:44 Mar 26, 2015 Jkt 235001 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): ■ 2015–06–05 Airbus: Amendment 39–18123. Docket No. FAA–2014–0229; Directorate Identifier 2013–NM–186–AD. (a) Effective Date This AD becomes effective May 1, 2015. (b) Affected ADs None. (c) Applicability This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of this AD, certificated in any category. (1) Model A300 B2–1A, B2–1C, B2K–3C, B2–203, B4–2C, B4–103, and B4–203 airplanes, all manufacturer serial numbers. (2) Model A300 B4–601, B4–603, B4–620, and B4–622 airplanes; Model A300 B4–605R and B4–622R airplanes; Model A300 F4– 605R and F4–622R airplanes; and Model A300 C4–605R Variant F airplanes; all manufacturer serial numbers, except those on which Airbus Modification 12699 has been embodied in production. (3) Model A310–203, –204, –221, –222, –304, –322, –324, and –325 airplanes, all manufacturer serial numbers. (d) Subject Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage. (e) Reason This AD was prompted by a review of certain repairs, which revealed that the structural integrity of the airplane could be negatively affected if those repairs are not reworked. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct certain repairs on the floor cross beams flange. If those repairs are not reworked, the structural integrity of the airplane could be negatively affected. PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 (f) Compliance Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done. (g) Inspection (1) Within 30 months after the effective date of this AD: Do a general visual inspection of the floor cross beams flange at FR11 and FR12A to determine which structural repair manual (SRM) repairs have been done, in accordance with the instructions of the service information specified in paragraph (g)(1)(i), (g)(1)(ii), or (g)(1)(iii) of this AD, as applicable. (i) For Model A300 series airplanes: Airbus All Operator Telex (AOT) A300–53A0392, dated March 14, 2012. (ii) For Model A300 B4–601, B4–603, B4– 620, and B4–622 airplanes; Model A300 B4– 605R and B4–622R airplanes; Model A300 F4–605R and F4–622R airplanes; and Model A300 C4–605R Variant F airplanes: Airbus AOT A300–53A6171, dated March 14, 2012. (iii) For Model A310 series airplanes: Airbus AOT A310–53A2135, dated March 14, 2012. (2) A review of airplane maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of the general visual inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD if the SRM repairs can be positively identified from that review. (h) Repair If, during the inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, it is determined that any SRM repair specified in paragraph 2 of the service information identified in paragraph (g)(1)(i), (g)(1)(ii), or (g)(1)(iii) of this AD, as applicable, has been done: Within 30 months after the effective date of this AD, rework the repair 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). (i) Other FAA AD Provisions The following provisions also apply to this AD: (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98507–3356; telephone 425–227–2125; fax 425–427–1149. Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-116AMOC-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 E:\FR\FM\27MRR1.SGM 27MRR1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 59 / Friday, March 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 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. (j) Related Information Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Airworthiness Directive 2013–0220, dated September 18, 2013, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail; D=FAA-2014-0229-0002. (k) Material Incorporated by Reference (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise. (i) Airbus All Operator Telex A300– 53A0392, dated March 14, 2012. The document number and date appear on only the first page of this document. (ii) Airbus All Operator Telex A300– 53A6171, dated March 14, 2012. The document number and date appear on only the first page of this document. (iii) Airbus All Operator Telex A310– 53A2135, dated March 14, 2012. The document number and date appear on only the first page of this document. (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/ibr-locations.html. Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 14, 2015. Jeffrey E. Duven, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 2015–06583 Filed 3–26–15; 8:45 am] asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES BILLING CODE 4910–13–P FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 16 CFR Part 305 RIN 3084–AB03 EnergyGuide Labels on Televisions AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:44 Mar 26, 2015 Jkt 235001 ACTION: Final rule. The Federal Trade Commission (‘‘Commission’’) amends its Energy Labeling Rule (‘‘Rule’’) by publishing new ranges of comparability for required EnergyGuide labels on televisions. DATES: Effective July 15, 2015. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hampton Newsome, Attorney, Division of Enforcement, Federal Trade Commission, Washington, DC 20580 (202–326–2889). