1 SUPPORTING STATEMENT Rule for the Inclusion of Delaware and New Jersey in the Clean Air Interstate Rule EPA ICR # 2184.01 1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION 1( a) Title of the Information Collection " Rule for the Inclusion of Delaware and New Jersey in the Clean Air Interstate Rule  Proposed Rule."

1( b) Short Characterization/ Abstract The United States ( U. S.) Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) has proposed a Rule to add the States of Delaware and New Jersey to the States that are subject to the Clean Air Interstate Rule ( CAIR) because of their PM 2.5 impact on other States and to require that Delaware and New Jersey report all of the emissions related data required by CAIR. ( Delaware and New Jersey are already affected by ozone related requirements in CAIR.) These emissions data reporting requirements include new reporting requirements and combine these new requirements with existing requirements from the Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule ( CERR), the Emission Reporting Requirements for Ozone State Implementation Plan ( SIP) Revisions Relating to Statewide Budgets for NO X Emissions to Reduce Regional Transport of Ozone ( NO X SIP Call) and the Acid Rain Program under Title IV of the CAA Amendments of 1990. Each of these three existing requirements has an approved ICR in place. The current ICRs are: for the CERR, ICR # 0916.10, for the NO X SIP Call, ICR # 1857.03 and for the Acid Rain Program, ICR # 1633.13. The ICR for the Rule to Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone ( Clean Air Interstate Rule) is ICR # 2152.01 and is also considered in this ICR..

This supporting statement and ICR is being submitted to account for the incremental burden associated with the addition of Delaware and New Jersey to the CAIR for PM 2.5. As such, this supporting statement references the burden analysis included in ICR # s 0916.10, 1857.03, 1633.13 and 2152.01 and estimates the change in burden resulting from the proposed additional requirements for Delaware and New Jersey on each of these ICRs.

EPA is proposing to include Delaware and New Jersey in the PM 2.5 requirements under CAIR. This proposal details the additions and changes to reporting requirements. These changes can be divided in to two categories: 1. Changes to existing requirements for emission reporting 2 under the CERR and NO X SIP Call and 2. The addition of reporting requirements to support emissions trading in states using the CAIR model cap and trade rules. Throughout this Supporting Statement, the burden analysis associated with these two categories will be discussed sequentially as " Emission Reporting Requirements" and " Emission Trading Requirements."

Emission Reporting Requirements Taken together, the existing emissions reporting requirements under the NO X SIP Call and CERR are already rather comprehensive in terms of the States covered and the information required. Therefore, the practical impact of the changes proposed for Delaware and New Jersey is to impose only one new requirement.

Under the existing CERR, yearly reporting is required only for sources whose emissions exceed specified amounts. Under the CAIR, the 23 States and the District of Columbia subject to the CAIR for reasons of PM 2.5 must report to EPA each year a set of specified data elements for all sources subject to new controls adopted specifically to meet the CAIR requirements related to PM 2.5, unless the sources participate in an EPA administered emissions trading program. This is like the every year reporting requirement for controlled sources under the NOx SIP Call, but covering SO 2 in addition to NO X and covering the whole year   since the PM 2.5 NAAQS at issue is the annual NAAQS   rather than only the ozone season. This proposal could increase the number of sources for which Delaware and New Jersey must submit reports each year rather than only every third year, if Delaware and/ or New Jersey chooses to control non EGU sources under the CAIR or if Delaware and/ or New Jersey does not join the EPA trading programs for EGUs. It is proposed that this new requirement begin with the 2009 inventory year, the report for which will be due to EPA by June 1, 2011. After the 2009 reporting year, this new requirement will have no effect on States that fully comply with the CAIR by requiring their EGUs to participate in the EPA model cap and trade programs.

Emission Trading Requirements For this ICR, it is assumed that Delaware and New Jersey will adopt the CAIR SO 2 and annual NO X model trading rules, and the burden associated with such a program is evaluated. This trading program burden would include the paperwork burden related to ( 1) transferring and tracking allowances; ( 2) the allocation of allowances to affected units; ( 3) permitting; and ( 4) monitoring and reporting. The monitoring and reporting requirements of a trading program will require capital and labor expenditures by industry, and these are evaluated.

Like with the Acid Rain Program and the NO X SIP Call, the ability to buy and sell ( or transfer) allowances is expected to provide substantial economic benefits by encouraging the greatest emissions reductions where costs of reductions are lowest. Allowance trading cannot be implemented, however, unless regulations governing emissions monitoring and permitting of sources are in place as well. To ensure compliance with the emissions reduction requirements and to provide the regionwide consistency needed to foster the allowance market, the designated 3 representative of the owners and operators of each source with affected units are required to have CAIR requirements integrated into their Title V permits for the affected source and to certify that an approved SO 2 and NO X emissions monitoring system has been installed and is properly operated at each affected unit.

For affected units currently required to monitor using Part 75 provisions, information for the proposed allocation methodology will be recorded and collected as part of the emissions monitoring and reporting process.

While many sources have already installed necessary emissions monitoring equipment due to requirements under other regulations, some sources will need to install new monitors or upgrade existing monitors. Capital costs also usually include the cost of initial certification of new or upgraded monitors is included as part of start up costs.

Emissions monitoring and reporting by sources in the cap and trade program is fundamental to the allowance trading system. EPA will use the data contained in the reports to verify actual emissions. Without accurate monitoring and reporting of emissions, the integrity of the allowance system would be undermined, and there would be no assurance that the cap is achieved and emissions had been reduced. To meet the emissions monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements, affected units are required to ( 1) submit a monitoring plan and certification reports for each monitoring system, ( 2) record hourly emissions data, and ( 3) submit reports of their emissions and operating data to EPA. Sources with monitors already certified under Part 75 may be exempt from initial certification requirements.

All participants in the allowance transfer system will be required either to complete and submit an allowance transfer form for each allowance transfer or to perform the transfer on line. Participants in the transfer system that are not affected sources, such as allowance brokers, fuel suppliers and environmental groups will also be required to file a one time account information application to establish accounts in the allowance tracking systems. For sources affected by the CAIR, allowance transfers currently conducted under the Acid Rain and NOx SIP Call Programs will in the future occur in the context of the CAIR Trading Program.

2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION 2( a) Need/ Authority for the Collection One of the goals of this proposed rulemaking is to consolidate the emission inventory reporting requirements found in several existing regulations and streamline the activities involved in submitting the emissions data to EPA. This will enable the EPA to achieve uniformity and completeness in emission inventories used to support national, regional, and local air quality planning and attainment. 4 While the CAA does not provide a specific authorization for a national emissions data base, the CAA provides the EPA ample legislative authority for acquiring such data. Emissions data are of vital importance to the EPA for fulfilling a host of monitoring, standard setting, rulemaking, reviewing, and reporting duties. Section 110 and 301( a) of the CAA provide a primary authority for a national emissions data base. Section 110 requires each State to prepare a plan which provides for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the primary standard for each pollutant for which air quality criteria have been issued. This plan must include provisions for periodic reports identifying sources and listing amounts of emissions. Section 301( a) authorizes the Administrator to promulgate necessary regulations.

