[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 114 (Thursday, June 15, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27444-27448]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11826]

========================================================================
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. 82, No. 114 / Thursday, June 15, 2017 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-0451; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-253-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM); reopening
of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2004-23-20. AD 2004-
23-20 applies to certain Airbus Model A300 B2-1A, A300 B2-1C, A300 B2K-
3C, A300 B2-203, A300 B4-2C, A300 B4-103, and A300 B4-203 airplanes;
and Model A300 B4-601, A300 B4-603, A300 B4-620, A300 B4-622, A300 B4-
605R, A300 B4-622R, A300 F4-605R and A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes.
This action revises the NPRM by reducing certain compliance times,
among other changes. We are proposing this airworthiness directive (AD)
to address the unsafe condition on these products. Since these actions
impose an additional burden over those proposed in the NPRM we are
reopening the comment period to allow the public the chance to comment
on these proposed changes.

DATES: The comment period for the NPRM published in the Federal
Register on February 1, 2016 (81 FR 5056), is reopened.
    We must receive comments on this SNPRM by July 31, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     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 SNPRM, 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<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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-
0451; 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 SNPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received,
and other information. The street address for the Docket Office
(telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) 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, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; 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-2016-0451;
Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-253-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this SNPRM. We will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
SNPRM 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 SNPRM.

Discussion

    On November 10, 2004, we issued AD 2004-23-20, Amendment 39-13875
(69 FR 68779, November 26, 2004) (``AD 2004-23-20''). AD 2004-23-20
requires actions intended to address an unsafe condition on certain
Airbus Model A300 B2-1A, B2-1C, B2K-3C, B2-203, B4-2C, B4-103, and B4-
203 airplanes; and Model A300 B4-601, A300 B4-603, A300 B4-620, A300
B4-622, A300 B4-605R, A300 B4-622R, A300 F4-605R and A300 C4-605R
Variant F airplanes.
    We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD to
supersede AD 2004-23-20 that would apply to certain Airbus Model A300
B2-1A, B2-1C, B2K-3C, B2-203, B4-2C, B4-103, and B4-203 airplanes; and
Model A300 B4-601, A300 B4-603, A300 B4-620, A300 B4-622, A300 B4-605R,
A300 B4-622R, A300 F4-605R and A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes. The
NPRM published in the Federal Register on February 1, 2016 (81 FR 5056)
(``the NPRM''). The NPRM was prompted by a report indicating that the
material used to manufacture the upper frame feet was changed and
negatively affected the fatigue life of the frame feet. The NPRM
proposed to reduce the compliance times for the initial inspection and
the inspection intervals. The NPRM also proposed to expand the
applicability and require an additional repair on certain airplanes
that have been modified.

Actions Since the NPRM Was Issued

    Since we issued the NPRM, we have determined the compliance times
for the proposed modification must be reduced and an additional
modification must be done. In addition, we have determined that the
repetitive inspections are no longer necessary. Therefore, certain
requirements identified as ``retained'' in the proposed AD (in the
NPRM) have been removed from this proposed AD.

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD
2016-0249, dated December 14, 2016; corrected January 10, 2017
(referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness
Information, or ``the MCAI''); to correct an unsafe condition for all
Airbus Model A300 B4-603, A300 B4-620, A300 B4-622, A300 B4-605R, A300
B4-622R, A300 F4-605R, A300 F4-622R, and A300 C4-605R Variant F
airplanes. The MCAI states:

    During an inspection in accordance with Airworthiness Limitation
Item (ALI) 53-15-54 on an A300-600 aeroplane, Frames (FR) 43, FR44,
FR45 and FR46 were found cracked between stringer (STGR) 24 and
STGR30 on the aeroplane right hand side. FR45 was also found cracked
on the aeroplane left hand side.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could reduce the
structural integrity of the fuselage.
    To address this potential unsafe condition and improve the
fatigue life of the upper frame feet fittings, Airbus issued Service
Bulletin (SB) A300-53-6125 to provide instructions for expansion of
the most sensitive fastener holes between FR41 and FR46. DGAC
[Direction G[eacute]n[eacute]rale de l'Aviation Civile] France
issued AD F-2004-002 (EASA approval 2003-2108) [which corresponds to
FAA AD 2004-23-20] to require the structural modification defined in
SB A300-53-6125 Revision 03 (Airbus modification 12168).
    [DGAC] AD F-2004-002 was subsequently superseded by EASA AD
2013-0295 to amend the inspection programme in this area as provided
in SB A300-53-6122 (which is now obsolete and replaced by ALI task
531558, published in the [Airworthiness Limitation Section] ALS Part
2 Revision 01 dated 07 August 2015).
    Since EASA AD 2013-0295 was issued, a new investigation was
conducted in the frame of the Widespread Fatigue Damage study.
Airbus revised the thresholds for the accomplishment of the
instructions defined in SB A300-53-6125 and issued SB A300-53-6178
to provide modification instructions to improve the fatigue life of
upper frame feet fittings on aeroplane on which Airbus modification
(mod) 12168 or Airbus SB A300-53-6125 was embodied.
    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD retains some
requirements of EASA AD 2013-0295, which is superseded, and requires
modification of the upper frame feet fittings from FR41 to FR46
[repetitive inspections are not retained].
    This [EASA] AD is republished to correct a typographical error
in the compliance time * * *.