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: I. Background The Commission issued the Energy Labeling Rule in 1979, 44 FR 66466 (Nov. 19, 1979) pursuant to the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (‘‘EPCA’’).1 The Rule covers several categories of major household products, including televisions. It requires manufacturers of covered products to disclose specific energy consumption or efficiency information (derived from Department of Energy (‘‘DOE’’) test procedures) at the point-of-sale. In addition, each label must include a ‘‘range of comparability’’ indicating the highest and lowest energy consumption or efficiencies for comparable models. The Commission updates these ranges periodically. II. Range Updates for Televisions The Commission amends its television ranges in section 305.17(f)(5) based on manufacturer data derived from the DOE test procedures and posted on the DOE Web site (https:// www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms). Last year, the Commission issued changes to the television labeling requirements, including new reporting and testing provisions, to conform the FTC Rule to a new DOE test procedure (79 FR 19464 (April 9, 2014)). In that Notice, the Commission also discussed the possibility that it would revise the Rule’s comparability ranges following the submission by manufacturers of new model data derived from the DOE test procedure.2 The Commission now updates those ranges, along with related sample labels. In addition, these amendments update the cost figure on the television label to 12 cents per kWh consistent with other labeled products.3 1 42 U.S.C. 6294. EPCA also requires the Department of Energy (‘‘DOE’’) to set minimum efficiency standards and develop test procedures to measure energy use. 2 The Commission also discussed the potential for new ranges in a notice published last summer (79 FR 34642, 34656 n.108 (June 18, 2014)). 3 These amendments also make a minor, conforming change to the range categories in PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 16259 Manufacturers have until July 15, 2015 to begin using the ranges on their labels. III. Administrative Procedure Act The amendments published in this Notice are purely ministerial in nature and implement the Rule’s requirement that representations for televisions be derived from DOE test procedures. See 16 CFR 305.5(d). Accordingly, the Commission has good cause under section 553(b)(B) of the APA to forgo notice-and comment procedures for these rule amendments. 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). These technical amendments merely provide a routine, conforming change to the range and cost information required on EnergyGuide labels. The Commission therefore finds for good cause that public comment for these technical, procedural amendments is impractical and unnecessary. IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act The provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act relating to a Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis (5 U.S.C. 603– 604) are not applicable to this proceeding because the amendments do not impose any new obligations on entities regulated by the Energy Labeling Rule. These technical amendments merely provide a routine change to the range information required on EnergyGuide labels. Thus, the amendments will not have a ‘‘significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.’’ 4 The Commission has concluded, therefore, that a regulatory flexibility analysis is not necessary, and certifies, under Section 605 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), that the amendments announced today will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. V. Paperwork Reduction Act The current Rule contains recordkeeping, disclosure, testing, and reporting requirements that constitute information collection requirements as defined by 5 CFR 1320.3(c), the definitional provision within the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations that implement the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). OMB has approved the Rule’s existing information collection requirements through May 31, 2017 (OMB Control No. 3084 0069). The amendments now being adopted do not change the substance or frequency of the recordkeeping, § 305.17 to reflect the scope of the DOE test procedure, which does not cover models with screen sizes smaller than 16 inches. See 79 FR at 19465 (Commission’s discussion of this DOE change). 4 5 U.S.C. 605. E:\FR\FM\27MRR1.SGM 27MRR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 59 (Friday, March 27, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16255-16259]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06583]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0229; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-186-AD; 
Amendment 39-18123; AD 2015-06-05]
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 and A310 series airplanes, and certain Model A300 B4-
600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series airplanes, and Model A300 C4-605R 
Variant F airplanes (collectively called Model A300-600 series 
airplanes). This AD was prompted by a review of certain repairs, which 
revealed that the structural integrity of the airplane could be 
negatively affected if those repairs are not re-worked. This AD 
requires an inspection to identify certain repairs, and corrective 
action if necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct 
certain repairs on the floor cross beams flange. If those repairs are 
not reworked, the structural integrity of the airplane could be 
negatively affected.