Congressional support for collecting and reporting emissions data is demonstrated in three sections of the CAA. Section 110( a)( 2)( F) requires that each State provide for periodic reports on the nature and amounts of emissions of criteria pollutants from stationary sources.

Sections 182( a)( 3)( A) and 187( a)( 5) of the CAA specify periodic inventory requirements for ozone and CO nonattainment areas, respectively. Section 182( a)( 3)( A) requires States with ozone nonattainment areas to submit a current inventory of actual emissions of VOC, NO X, and CO every 3 years. Section 187( a)( 5) requires a similar inventory of actual CO emissions for CO nonattainment areas. Periodic inventories include emission estimates for all point, nonpoint, onroad mobile, nonroad mobile, and biogenic sources. Section 172( c)( 3) also provides the Administrator with discretionary authority to require other emissions data as deemed necessary for State Implementation Plan ( SIP) development in nonattainment areas to meet the NAAQS. In 1998, EPA promulgated the NO X SIP Call which requires the affected States and the District of Columbia to submit SIP revisions providing for NO X reductions to reduce their adverse impact on downwind ozone nonattainment areas. ( 63 FR 57356, October 27, 1998). As part of that rule, codified in 40 CFR 51.122, EPA established emissions reporting requirements to be included in the SIP revisions required under that action. Another set of emissions reporting requirements, termed the Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule ( CERR), was promulgated by EPA in 2002, and is codified at 40 CFR part 51 subpart A. ( 67 FR 39602, June 10, 2002). These requirements replaced the requirements previously contained in subpart Q, expanding their geographic and pollutant coverages while simplifying them in other ways.

As noted above, at present, two sections of title 40 of the CFR contain emissions reporting requirements applicable to States: subpart A of part 51 ( the CERR) and section 51.122 in subpart G of part 51 ( the NO X SIP Call reporting requirements). The proposed rulemaking would consolidate these for Delaware and New Jersey, with modifications as proposed below. The modifications are intended to achieve the additional reporting needed to verify the reductions required by the CAIR.

2( b) Practical Utility/ Users of the Data Emission Reporting Requirements 5 Emissions data and related information on stationary point and nonpoint sources, as well as nonroad mobile and onroad mobile sources, are routinely used by the OAQPS and the EPA Regional Offices in carrying out a variety of activities. These activities support regulatory functions as well as functions that are more programmatic in nature such as trends analyses. Such projects include:

° Evaluation of existing control strategies, such as the NO X SIP Call, for States and larger areas;

° Evaluation of proposed control strategies for States and larger areas, including applications of regional scale models;

° Development of national control strategies and preparation of Regulatory Impact Analyses ( RIA);

° Preparation and publication of national summaries of emissions including trend analyses;

° As a data base to assist in the identification of important source categories for future regulation; and ° Preparation of the stationary source portion of a report to Congress on SO 2 emissions. This report is required by Section 406 of the CAA and is due on a 5 year cycle that began on January 1, 1995. The report must contain an inventory of national annual SO 2 emissions from industrial sources ( as defined in Title IV of the CAA).

EPA's Office of Research and Development ( ORD) uses emissions source data in determining priorities for control technology research and as a key data component in the application of regional scale models. The EPA's Regional Offices use emissions and other source parameters to support source inspections and in the analyses of the impact of new or modified sources within an area. EPA's Emission Factor and Inventory Group ( EFIG) use the data to assess and analyze trends in criteria pollutant emissions over time.

In addition to supporting projects and initiatives internal to EPA, both the OAQPS and the Regional Offices respond to numerous requests for reports on emission sources. Typically this is done under the Freedom of Information Act. Most requests come from contractors and consultants involved in special studies; a smaller number come from the press and universities and others involved in research.

The collection of emissions data specific to nonattainment areas for certain criteria air pollutants is necessary to comply with requirements specified in Title I of the CAA. States with nonattainment areas rely on current information for point, nonpoint, and mobile sources to revise their SIPs and to plan for emission reductions mandated by the CAA. In addition, a statewide inventory compiled at least every 3 years for all point, nonpoint, and mobile sources is considered 6 to be a key tool to assist States in meeting CAA requirements that address emissions tracking, compliance issues, and mid course adjustments. Statewide emission inventories can be used by States affected by pollution transport from upwind areas to develop more efficient control strategies to meet the NAAQS. Statewide emission inventories that were developed by EPA ( the NEI) are being used by the Regional Planning Organizations ( RPOs) as the starting point for the development of statewide emission inventories used in the regional haze program to define control strategies.

Emission Trading Requirements Data from emissions monitoring is indispensable to successful implementation of the trading programs for two reasons:

° The primary purpose of the trading programs is to assist States in the attainment of the fine particulate matter national ambient air quality standard ( NAAQS) by reducing the adverse effects of the transport of fine particles from upwind States by reducing annual emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides; and ° EPA can only enforce the program by comparing, for each affected unit, emissions data and the number of allowances held.

Information collected on allowance transfers will be used by EPA or its designated agent to track allowances for the purpose of determining compliance with the CAIR annual NO X and SO 2 Trading Programs. Information on allowance transfers will also be used by participants in the allowance market and the public to evaluate the activities of affected sources, and by EPA for program evaluation.

Together, the allowance trading system, operating permits, and emissions data will help to provide the accountability to allow the NO X and SO 2 Trading Programs to function without more stringent command and control approaches.

3. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA 3( a) Nonduplication Emission Reporting Requirements The EPA will allow the direct reporting of point source data from sources to EPA to satisfy this requirement if the sources are subject to the monitoring and reporting requirements of 40 CFR Part 75. The direct reporting of data from sources to EPA will minimize the reporting burden on Delaware and New Jersey. Also, direct reporting will avoid duplication of effort for sources subject to the Part 75 requirements. 7 Emission Trading Requirements Reporting requirements for affected sources for the CAIR NO X and SO 2 Trading Programs will be integrated with existing Part 75 reporting formats. The reporting formats are currently used by Acid Rain Program units under Title IV of the Act and units subject to the NO X SIP Call Trading Program implemented under Title I of the Act. Thus, for units subject to Acid Rain or the CAIR quarterly reporting requirements, or both, only one submission will need to be made on a quarterly basis.

3( b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB Not required. This is a rule related ICR.

3( c) Consultations Emission Reporting Requirements Because the emission reporting requirements for CAIR were developed after the NPR was published on January 30, 2004 ( 69 FR 4566), consultations with the stakeholder community were necessarily limited. Since the publication of the SNPR on June 10, 2004 ( 69 FR 32684), discussions have been held with STAPPA/ ALAPCO to clarify EPA's logic in developing the proposed rule and to answer questions.

Emission Trading Requirements The requirements for the CAIR Trading Programs have been developed using both the methodology found in existing trading programs as well as consultations with interested parties. EPA built on the cap and trade strategy used in the Acid Rain Program, Ozone Transport Commission's NO X Budget Program, and the NO X SIP Call.