    We have also removed Model A300 B2-1A, B2-1C, B2K-3C, B2-203, B4-
2C, B4-103, and B4-203 airplanes from the applicability of this
proposed AD. We have issued AD 2017-05-01, Amendment 39-18811 (82 FR
12401, March 3, 2017), which addresses the identified unsafe condition
on all Model A300 series airplanes.
    In addition, we have removed Model A300 B4-601 airplanes from the
applicability of this proposed AD. The airplane manufacturer stated
that all serial numbers for this airplane model have been removed from
service. Also, we have added Model A300 F4-622R airplanes to the
applicability of this proposed AD to correspond with the applicability
in the MCAI.
    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
0451.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued Service Bulletin A300-53-6125, Revision 04, dated
March 17, 2015; and Service Bulletin A300-53-6178, dated March 17,
2015. The service information describes procedures for the modification
of certain upper frame feet fittings. These documents are distinct
since they apply to airplanes in different configurations.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this proposed AD. We considered the comments received.

Request To Specify That Reporting Is Optional

    FedEx requested that the reporting action specified in Airbus
Service Bulletin A300-53-6122 be identified as an optional action in
the NPRM. The commenter stated that the NPRM does not include a
statement that the reporting requirements specified in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-6122 are not required by the NPRM. The commenter
stated that Airbus has received these reports in the past and has not
provided statistics or benefits to operators.
    We agree with the commenter that reporting should not be required.
All references to Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6122 have been
omitted from this proposed AD. Since the NPRM was issued, Airbus has
included the inspections specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-
6122 in appropriate airworthiness limitations. Since this proposed AD
does not include any references to Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-
6122, we have not revised this proposed AD in regard to this issue.

Request To Extend the Grace Period in Paragraph (n)(1) of the Proposed
AD

    FedEx requested that the grace period in paragraph (n)(1) of the
proposed AD (in the NPRM) be extended from 1,000 flight cycles to 2,000
flight cycles. The commenter noted that this would permit scheduling
this inspection and modification at the next major maintenance check
and would not impose any additional scheduling burden on operators. The
commenter stated that this would only affect seven airplanes in its
fleet that are currently awaiting the initial threshold for the
inspection. The commenter also mentioned that its experience to date
has not shown wide spread fatigue cracking in this area under the
existing 15,000-flight-cycle threshold.
    As stated previously, certain inspections, including those
specified in paragraph (m)(1) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM), are not
included in this proposed AD. Therefore, it is not necessary to extend
the grace period for the initial rotating probe inspection (which
corresponds to paragraph (n)(1) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM)). We
have not changed this proposed AD regarding this issue.

Request To Revise the Compliance Times in Paragraph (o) of the Proposed
AD

    United Parcel Service (UPS) requested that the NPRM be revised to
simplify the compliance requirements in paragraph (o) of the proposed
AD to reflect the current service experience of the fleet. UPS noted
that almost 12 years have passed between the issuance of AD 2004-23-20
and the NPRM. UPS pointed out that during this time new information
regarding structural fatigue has been developed and this information is
not reflected in the NPRM. In addition, UPS stated that, while it is
the FAA's standard practice to supersede an AD but retain information
from the AD being superseded in an NPRM, in this NPRM, the compliance
times in paragraph (o) of the proposed AD are confusing and difficult
to interpret.
    We agree with the commenter's request to clarify and simplify the
compliance times in paragraph (g)(1) of this proposed AD (which
corresponds to paragraphs (o)(1)(i) and (o)(1)(ii) of the proposed AD
(in the NPRM)), for the reasons provided by the commenter. We have
revised the compliance times in paragraph (g)(1) of this proposed AD to
correspond with the compliance times specified in the MCAI.