DATES: This AD becomes effective May 1, 2015.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by 
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of May 1, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0229; or in person at the 
Docket Management

[[Page 16256]]

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 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 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-2014-0229.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, ANM-
116, International Branch, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98507-3356; 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 and 
A310 series airplanes, and certain Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-
600R series airplanes, and Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes 
(collectively called Model A300-600 series airplanes). The NPRM 
published in the Federal Register on April 16, 2014 (79 FR 21413).
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical 
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA 
Airworthiness Directive 2013-0220, dated September 18, 2013 (referred 
to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or 
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Model A300 
and A310 series airplanes, and certain Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and 
F4-600R series airplanes, and Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes 
(collectively called Model A300-600 series airplanes). The MCAI states:

    In the frame of the Extended Service Goal (ESG) activity, all 
existing Structural Repair Manual (SRM) repairs were reviewed.
    This analysis, which consisted in new static and fatigue 
calculations, revealed that some repairs were no longer applicable 
to some specific areas.
    These repairs, if not reworked, could affect the structural 
integrity of the aeroplane. To address the repairs on the floor 
cross beams flange, Airbus issued Alert Operator Transmission (AOT) 
A300-53A0392, AOT A300-53A6171 and AOT A310-53A2135.
    To address this unsafe condition, and further to the 
implementation of the Aging Aircraft Safety Rule (AASR), this [EASA] 
Airworthiness Directive requires a [general visual] inspection of 
the floor cross beams flange at frame (FR)11 and FR12A to identify 
SRM repairs and, depending on findings, accomplishment of corrective 
action [reworking the SRM repairs].

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-0229-0002.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing 
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM (79 
FR 21413, April 16, 2014) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Change the Compliance Time Expression From Months to Flight 
Cycles

    United Parcel Service (UPS) requested that the compliance time 
proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 21413, April 16, 2014) for doing the 
general visual inspection be changed from a compliance time based on 
months to a compliance time based on the accumulation of flight cycles 
since certain structural repair manual (SRM) repairs were incorporated 
on an airplane. UPS stated that all documentation related to the NPRM 
indicated that the reported damage is fatigue-related; therefore the 
inspection compliance time should reflect a typical fatigue-related 
issue, which is expressed in flight cycles. UPS explained that it did 
not provide a proposed compliance time because it did not have data and 
suggested that the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) could 
establish compliance times for the instructions for continued 
airworthiness based on the data used in the SRM repair evaluation to 
determine extended service goals.
    We do not agree to change the compliance time expression from 
months to accumulated flight cycles since certain SRM repairs were 
done. The OEM does not have documentation for all the SRM repairs 
accomplished on each airplane, thus it is unable to establish 
compliance times because of the incomplete data. The FAA and EASA have 
determined that a 30-month compliance time is sufficient to accomplish 
the inspection and all applicable corrective actions. No change has 
been made to this AD regarding this issue. However, under the 
provisions of paragraph (i) of this AD, we may approve requests for 
adjustments to the compliance time if data are submitted to 
substantiate that such an adjustment would provide an acceptable level 
of safety.

Request To Omit References to the AD in Repair Approvals

    UPS requested that paragraphs (h) and (i)(2) of the NPRM (79 FR 
21413, April 16, 2014) be revised to omit the statement ``[F]or a 
repair method to be approved, the repair approval must specifically 
refer to this AD.'' UPS stated that the FAA included this sentence in 
the NPRM because there is a ``potential'' for operators to do repairs 
that do not adequately address the unsafe condition. UPS commented that 
adding a reference to the applicable AD on repair documentation does 
not address the root cause of repair documentation availability. 
Previously approved repairs for an AD should have been vetted as part 
of the corrective action and AD development process. However, if a 
repair is not identified during that process, the operator is still 
responsible for adhering to the Airworthy Product provision in an AD. 
The Airworthy Product provision, in conjunction with FAA Advisory 
Circular 120-77, ``Maintenance and Alteration Data,'' dated October 7, 
2002 (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/
rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/199e798c7ee4347786256c4d004ae5dc/$FILE/
AC%20120-77.pdf), provides sufficient guidance and clarification for 
repairs accomplished during compliance with the requirements of an AD.
    We concur with the commenter's request to remove from this AD the 
requirement that repair approvals specifically refer to this AD. Since 
late 2006, we have included a standard paragraph titled ``Airworthy 
Product'' in all MCAI ADs in which the FAA develops an AD based on a 
foreign authority's AD. The MCAI or referenced service information in 
an FAA AD often directs the owner/operator to contact the manufacturer 
for corrective actions, such as a repair. Briefly, the Airworthy 
Product paragraph allowed owners/operators to use corrective actions 
provided by the manufacturer if those actions were FAA approved. In 
addition, the paragraph stated that any actions approved by the State 
of Design Authority (or its delegated agent) are considered to be FAA 
approved.
    In the NPRM (79 FR 21413, April 16, 2014), we proposed to prevent 
the use