EPA held two workshops with states in the NO X SIP Call or OTC programs to discuss lessons learned in those programs. Additionally, EPA has frequent interaction with affected sources and states in the course of implementing the Acid Rain and NO X SIP Call Trading Programs. EPA has received comments following the workshops and through these less formal interactions and considered and incorporated those comments into the proposed rule and ICR.

Finally, as part of updating the ICR for the Acid Rain Program ( Part 75) monitoring requirements, EPA contacted various affected parties to gather information on CEM capital costs, CEM operation and maintenance costs, fuel meter capital costs, and CEM/ fuelmeter testing costs. That information has been used in this ICR where appropriate. 8 3( d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection Emission Reporting Requirements The submittal dates required for reporting of emissions data to EPA have been established to minimize the burden on Delaware and New Jersey, but also to ensure that Delaware and New Jersey are collecting timely and sufficient emissions inventory data to support their air pollution control efforts. A statewide inventory compiled at least every 3 years for all point, nonpoint, and mobile sources is considered important to assist Delaware and New Jersey in meeting various CAA requirements.

If the information collection were not carried out every 3 years for all sources and annually for major point sources, the EPA would not be able to maintain a central, national repository of emissions data from which to extract updated information needed to fulfill EPA mandates.

If this information collection were not carried out annually for sources being controlled to meet the SO 2 and NO X budgets, EPA would not be able to verify that emission reductions necessary to meet Delaware and New Jersey's SO 2 and NO X emission budgets were being achieved.

In addition, a triennial report of all NO X sources statewide is vital in enabling EPA to track Delaware and New Jersey's progress towards meeting the NO X budgets. Because the SO 2 and NO X budgets prescribed have been deemed essential in order for downwind States to attain the NAAQS in a timely manner, data collected less frequently would be of little or no use.

Emission Trading Requirements Submittal of allowance trading information and emissions information on an annual basis provides necessary feedback on the requirements of the program, especially whether the program caps have been maintained. If this information collection were not carried out annually for sources being controlled to meet the SO 2 and NO X budgets, EPA would not be able to verify that emission reductions necessary to meet each State's SO 2 and NO X emission budgets were being achieved. Because the SO 2 and NO X budgets prescribed have been deemed essential in order to aid downwind States in attaining the NAAQS in a timely manner, data collected less frequently would be of little or no use.

Quarterly collections of emissions data allows the opportunity to check data for errors and provide rapid feedback on needed adjustments to data collection systems, and thereby promotes accurate and reliable emissions data. For this same reason, existing federal and state emission monitoring programs often require quarterly reporting, or in some cases, monthly. Less frequent collection, such as semi annually or annually, would increase the amount of preparation and review time at the end of the reporting period both for regulated sources and for EPA. This would slow down the process for the verification of compliance. 9 3( e) General Guidelines This ICR does not violate any of OMB's guidelines for information collections.

3( f) Confidentiality Any data that is submitted to EPA under this proposed rule will be considered in the public domain and cannot be treated as confidential.

As required by Section 114 of the Clean Air Act, estimates or measurements of emissions must be treated as nonconfidential. Under Agency procedures, data items relating to the computation of emissions may be identified as sensitive by a State and are then treated as " Statesensitive by EPA. The potentially State sensitive items include the following: Process rate, boiler design capacity, emission estimation codes, percent space heat, operating rate, and maximum operation rate/ hour. Where Federal and State requirements are inconsistent, the appropriate EPA Regional Office should be consulted for final reconciliation.

3( g) Sensitive Questions This information collection does not ask any questions concerning sexual behavior or attitudes, religious beliefs, or other matters usually considered private.

4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED 4( a) Respondents/ Standard Industrial Classification ( SIC) Codes The emissions data required by the proposed rule will be submitted by Delaware and New Jersey's air pollution control agencies. Delaware and New Jersey must report to EPA each year a set of specified data elements for all sources subject to new controls adopted specifically to meet the CAIR requirements related to PM2.5, unless the sources participate in an EPA administered emissions trading program. The affected SIC code would be 9511  Air and Water Resource and Solid Waste Management, which includes governmental environmental protection and control agencies, and pollution control agencies.

This ICR also estimates a burden for affected industry sources to monitor SO 2 and NO x mass emissions and demonstrate compliance with SO 2 and NO x control measures. Sources may report data directly to EPA if a source is required to meet the monitoring and reporting requirements of Part 75. It is expected that Delaware and New Jersey will choose to control large electric utility sources to comply with their SO 2 and NO x emissions budgets. Electric utility combustion sources are generally classified as either SIC 4911  Electric Services, or 4931  Electric and Other Services Combined [ NAICS 221112 Electric Power Distribution]. 10 4( b) Information Requested Emission Reporting Requirements The CERR and NO X SIP Call established the basic emission reporting requirements. The CAIR changes some of these requirements such that the previously accounted for reporting burden would also change. Only the changes to the CERR and NO X SIP Call reporting requirements that would change reporting burden are discussed here.

Respondent activities For the emission inventory reporting requirements of the CAIR, respondent activities are very similar to what has been required to satisfy reporting under CERR and the NO X SIP Call. The specific State respondent activities associated with the CAIR that are changes from the existing CERR and NO X SIP Call requirements are outlined below.

The one time State burden item:

° Read the reporting requirements of the rule.

Emission Trading Requirements This section describes the data items requested from affected sources for the collections described in this ICR. This section also defines the activities in which respondents must engage to assemble, submit, or store these data items.

( i) Data Items, Including Recordkeeping Requirements ( a) Allowance Tracking There are several data items required for allowance tracking activities. First, the affected source must submit account certificates of representation for the CAIR designated representative and ( if desired) alternate CAIR designated representative. This documentation, found in 40 CFR § § 96.113 and .213, must include:

Identification of the source and unit, ° Dates on which the unit commenced operation and commenced commercial operation,

Name and contact information for the CAIR designated representative and alternate,

A list of the owners and operators of each source and unit, and

A certification statement and signature of the CAIR designated representative and alternate.

Certification applications are to be kept for a period of 5 years pursuant to the general 11 requirements imposed for Title V permitted facilities.

( b) Permitting The basic requirement for permitting will be an application for a permit revision to a source's operating permit issued under Title V of the Act. Although there is some possibility that a non Title V source could be affected under the CAIR Trading Program, all affected sources are assumed to be Title V sources for purposes of this ICR. Except for the permit revision application, all of the other monitoring, reporting or recordkeeping requirements associated with Title V permitting are either part of the baseline Title V requirements or are covered separately under section 4( c). Title V permit applications must be kept for 5 years pursuant to Title V recordkeeping requirements. In addition, coal fired units that are not part of the Acid Rain Program are expected to have to apply for a permit to construct under Title I of the Act.

( c) Monitoring and Reporting Affected trading program sources would be required to monitor annual SO 2 and NO X mass emissions, and record and report emissions data using the requirements of 40 CFR Part 75. The emissions monitoring requirements specify that affected sources must ( 1) submit a monitoring plan for each affected unit at a source, ( 2) submit data for certification of each monitor, and ( 3) record hourly operational, pollutant monitor, and flow monitor data for each affected unit and submit quarterly reports of their emissions data to EPA.