Request To Include Inspection in One Location

    UPS requested that we either include the inspection specified in
paragraph (n)(1)(i) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM) as an AD
requirement or as an airworthiness limitation. UPS stated that the
inspection specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6125, which is
mandated by paragraph (n)(1)(i) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM), is a
duplicate of ALI task 53-15-58. UPS noted that the NPRM and
airworthiness limitation documents have different inspection interval
requirements and there is the potential for duplicate and conflicting
requirements if either document is revised.
    We agree with the commenter's observation regarding duplicate
inspection requirements. ALI task 53-15-58 was revised in Airbus ALS
Part 2, Variation 13.2, to include the inspection in ALI task 53-15-58-
03. The inspection is required for airplanes that have not incorporated
the actions specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6125 and is no
longer required for airplanes that have incorporated the actions
specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6125. The FAA issued
Alternative Method of Compliance (AMOC) ANM-116-15-387 to AD 2013-13-
13, Amendment 39-17501 (79 FR 48957, August 19, 2014), that allows
operators to revise their maintenance or inspection programs by
incorporating Airbus ALS Part 2, Variation 13.2. We are working on
proposed rulemaking that would require operators to incorporate the
latest version of Airbus ALS Part 2, which includes the inspection
mentioned previously by the commenter. The inspections in paragraph
(m)(1) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM), along with the associated
compliance times in paragraph (n)(1) of the proposed AD (in the NPRM),
are not included in the requirements of this proposed AD. Therefore, no
changes to this proposed AD are necessary regarding this issue.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This SNPRM

    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 these
same type designs.
    Certain changes described above expand the scope of the rulemaking.
As a result, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the
comment period to provide additional opportunity for the public to
comment on this SNPRM.

Differences Between This SNPRM and the MCAI

    There is a difference between this SNPRM and the MCAI regarding how
the compliance time is stated for the post-modification actions
specified in paragraph (h) of this proposed AD. The MCAI states that
the post-modification actions should be accomplished ``no later than 6
months (estimated by projection of airplane usage) prior to exceeding
24,500 flight cycles or 42,700 flight hours, whichever occurs first
after Airbus SB A300-53-6178 embodiment.'' Paragraph (h) of this
proposed AD specifies that the post-modification actions should be done
``Prior to exceeding 24,100 total flight cycles or 42,000 total flight
hours, whichever occurs first after doing the modification required by
paragraph (g)(2) of this AD.'' The compliance time in paragraph (h) of
this proposed AD is based upon the average annual utilization of the
Airbus airplanes identified in paragraph (c) of this proposed AD, which
is 790 flight cycles and 1,463 flight hours (or 395 flight cycles and
732 flight hours over 6 months). We have rounded the compliance time in
paragraph (h) of this proposed AD accordingly.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this SNPRM affects 65 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    The actions that are required by AD 2004-23-20 and retained in this
SNPRM take about 90 work-hours per product, at an average labor rate of
$85 per work-hour. Required parts cost about $4,000 per product. Based
on these figures, the estimated cost of the actions that were required
by AD 2004-23-20 is $11,650 per product.
    We also estimate that it would take up to 109 work-hours per
product to comply with the new basic requirements of this SNPRM. The
average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts would cost up
to $6,070 per product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of
this SNPRM on U.S. operators to be $996,775, or $15,335 per product.
    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.

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)
2004-23-20, Amendment 39-13875 (69 FR 68779, November 26, 2004), and
adding the following new AD:

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2016-0451; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-
253-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by July 31, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2004-23-20, Amendment 39-13875 (69 FR 68779,
November 26, 2004) (``AD 2004-23-20'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Model A300 B4-603, A300 B4-620, A300
B4-622, A300 B4-605R, A300 B4-622R, A300 F4-605R, A300 F4-622R, and
A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes; certificated in any category; all
manufacturer serial numbers.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report indicating that the material
used to manufacture the upper frame feet was changed and negatively
affected the fatigue life of the frame feet. We are issuing this AD
to prevent cracking of the center section of the fuselage, which
could result in a ruptured frame foot and reduced structural
integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Modification of the Upper Frame Feet Fittings

    (1) Except for airplanes identified in table 2 to paragraphs
(g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD: At the times specified in table 1 to
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, depending on the average flight time
(AFT), as defined in paragraph (i) of this AD, modify the upper
frame feet fittings, including doing all applicable related
investigative and corrective actions, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6125,
Revision 04, dated March 17, 2015 (``SB A300-53-6125, Revision
04''). Do all applicable related investigative and corrective
actions before further flight. Where Airbus SB A300-53-6125,
Revision 04, specifies to contact Airbus for appropriate action, and
specifies that action as ``RC'' (Required for Compliance): Before
further flight, accomplish corrective actions in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (l)(2) of this AD.