[[Page 16257]]

of repairs that were not specifically developed to correct the unsafe 
condition by requiring that the repair approval provided by the State 
of Design Authority or its delegated agent specifically refer to this 
FAA AD. This change was intended to clarify the method of compliance 
and to provide operators with better visibility of repairs that are 
specifically developed and approved to correct the unsafe condition. In 
addition, we proposed to change the phrase ``its delegated agent'' to 
include ``the Design Approval Holder (DAH) with a State of Design 
Authority's design organization approval (DOA)'' to refer to a DAH 
authorized to approve required repairs for the AD.
    Comments were provided to another NPRM (Directorate Identifier 
2012-NM-101-AD (79 FR 21413, April 16, 2014)) about these proposed 
changes. UPS commented on that NPRM as follows: ``The proposed wording, 
being specific to repairs, eliminates the interpretation that Airbus 
messages are acceptable for approving minor deviations (corrective 
actions) needed during accomplishment of an AD mandated Airbus service 
bulletin.''
    That comment has made the FAA aware that some operators have 
misunderstood or misinterpreted the Airworthy Product paragraph to 
allow the owner/operator to use messages provided by the manufacturer 
as approval of deviations during the accomplishment of an AD-mandated 
action. The Airworthy Product paragraph does not approve messages or 
other information provided by the manufacturer for deviations to the 
requirements of the AD-mandated actions. The Airworthy Product 
paragraph only addresses the requirement to contact the manufacturer 
for corrective actions for the identified unsafe condition and does not 
cover deviations from other AD requirements. However, deviations to AD-
required actions are addressed in 14 CFR 39.17, and anyone may request 
approval of an alternative method of compliance to the AD-required 
actions using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    To address this misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the 
Airworthy Product paragraph, we have changed that paragraph and 
retitled it ``Contacting the Manufacturer.'' This paragraph now 
clarifies that for any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective 
actions from a manufacturer, the actions must be accomplished using a 
method approved by the FAA, or the European Aviation Safety Agency 
(EASA), or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).
    The Contacting the Manufacturer paragraph also clarifies that, if 
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized 
signature. The DOA signature indicates that the data and information 
contained in the document are EASA approved, which is also FAA 
approved. Messages and other information provided by the manufacturer 
that do not contain the DOA-authorized signature approval are not EASA 
approved, unless EASA directly approves the manufacturer's message or 
other information.
    This clarification does not remove flexibility afforded previously 
by the Airworthy Product paragraph. Consistent with long-standing FAA 
policy, such flexibility was never intended for required actions. This 
is also consistent with the recommendation of the AD Implementation 
Aviation Rulemaking Committee to increase flexibility in complying with 
ADs by identifying those actions in manufacturers' service instructions 
that are ``Required for Compliance'' with ADs. We continue to work with 
manufacturers to implement this recommendation. But once we determine 
that an action is required, any deviation from the requirement must be 
approved as an alternative method of compliance.
    Other commenters pointed out that in many cases the foreign 
manufacturer's service bulletin and the foreign authority's MCAI may 
have been issued some time before the FAA AD. Therefore, the DOA may 
have provided U.S. operators with an approved repair, developed with 
full awareness of the unsafe condition, before the FAA AD is issued. 
Under these circumstances, to comply with the FAA AD, the operator 
would be required to go back to the manufacturer's DOA and obtain a new 
approval document, adding time and expense to the compliance process 
with no safety benefit.
    Based on these comments, we removed the requirement from this AD 
that the DAH-provided repair specifically refer to this AD. Before 
adopting such a requirement in the future, the FAA will coordinate with 
affected DAHs and verify they are prepared to implement means to ensure 
that their repair approvals consider the unsafe condition addressed in 
an AD. Any such requirements will be adopted through the normal AD 
rulemaking process, including notice-and-comment procedures, when 
appropriate.
    We have also decided not to include a generic reference to either 
the ``delegated agent'' or the ``DAH with State of Design Authority 
design organization approval,'' but instead we will provide the 
specific delegation approval granted by the State of Design Authority 
for the DAH.