Respondents are required by 40 CFR 75.64 to submit the quarterly SO 2 and NO X mass emissions data electronically, by direct electronic submission to EPA, and must also include a certification statement by the designated representative of the unit. All monitoring records are to be kept for three years, with one possible exception under a voluntary option for fuel flowmeter calibration testing.

( ii) Respondent Activities The primary tasks that will be performed by trading program respondents to meet the emissions monitoring requirements are ( 1) completing and submitting appropriate monitoring plan forms for each affected source and each affected unit at a source; ( 2) conducting tests to certify the operation of monitors, and submitting test results to EPA; ( 3) recording hourly emissions data ( this activity generally is performed electronically); ( 4) operation and maintenance activities associated with the monitoring, including quality assurance activities; ( 5) assuring data quality, preparing quarterly reports of emissions data and submitting these reports to EPA; and ( 6) responding to error messages generated by EPA. In addition, respondents will have to purchase the necessary monitoring hardware and purchase the electronic data reporting software ( or software upgrades). 12 5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED   AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODS, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 5( a) Agency Activities Emission Reporting Requirements The EPA activities associated with the rule include:

° Receiving, reviewing, and storing emission inventory data submitted by each State;

° Processing and updating data submitted by States, including performing quality assurance of data, and coordination of efforts to resolve errors and anomalies; and ° Fulfilling information requests.

Emission Trading Requirements The major EPA activities related to the CAIR Trading Program include ( 1) maintenance and administration of the SO 2 and NO X allowance tracking systems, ( 2) reviewing permit applications, ( 3) reviewing monitoring plans and certification applications, ( 4) processing, reviewing and evaluating reports of quarterly emissions data from affected units, ( 5) calculating/ reviewing annual emissions from affected sources, and ( 6) reviewing total annual emissions data submitted to track each State's progress toward meeting its budgets and creating a summary report of emissions. EPA will use a computer system to track and maintain monitoring and emissions information. EPA will also answer respondent questions and conduct audits of data submissions.

5( b) Collection Methodology and Management Emission Reporting Requirements The EPA has establishing a central repository of inventory data for all States termed the National Emissions Inventory ( NEI) database. Emissions inventory data reported electronically will be stored in the NEI database and used by the EPA and by other States for air modeling, tracking progress in meeting CAA requirements, setting policy and answering questions from the public.

The EPA has created and maintains the NEI database as a central repository of inventory data for all States, but the data must be supplied by the States in electronic form. The EPA currently requires that States use the NEI Input Format ( NIF) for electronic data reporting ( EDR).

Emission Trading Requirements 13 To ensure consistency regionwide and to expedite data entry, EPA will require that standard formats used for Part 75 reporting be used to submit the information collected for the CAIR SO 2 and NO X Trading Programs.

Several computer systems and associated databases have been developed to ( 1) track allowances, ( 2) record quarterly emissions monitoring data, and ( 3) calculate the number of allowances to be deducted each year. The systems and databases are designed to coordinate the information for easy access and use by the Agency, states, regulated community, and the public.

The EPA also has established a Clean Air Markets Page on the Internet, which includes detailed information collected from emissions reports. Those without access to the Internet may use the Clean Air Markets Hotline to request information, including summary reports. The Agency expects to rely on these electronic means to disseminate information about the CAIR Trading Program as the program is developed and implemented.

5( c) Small Entity Flexibility Emission Reporting Requirements State and Territorial control agencies are not considered to be small entities. According to EPA's ICR Handbook, OMB's definition for a small entity includes small governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. According to 1999 population data from the U. S. Census Bureau, no State or Territory has a population below this threshold. However, certain local air pollution agencies may be in charge of individual counties or multi county areas whose population is less than 50,000.

These local agencies have had experience compiling their 2002 inventories that were submitted to EPA in June 2004 as required by the CERR. The emission reporting requirements in CAIR are estimated to result in a net burden reduction for the reporting agencies.

Emission Trading Requirements The CAIR Trading Program includes fossil fuel fired units ( stationary boilers, combustion turbines, and combined cycle systems) that serve an electrical generator of capacity greater than 25 MWe. Units with a lower capacity are not included because of the high cost of monitoring emissions from these sources and the de minimis nature of their emissions.

There is one small unit provision applicable to the CAIR Trading Program which provides for reduced monitoring. The low mass emissions provisions ( 40 CFR 75.19) allows optional reduced monitoring, quality assurance, and reporting requirements for units that combust natural gas and/ or fuel oil and that emit no more than 100 tons of NO X annually provided that no more than 50 tons of NO X is emitted in the ozone season ( May 1   September 30) and no more than 25 tons of SO 2 annually and that calculate no more than the same amount based on specified procedures 14 for calculating and reporting emissions. Utilities that qualify are not required to keep monitoring equipment installed on ( or conduct fuel sampling for) low mass emissions units, nor are they required to perform quality assurance or quality control tests. Moreover, emissions reporting requirements are significantly simplified for these units.

Even if a gas or oil fired unit does not qualify for the " low mass emissions unit" provisions, the monitoring provisions of Part 75 do allow for the use of alternative methods to determine emissions. As discussed in the Regulatory Impact Analysis ( RIA) of the final Acid Rain Implementation Regulations ( October 19, 1992), smaller utilities are more likely to be dependent on these oil and gas fired units, especially very small utilities ( see p. 5 14 of that RIA document). This analysis remains relevant to this rulemaking.

5( d) Collection Schedule There are no requirements in the CAIR that will impact the reporting schedule for Delaware and New Jersey.

6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION 6( a) Estimating Respondent Burden Emission Reporting Requirements The respondent burden for complying with the reporting requirements of the rule is estimated incremental to the burden associated with existing annual inventory and periodic inventory reporting requirements.

In general, States already have mechanisms in place for reporting emissions data to EPA under the existing CERR and NO X SIP Call inventory requirements. The changes to the existing reporting requirements are specified in Section 4( b)( i) of this supporting statement.

Other ongoing State activities that support existing inventory reporting requirements include:

° Collecting emissions data and other associated information; ° Training staff in coding and submissions techniques; ° Quality assuring emissions data and resolution of errors and anomalies identified by EPA; ° Maintaining records associated with data submitted by sources; and ° Preparing and submitting required inventory data items in approvable format.

The following sections discuss the assumptions used to develop burden hour estimates for one time only activities and triennial activities. Table 6 1 lists the burden items included under these categories, and presents their associated burden hours for 1 year. In general, managerial 15 time was estimated to be 5 percent of technical staff time. Burden hours and associated costs were estimated for the first 3 year period that the affected States would have to start reporting emissions data to EPA. In this case, that period corresponds to the years 2006, 2007, and 2008. Table 6 2 shows the required activities that Delaware and New Jersey must perform each year, beginning in the year 2006 through 2008. Table 6 3 presents the Delaware and New Jersey respondent annual burden hours and costs by activity.