  Table 1 to Paragraph (g)(1) of This AD--Modification SB A300-53-6125,
                               Revision 04
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Initial compliance time  (flight
          Airplane usage              cycles or flight hours, whichever
                                      occurs first since first flight)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFT greater than 1.5..............  Within 10,200 flight cycles or
                                     22,100 flight hours.
AFT equal to or less than 1.5.....  Within 11,000 flight cycles or
                                     16,600 flight hours.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 2 to Paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of This AD--Modification SB A300-
                                 53-6178
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Airplane configuration               Initial compliance time
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post-modification 12168...........  Within 27,100 flight cycles or
                                     47,300 flight hours since the
                                     airplane's first flight, whichever
                                     occurs first.
Post-SB A300-53-6125..............  Within 27,100 flight cycles or
                                     47,300 flight hours after
                                     embodiment of SB A300-53-6125,
                                     whichever occurs first.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) For airplanes identified in table 2 to paragraphs (g)(1) and
(g)(2) of this AD: At the applicable compliance time specified in
table 2 to paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD, modify the upper
frame feet fittings, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6178, dated March
17, 2015. Where Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6178, dated March
17, 2015, specifies to contact Airbus for appropriate action, and
specifies that action as ``RC'': Before further flight, accomplish
corrective actions in accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (l)(2) of this AD.

(h) Additional Post-Modification Actions

    Prior to exceeding 24,100 total flight cycles or 42,000 total
flight hours, whichever occurs first after doing the modification
required by paragraph (g)(2) of this AD: Contact 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); for instructions to do
additional actions, and do those actions at the compliance times
stated therein.

(i) Definition of AFT

    For the purpose of this AD, to establish the applicable AFT for
the actions required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, divide the
total accumulated flight hours counted from take-off to touch-down
by the total accumulated flight cycles as of the effective date of
this AD.

(j) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the modification required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, if the modification was performed before
the effective date of this AD using the service information
specified in paragraph (j)(1), (j)(2), (j)(3), or (j)(4) of this AD.
    (1) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6125, dated November 8,
2000.
    (2) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6125, Revision 01, dated
June 13, 2003.
    (3) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6125, Revision 02, dated
February 25, 2005.
    (4) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6125, Revision 03, dated
September 13, 2011.

(k) Exempt Airplanes

    For airplanes on which Airbus Modification 12168 has been
embodied in production: The modification required by paragraph
(g)(1) of this AD is not required by this AD.

(l) 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 the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (m)(2) of this AD. Information
may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: 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 EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. If
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized
signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by
paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD: If any service information
contains procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those
procedures and tests must be done to

comply with this AD; any procedures or tests that are not identified
as RC are recommended. Those procedures and tests that are not
identified as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in
accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection program
without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and
tests identified as RC can be done and the airplane can be put back
in an airworthy condition. Any substitutions or changes to
procedures or tests identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

(m) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2016-0249, dated December 14,
2016; corrected January 10, 2017; 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-
2016-0451.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Dan Rodina,
Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (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<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 31, 2017.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-11826 Filed 6-14-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 174 (Monday, September 13, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50842-50843]
[FR Doc No: 2021-19565]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0471; Airspace Docket No. 21-AGL-25]
RIN 2120-AA66

Revocation of Class E Airspace and Amendment of Class E Airspace;
Peebles and West Union, OH

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action revokes the Class E extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface at Peebles, OH; and amends the Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Alexander Salamon
Airport, West Union, OH. This action is the result of airspace reviews
caused by the decommissioning of the West Union non-federal non-
directional beacon (NDB). The geographic coordinates of the Alexander
Salamon Airport are also being updated to coincide with the FAA's
aeronautical database.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, December 2, 2021. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and
publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11E at NARA, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it revokes the Class E extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Peebles, OH; and amends the Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface at Alexander Salamon Airport,
West Union, OH, to support instrument flight rule operations at these
airports.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the
Federal Register (86 FR 35420; July 6, 2021) for Docket No. FAA-2021-
0471 to revoke the Class E extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Peebles, OH; and amend the Class E airspace extending upward
from 700 feet above the surface at Alexander Salamon Airport, West
Union, OH. Interested parties were invited to participate in this
rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the
FAA. No comments were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.11E, dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15,
2020, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15,
2020. FAA Order 7400.11E is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11E lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 71:
    Revokes the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface at Peebles, OH;
    And amends the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface to within a 6.4-mile (decreased from a 7.7-mile)
radius of Alexander Salamon Airport, West Union, OH; removes the name
associated with the airport to comply with changes to FAA Order
7400.2N, Procedures for Handling Airspace Matters; and updates the
geographic coordinates of the airport to coincide with the FAA's
aeronautical database.
    This action is due to airspace reviews caused by the
decommissioning of the West Union non-federal NDB, and the closure of
the airport and cancellation of the instrument procedures at Peebles,
OH.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5.a. This airspace action is not expected
to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11E,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and
effective September 15, 2020, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

AGL OH E5 Peebles, OH [Removed]

* * * * *

AGL OH E5 West Union, OH [Amended]

Alexander Salamon Airport, OH
    (Lat. 38[deg]51'06'' N, long. 83[deg]33'58'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.4-mile radius of the Alexander Salamon Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on September 7, 2021.
Martin A. Skinner,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2021-19565 Filed 9-10-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P