Additional Changes to This AD

    In this AD, we have corrected a formatting error in the 
subparagraphs of paragraph (g)(1) of the NPRM (79 FR 21413, April 16, 
2014). The subparagraphs were incorrectly identified as (g)(1)(a), 
(g)(1)(b), and (g)(1)(c), and should have been identified as paragraphs 
(g)(1)(i), (g)(1)(ii), and (g)(1)(iii) of this AD.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, 
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting 
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial 
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the 
NPRM (79 FR 21413, April 16, 2014) for correcting the unsafe condition; 
and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was 
already proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 21413, April 16, 2014).
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the 
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued the following service information, which 
describes procedures for doing general visual inspections of the floor 
cross beams flange at certain frames and contacting the manufacturer 
for corrective actions:
     Airbus All Operator Telex A300-53A0392, dated March 14, 
2012 (for Model A300 series airplanes);
     Airbus All Operator Telex A300-53A617, dated March 14, 
2012 (for Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, and B4-622 airplanes; 
Model A300 B4-605R and B4-622R airplanes; Model A300 F4-605R and F4-
622R airplanes; and Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes); and
     Airbus All Operator Telex A310-53A2135, dated March 14, 
2012 (for Model A310 series airplanes).
    This service information is reasonably available; see ADDRESSES for 
ways to access this service information.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 177 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We also estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product 
to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor 
rate is $85

[[Page 16258]]

per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD 
on U.S. operators to be $15,045, or $85 per product.
    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide 
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to 
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the 
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation 
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's 
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in 
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General 
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with 
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing 
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator 
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within 
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition 
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this 
rulemaking action.

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/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0229; 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

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 adding the following new airworthiness 
directive (AD):

2015-06-05 Airbus: Amendment 39-18123. Docket No. FAA-2014-0229; 
Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-186-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective May 1, 2015.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes identified in paragraphs 
(c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of this AD, certificated in any category.
    (1) Model A300 B2-1A, B2-1C, B2K-3C, B2-203, B4-2C, B4-103, and 
B4-203 airplanes, all manufacturer serial numbers.
    (2) Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, and B4-622 airplanes; 
Model A300 B4-605R and B4-622R airplanes; Model A300 F4-605R and F4-
622R airplanes; and Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes; all 
manufacturer serial numbers, except those on which Airbus 
Modification 12699 has been embodied in production.
    (3) Model A310-203, -204, -221, -222, -304, -322, -324, and -325 
airplanes, all manufacturer serial numbers.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a review of certain repairs, which 
revealed that the structural integrity of the airplane could be 
negatively affected if those repairs are not re-worked. We are 
issuing this AD to detect and correct certain repairs on the floor 
cross beams flange. If those repairs are not reworked, the 
structural integrity of the airplane could be negatively affected.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, 
unless already done.

(g) Inspection

    (1) Within 30 months after the effective date of this AD: Do a 
general visual inspection of the floor cross beams flange at FR11 
and FR12A to determine which structural repair manual (SRM) repairs 
have been done, in accordance with the instructions of the service 
information specified in paragraph (g)(1)(i), (g)(1)(ii), or 
(g)(1)(iii) of this AD, as applicable.
    (i) For Model A300 series airplanes: Airbus All Operator Telex 
(AOT) A300-53A0392, dated March 14, 2012.
    (ii) For Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, and B4-622 
airplanes; Model A300 B4-605R and B4-622R airplanes; Model A300 F4-
605R and F4-622R airplanes; and Model A300 C4-605R Variant F 
airplanes: Airbus AOT A300-53A6171, dated March 14, 2012.
    (iii) For Model A310 series airplanes: Airbus AOT A310-53A2135, 
dated March 14, 2012.
    (2) A review of airplane maintenance records is acceptable in 
lieu of the general visual inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) 
of this AD if the SRM repairs can be positively identified from that 
review.

(h) Repair

    If, during the inspection required by paragraph (g)(1) of this 
AD, it is determined that any SRM repair specified in paragraph 2 of 
the service information identified in paragraph (g)(1)(i), 
(g)(1)(ii), or (g)(1)(iii) of this AD, as applicable, has been done: 
Within 30 months after the effective date of this AD, rework the 
repair 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).

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, 
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using 
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight 
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information 
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Dan Rodina, 
Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport 
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98507-
3356; telephone 425-227-2125; fax 425-427-1149. 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

[[Page 16259]]

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.

(j) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) 
Airworthiness Directive 2013-0220, dated September 18, 2013, for 
related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the 
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-
0229-0002.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the 
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed 
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do 
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Airbus All Operator Telex A300-53A0392, dated March 14, 
2012. The document number and date appear on only the first page of 
this document.
    (ii) Airbus All Operator Telex A300-53A6171, dated March 14, 
2012. The document number and date appear on only the first page of 
this document.
    (iii) Airbus All Operator Telex A310-53A2135, dated March 14, 
2012. The document number and date appear on only the first page of 
this document.
    (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/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 14, 2015.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-06583 Filed 3-26-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P