One time activities The time for the Delaware and New Jersey agencies to read and interpret the reporting requirements of the rule was estimated to be 1 hour for technical staff and 1 hour for managerial staff.

Emission Trading Requirements This section estimates the paperwork burden and cost of submitting permit applications, allowance tracking and transfer materials ( including applications for early reduction credits), submittal of monitoring plans, obtaining certification of each monitoring system, conducting monitor quality assurance activities, and recording and reporting data from CEM systems ( or approved alternatives).

To estimate the burden and/ or cost of each incidence of the various proposed rule revisions, EPA had available prior estimates of the costs of various activities, estimates provided by affected utilities in comments to the Agency, and estimates based on the Agency's experience in implementing the existing trading programs.

All units in Delaware and New Jersey that are likely to be affected by this proposed rule are already currently regulated by the Acid Rain Program or the NO X SIP Call trading program or both.

The CAIR Trading Program requires all affected sources to monitor a NO X emission rate, SO 2 emission rate and heat input in order to determine NO X mass emissions and SO 2 mass emissions. Affected gas and oil fired units may elect to use a SO 2 emissions rate CEM and a fuel flowmeter. In addition, peaking units that burn natural gas and/ or fuel oil may use an alternative method for calculating NO X emission rates. EPA will also allow certain low mass emissions units to use assumed emissions factors together with operational data to calculate emissions.

For purposes of this ICR, burdens and costs are calculated only in terms of incremental impacts resulting from this proposed rule. It should be noted that the labor hour and cost estimates per unit identified in this document, represent the weighted average burden and cost for all units and do not represent the actual burden and cost for a particular unit.

Units subject to Acid Rain and NO X SIP Call requirements will incur only labor burdens 16 associated with permit applications and certain allowance transactions. These units will not incur additional burdens ( or capital and operating and maintenance costs) as a result of the proposed rule since they have already installed and are operating a CEMS ( or approved alternative) and meet Part 75 requirements for both SO 2 and NO X.

Units subject only to NO X SIP Call requirements are already required to meet the monitoring and reporting requirements in Part 75 for NO X. These units are required to calculate and report hourly, quarterly and ozone season or annual NO X mass emissions. These sources would continue monitoring and reporting NO X mass emissions. These sources would need to monitor and report NO X mass emissions year round; therefore needing to modify operational practices but not purchase any equipment. There will also be labor burdens associated with permit applications, certain allowance transactions, and some additional emission collection and reporting, and the installation of systems to measure SO 2 in accordance with Part 75. These sources will need to make some additions to their existing monitoring systems to account for SO 2 mass emissions, but will not need to install a full monitoring and reporting system in order to comply with the monitoring and reporting requirements in the CAIR SO 2 Trading Program. As a result, these units will incur additional capital and other operating costs. Finally, these units are expected to incur some costs associated with upgrading the data acquisition and handling system ( DAHS) to collect the new SO 2 and additional NO X data for this program.

Sources will be subject to the CAIR Trading Programs NO X monitoring and reporting requirements in 2008 and the SO 2 monitoring and reporting requirements in 2009. Compliance with the emissions caps   with allowance holding requirements begins in 2009 for NO X and 2010 for SO 2. Table 6 4 shows the burden associated with monitoring SO 2 and NO X under CAIR trading programs at the two types of sources in Delaware and New Jersey.

The primary tasks performed by owners and operators of affected units are ( 1) permitting, ( 2) monitoring, recording, and reporting emissions data, ( 3) allowance trading activities and ( 4) submittal of the year end compliance certification.

( i) Permitting.

Each affected entity will have to submit a permit revision application to include in the source's Title V permit the necessary conditions related to compliance with the CAIR Trading Programs. The Agency believes that this application should be relatively routine, and that a standard method of incorporating the requirements by reference or a standard set of permit conditions will be available. The Agency estimates that, on a per unit basis, about 4 managerial hours will be required to revise the Title V permit.

Some sources will also be required to construct additional facilities, and therefore will need to complete a permit to construct application. The Agency estimates that this requirement will be necessary for all coal fired units that are not in the Acid Rain Program and that the task will take 20 hours of managerial and 20 hours of technician time, per permit. 17 ( ii) Monitoring.

For monitoring, the burdens differ greatly based on the amount and type of monitoring the unit is already subject to and the particular subtask of monitoring being conducted. The specific elements of burden are:

Start up Activities. A large part of start up activities involves capital and test contractor costs. However, the owner or operator will incur some labor burden for these activities, as applicable. For Acid Rain units, the proposed rule imposes no start up burdens beyond existing programs. For non Acid Rain units, the burdens reflect arranging for SO 2 CEMS purchase 9as required) and oversight of the certification process.

Regulatory Review. The ICR includes an allocation of time for the managerial and technical staff to review the regulatory requirements and the EDR formats and instructions. Affected units in Delaware and New Jersey are expected to be relatively familiar with the trading program requirements because of similar Acid Rain and NO X SIP Call requirements and therefore the burden is expected to be 5 hours of managerial time and 5 hours of technician time in year one and 1 hour each per year in subsequent years.

DAHS Debugging. Based on experience with the Acid Rain Program, some effort will be involved to fix problems with the DAHS software used to report in the EDR formats. This burden is assumed to fall primarily on units that are not affected under either the Acid Rain or NO X SIP Call programs. Since all units in Delaware and New Jersey will be familiar with this process it is estimated that 1 managerial and 4 technician hours will be required each year for this activity.

Monitoring Plans. The regulations require submittal of monitoring plans. Because most of the monitoring plan elements are now part of the EDR format, the effort involved in developing and maintaining the plans are incorporated into the overall reporting burden estimate.

Monitor Certification/ Recertification. Initial certification burdens and costs for new monitoring equipment are addressed above under start up activities since these costs are often part of the overall purchase expense for the equipment. For some non Acid Rain units, however, there will be burdens associated with certifying existing monitors used under other programs for this program, as well as burdens for recertification to the extent a change in a monitoring system requires recertification. EPA estimates that approximately 10% of all units will have to recertify each year following the year in which the initial certification occurs. The ICR incorporates a labor burden estimate generally consistent with existing Agency models for the labor burdens associated with certification. However, note that the ICR reduces the labor hours for this activity to avoid double counting hours that are already accounted for in the quality assurance activity area ( see the following subsection). The double counting would occur because a portion of the labor incurred for the certification or recertification event replaces the labor burden that is generally allocated to the annual relative accuracy test audit ( RATA) in the year in which the certification event occurs. 18 Quality Assurance. Quality assurance ( QA) activities and other routine maintenance for monitoring systems is the largest burden item under the CAIR Trading Programs. These requirements generally include daily, quarterly and annual QA requirements, depending on the monitoring approach being used. For reporting units that use a CEMS, the Agency has assumed a per unit labor burden based on a variety of sources, including the existing Acid Rain Program ICR, the existing NO X SIP Call ICR, information provided by Acid Rain Program sources, a CEM cost model developed by EPA, and comments submitted in response to the section 110 SIP Call for ozone transport. For units that rely on alternative methodologies, reduced labor burden estimates apply because the quality assurance activities for the excepted methods are less than for a CEMS. Consistent with the existing Acid Rain Program ICR, the labor burden is expected to be almost entirely technician labor.

Quarterly Reports. Tasks performed by utilities in preparing quarterly reports include: ( 1) assuring the quality of the data, ( 2) preparing the quarterly report, ( 3) revising the monitoring plan, if necessary, ( 4) preparation of hard copy documentation accompanying the quarterly reports, and managerial review. The existing Acid Rain program ICR was used as the basis for these estimates.

Fuel Sampling. To calculate heat input where the source is using the fuel flowmeter option for an oil or gas fired unit, the source must obtain gross calorific value data from sampling in accordance with Appendix D of Part 75. For purposes of this ICR, it is assumed that the GCV data would be collected as part of standard business operating procedures to assure compliance with contractual specifications. Thus no additional fuel sampling burdens or costs should be incurred.

( iii) Allowance transaction activities.

The Agency anticipates the average number of additional allowance transactions will be approximately 100 per year beginning in 2008. A portion of all units will likely conduct transactions in each year solely as a result of this program. The Agency believes that each transaction will involve about 1 hour each of managerial and technician time.

6( b) Estimating Respondent Costs Table 6 3 presents state and local respondent annualized hours and costs for each information collection activity. To estimate annualized hours and costs for one time and triennial activities, the burden estimate is divided by 3 to estimate the burden over a 3 year period. Table 6 4 summarizes the annual industry respondent costs. The following discussion describes how the costs were derived.

( i) Estimating Labor Costs 19 For this ICR, the labor rate used for technical staff at State agencies is $ 34.36 per hour, and the labor rate for managerial employees at State agencies is $ 41.63. These labor rates include benefits and overhead. These labor rates are derived from data shown on the U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, web site at http:// stats. bls. gov/ news. release/ ecec. toc. htm. Wage and salary rates are given in Employee Costs for Employee Compensation " Table 3. State and local government, by major occupation and industry group ( March 2004)." The wage and salary rates from this table account for benefits provided to workers. When considering both technical and managerial hours, labor costs for State and Territorial agencies are estimated to be $ 46,000 per year per respondent, and labor costs for local agencies are estimated to be $ 30,000 per year per respondent for the emissions reporting requirements.

In estimating labor costs, EPA used the following amounts: $ 73.42 per hour for managers and $ 50.44 per hour for technicians. These rates were used in the existing Acid Rain Program ICR using the Bureau of Labor Statistics Employment Cost Index.

Federal Agency labor rates were assumed to be $ 43.44 per hour. This labor rate was derived from the federal government's 2004 General Schedule published by the U. S. Office of Personnel Management using the factors in the following table.

Determination of Federal Wage Rates Annual Salary of Technical Staff, GS 11 Step 3 $ 47,078 Annual Cost of Supervisory Staff, GS 13, step 3 $ 67,099 Factor ( 1/ 11) 0.09 $ 6,039 Annual Cost of Support Staff, GS 6, step 6 $ 31,311 Factor ( 1/ 8) 0.13 $ 4,070 Annual Applicable Salary of Permit Staff $ 57,187 Benefits ( at 16%) $ 9,150 Sick Leave/ Vacation ( at 10%) $ 5,719 General Overhead ( at 32%) $ 18,300 Total Cost per FTE $ 90,366 Total Hourly Cost ( total per FTE dividend divided by 2,080 hours per year) $ 43.44 20 ( ii) Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs Emission Reporting Requirements EPA has concluded that the Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs estimated under the CERR and the NO X SIP Call are sufficient to accommodate the modest changes in reporting burden for the proposed CAIR. Therefore, no estimate of Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs were made for this ICR.

Emission Trading Requirements Capital/ start up costs include the cost of installing required CEMS or alternatives. Operation and maintenance costs ( exclusive of labor costs) reflect ongoing costs to a unit and include both contractor costs for the required recertification, diagnostic, and quality assurance ( QA) testing, and other direct maintenance related expenses ( e. g., spare parts and calibration gases). These cost estimates have been derived from EPA CEM cost models, existing ICRs, Agency staff experience under the Acid Rain and NO X SIP Call programs, and supplemental estimates provided by affected utilities and others related to the various cost items.

Acid Rain affected units are not expected to incur any non labor costs associated with this program. They are already monitoring and reporting SO 2 and NO X year round. Non Acid Rain units will need a DAHS upgrade, estimated at $ 4,000 per unit and an SO 2 analyzer for $ 42,525.

Note that testing contractor costs for certification, recertification and annual relative accuracy test audits ( RATAs) are presented as other direct costs and are not converted to equivalent source labor hours. This approach is consistent with the common business practice for obtaining outside contractors to conduct certification/ recertification tests and annual RATAs. For initial certification, the certification test costs are commonly bundled with equipment purchase contracts, according to information provided by a range of CEMS equipment vendors. For RATAs that are conducted either as part of the annual quality assurance requirements or as part of recertification, industry contacts have indicated that RATA testing is usually performed under a fixed price contract basis, except for travel costs that may be billed on an hourly basis beyond the basic contract cost.

The Agency also notes that this ICR does not include a cost for the purchase of monitoring equipment for all affected units. Many sources covered by the CAIR Trading Programs are already required to have CEMS under other regulatory programs. Therefore, to the extent that no new equipment is needed by these sources, capital costs are not included because those costs were included in the ICRs of those other programs. Thus, the capital and other costs included in Table 6 4, represent weighted average costs for each respondent, not the total individual cost for any particular respondent. 21 ( iii) Capital/ Start up vs. Operating and Maintenance ( O & M) Costs Capital costs for emissions trading reflect one time costs for purchase of equipment which will be used over a period of years. Conversely, operating and maintenance costs are those costs which are incurred on an annual or other scheduled basis. For instance, costs associated with quality assurance activities, such as spare parts or contractor costs for work, will be incurred on an annual basis.

( iv) Annualizing Capital Costs The relevant capital costs for the emissions trading portion of this ICR were annualized at a rate of 7%, ( i. e., the annualized capital cost was calculated assuming money to purchase the capital equipment was borrowed at a 7% annual interest rate). The cost of the loan was amortized over the life of the loan to repay original borrowed amount plus interest. The result is the annualized capital cost reported.) The annualized cost of the necessary capital purchases varies from $ 2,250 to $ 22,500, per year, per unit, depending on the type of monitoring methodology. Tables 6 4 contains a breakdown of annual costs by monitoring methodology.

6( d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs Emission Reporting Requirements The number of respondents is 2 States. The total hourly burden for both respondents is estimated to be an increase of 1 hour per year from the approved ICRs for the CERR and the NO X SIP Call. During the first 3 year period that the rule is in effect, the respondents costs should increase by $ 33 per year.

Emission Trading Requirements The number of industry respondents varies depending on the activity in question. Activities such as title V permit application or processing allowance transfers can involve approximately sixty sources. The number of units which will be required to install a particular type of monitoring equipment will be less since many sources already have monitoring equipment especially since they are in the NO X SIP Call region. Tables 6 1, 6 2, and 6 3 give estimates of State burden. These burdens include preparation of the SIP revision in response to this proposed rule, activities associated with participating in an emissions trading programs, and reporting information to EPA under § 51.123 and .124 . Table 6 4 gives estimates of industry burden beginning with the first expected monitoring year, 2008. This burden includes monitoring, reporting and other activities involved in participating in an emissions trading programs. The total number of respondents is estimated to be 60 facilities. 22 6( e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables Emission Reporting Requirements Total Estimated Respondent Burden and Cost Summary Number of Respondents Number of Activities1 Total Hours Per Year Total Labor Costs Per Year State Respondents 2 1 1 $ 33 1On average, each State respondent is assumed to perform 5 discrete activities associated with the CAIR emission reporting requirements, as indicated in Table 6 3. This total is the sum of the " Number of Respondents" column in Table 6 3.

Emission Trading Requirements Total Estimated Respondent Burden and Cost Summary Number of Respondents Total Hours Per Year Total Costs Per Year State Respondents 2 247 $ 26,114 Industry Respondents ~ 60 2,542 $ 248,000 6( f) Reasons for Change in Burden Emission Reporting Requirements The net change in emission reporting burden as compared with the approved ICRs for the CERR and NO X SIP Call is an increase of 1 hour which is the time estimated to read the rule requirements.

Emission Trading Requirements The majority of the burden associated with this proposed rule is a result of the costs of monitoring, certifying, quality assuring and reporting emissions data from large electric generating units regulated under the proposal. This burden is tempered however by the integration of these monitoring and reporting requirements with those already required under the Acid Rain and NO X SIP Call trading programs. Otherwise, the burden would be significantly higher and the number of sources would be greater.

6( g) Burden Statement Reporting of emissions data required by the CAIR is estimated to involve an average of less than 1 hour per year for each of the State air pollution control agencies. Monitoring and reporting emissions under the CAIR Trading Programs is estimated to involve up to 308 hours per year for industrial sources. This estimate considers the most hours expected for a source. 23 With acceptable variations in monitoring methodologies, many sources will spend much less time each year meeting these requirements.

Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.

Send comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondents burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques, to the Director, OPPE Regulatory Information Division, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( 2137), 401 M St., S. W., Washington, DC 20460; and to Paperwork Reduction Project ( OMB# 2060 0088), Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Include the EPA ICR number and OMB control number in any correspondence. Table 6 1. Emission Reporting Requirements  State Respondent Burden Hours by Activity Information Collection Activity Hours Per Respondent Managerial Hours Technical Hours Total One time Read the reporting requirements of the rule 1 1 2 Table 6 2. Emission Reporting Requirements  Activities Required by States Every Year During the Period 2006 through 2008 Information Collection Acitivity 2006 2007 2008 One time ( Annualized)

Read the reporting requirements of the rule

Table 6 3. Annual State Respondent Burden and Cost by Activity Hours and Costs Per Respondent Total Hours and Costs Information Collection or Trading Rule Activity Mgr. $ 41.63/ Hr1 Tech. $ 34.36/ Hr1 Respondent Hours/ Year Labor Cost/ Year Number of Respond ents Total Hours/ Year2 Total Cost/ Year3 One time ( Annualized) Read the reporting requirements of the rule 0.33 0.33 0.66 25.08 2 1 33 Revise SIP if necessary to obtain required reductions 25 125 150 5335.75 2 300 10672 Annual Trading Program related ( monitoring certifications, audits) 20 200 220 7705 2 440 15409 Total 45 325 371 13066 2 741 26114 1 See Section 6 ( b) ( i) for labor and overhead rates.

2 Hours per year are rounded to the nearest hour. 3 Costs per year are rounded to the nearest dollar. Table 6 4. Annual Industry Respondent Burden and Cost by Activity, 2008 and subsequent years Mgr. Tech. Respondent Annual Capital Total $ 73.42 $ 50.44 Respondent Labor Startup O & M Number of Hours/ Total / Hour / Hour Hours/ Year Cost/ Year Costs Cost Respondents Year Cost/ Year Information Collection Activity 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 2008 Title V permit application 4 0 4 $ 293.68 $  $  126 504 $ 37,003.68 Permit to Construct 20 20 40 $ 2,477.20 $  $  2 80 $ 4,954.40 Startup/ Capital Items ~ nonAR Sources in PM States in SIP Call region a. add SO2 monitoring 13 3 16 $ 1,105.78 $ 6,379.00 $  2 32 $ 14,969.56 b. DAHS modification 2 4 6 $ 348.60 $ 600.00 $  92 552 $ 87,271.20 Review Instructions and Requirements ~ AR Sources in PM States in SIP Call region 1 1 2 $ 123.86 $  $  34 68 $ 4,211.24 ~ nonAR Sources in PM States in SIP Call region 1 1 2 $ 123.86 $  $  92 184 $ 11,395.12 Respond to EPA Generated Error Messages Debug Computer Software ~ nonAR Sources in PM States in SIP Call region 1 4 5 $ 275.18 $  $  92 460 $ 25,316.56 Certify Monitors ~ nonAR Sources in PM States in SIP Call region a. SO2 monitor 5 16 21 $ 1,174.14 $  $ 2,800.00 2 42 $ 7,948.28 Perform QA Testing and Maintenance ~ nonAR Sources in PM States in SIP Call region a. SO2 monitor 10 200 210 $ 10,822.20 $  $ 10,400.00 2 420 $ 42,444.40 Assure Data Quality, Prepare Reports, Submit Reports ~ Allowance Transfers 1 1 2 $ 123.86 $  $  100 200 $ 12,386.00 TOTAL 2542 $ 247,900.44


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 23 (Thursday, February 4, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5889-5893]
[FR Doc No: 2016-00379]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-1417; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-159-AD;
Amendment 39-18369; AD 2016-01-10]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2004-20-14,
for all Airbus Model A300 B4-2C, B4-103, and B4-203 airplanes; and all
Airbus Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series airplanes. AD
2004-20-14 required repetitive inspections to detect cracking of the
splice fitting at fuselage frame (FR) 47 between stringers 24 and 26
(left- and right-hand sides), and corrective actions if necessary. This
new AD reduces the inspection compliance time and repetitive inspection
intervals, and adds Airbus Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes to
the applicability. This AD was prompted by a determination that the
inspection compliance time and repetitive inspection interval must be
reduced to allow timely detection of cracks in the splice fitting at
fuselage FR 47. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking
of the splice fitting at fuselage FR 47; such cracking could result in
reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective March 10, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of March 10,
2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain other publications listed in this AD as of
November 17, 2004 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004).

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2015-1417; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.
    For service information identified in this final rule, contact
Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte,
31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61
93 44 51; email<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. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
1417.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to supersede AD 2004-20-14, Amendment 39-13819 (69 FR 60809,
October 13, 2004), which superseded AD 2001-03-14, Amendment 39-12118
(66 FR 10957, February 21, 2001). AD 2004-20-14 applied to all Model
A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R (collectively called Model A300-600)
series airplanes; and all Model A300 B4 series airplanes. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on May 14, 2015 (80 FR 27607). The
NPRM was prompted by a determination that the inspection compliance
time and repetitive inspection interval must be reduced to allow timely
detection of cracks in the splice fitting at fuselage FR 47. The NPRM
proposed to continue to require repetitive inspections to detect
cracking of the splice fitting at fuselage FR 47 between stringers 24
and 26 (left- and right-hand sides), and corrective actions if
necessary. The NPRM also proposed to reduce the inspection compliance
time and repetitive inspection intervals, and add Model A300 C4-605R
Variant F airplanes to the applicability. We are issuing this AD to
detect and correct cracking of the splice fitting at fuselage FR 47;
such cracking could result in reduced structural integrity of the
airplane.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2013-0184R1, dated August 22, 2013 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for all Model A300 B4-
600, B4-600R, and F4-600R (collectively called Model A300-600) series
airplanes; all Model A300 B4 series airplanes; and all Model A300 C4-
605R Variant F airplanes. The MCAI states:

    In order to prevent crack development in the fastener holes at
Frame (FR) 47 splicing joint on A300 aeroplanes, Airbus developed
modification (Mod) 5890 for aeroplanes in production and issued
corresponding Service Bulletin (SB) A300-53-0199 for aeroplanes in
service.
    Subsequently, cracks were found on FR47 splice fitting between
stringers (STRG) 24 and 26 on A300 aeroplanes previously modified by
SB A300-53-0199.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could reduce the
structural integrity of the aeroplane.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, DGAC [Direction
G[eacute]n[eacute]rale de l'Aviation Civile] France issued AD 2002-
184 http://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/2002184tb_superseded.pdf/AD_F-2002-184_2 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2004-20-14, Amendment 39-
13819 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004)], superseding [DGAC France] AD
85-152-069 and [DGAC France] AD 1999-515-298 [which corresponds to
FAA AD 2001-03-14, Amendment 39-12118 (66 FR 10957, February 21,
2001)], to require repetitive High Frequency Eddy Current (HFEC)
rotating probe inspections of the splice fitting between STRG 24 and
26 and, depending on findings, corrective action(s). DGAC France AD
2002-184(B) expanded the applicability to A300-600 aeroplanes, which
have the same design.
    Since that [DGAC France] AD was issued, a fleet survey and
updated Fatigue and Damage Tolerance analyses have been performed in
order to substantiate the second A300-600 Extended Service Goal
(ESG2) exercise. The results of these analyses have determined that
the inspection threshold and intervals for A300-600 aeroplanes must
be reduced to allow timely detection of these cracks and the
accomplishment of an applicable corrective action.
    For the reasons described above, [EASA] AD 2013-0184 retains the
requirements of DGAC France AD 2002-184, which is superseded, but
requires accomplishment of the actions for A300-600 aeroplanes
within the new thresholds and intervals introduced with Revision 05
of Airbus SB [service bulletin] A300-53-6123 [dated August 1, 2011].
    This [EASA] AD was revised to correct the splices Part Numbers
(P/N) in Table 4 of Appendix 1 of this [EASA] AD. Also, reference is
now made to Airbus SB A300-53-6123 Revision 06 [dated September 28,
2011], which corrected this mistake compared to Revision 05.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2015-1417-0002.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM (80
FR 27607, May 14, 2015) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Revise Compliance Times To Match Service Information

    United Parcel Service (UPS) and FedEx Express requested that we
revise the compliance times in paragraph (k) of the proposed AD (80 FR
27607, May 14, 2015) to match the compliance times in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-6123, Revision 06, dated September 28, 2011, and EASA
AD 2013-0184R1, dated August 22, 2013.
    We agree with the commenters' requests to revise the compliance
times in paragraph (k) of this AD to reflect the compliance times in
EASA AD 2013-0184R1, dated August 22, 2013. We have revised paragraph
(k) of this AD accordingly. The changes extend the inspection interval
and do not add an additional burden on operators.

Request To Retain Inspection Intervals in AD 2004-20-14, Amendment 39-
13819 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004)

    UPS requested that we revise paragraph (k) of the proposed AD (80
FR 27607, May 14, 2015) to retain the inspection intervals in AD 2004-
20-14, Amendment 39-13819 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004), until the
airplanes have reached their design service goal (DSG). UPS stated that
acceleration of the inspection interval on airplanes that have less
than 33 percent of the original DSG does not enhance safety. UPS
explained that the proposed inspection interval reduction introduces
additional opportunities for fastener hole damage due to the inspection
process, thus increasing the risk for subsequent fatigue damage.
    We disagree with the commenter's request. Since AD 2004-20-14,
Amendment 39-13819 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004), was issued, Airbus
conducted a fleet survey and an analysis to extend the DSG. In
consideration of this information, we determined that the inspection
interval and thresholds needed to be reduced to support timely
detection of cracks. The Airbus analysis for the extension of the DSG
and other data was used to determine the compliance thresholds and
intervals for this AD. We have not changed this AD in this regard.

Request To Revise Repetitive Inspection Interval

    FedEx Express requested that we revise the flight-cycle compliance
time in paragraph (k)(1) of the proposed AD (80 FR 27607, May 14, 2015)
from 2,000 flight cycles to 2,200 flight cycles so that the inspections
can consistently be performed at the same interval as a C-check. FedEx
Express stated that it considers the 2,200-flight-cycle interval to be
conservative. FedEx Express submitted service experience from the
previous inspections showing relatively few findings.
    We do not agree with the commenter's request. The inspections are
dependent upon various configurations and average flight times (AFTs).
The commenter did not identify the applicable configuration for the
requested 2,200-flight-cycle interval. Operators may request approval
of a different interval under the provisions of paragraph (o)(1) of
this AD if sufficient specific information is submitted to substantiate
that the compliance time will provide an acceptable level of safety. We
have not changed this AD in this regard.

Request To Remove Average Flight Time Classifications

    UPS request that we revise the compliance times to remove the AFT
classifications. UPS stated that it considers that the inspection
interval difference with regard to the AFT adds a level of compliance
complication that does not enhance fleet safety.
    We disagree with the commenter's request. The compliance time
thresholds and intervals using AFTs were developed by Airbus using
fleet experience and analysis. Once we issue this AD, the commenter may
request approval of a different interval under the provisions of
paragraph (o)(1) of this AD. Sufficient data must be submitted to
substantiate that the compliance time will provide an acceptable level
of safety. We have not changed this AD in this regard.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including 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 changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (80 FR 27607, May 14, 2015) for correcting the unsafe condition;
and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (80 FR 27607, May 14, 2015).

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued the following service information:
     Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0350, Revision 03,
including Appendix 03, dated July 26, 2007. This service bulletin
describes procedures for inspections to detect cracking of the splice
fitting at fuselage FR 47 between stringers 24 and 26, and corrective
actions.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6123, Revision 06, dated
September 28, 2011. This service bulletin describes procedures for
inspections for cracking of the splice fitting at fuselage FR 47
between stringers 24 and 26, and corrective actions.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 72 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We also estimate that it will take up to 14 work-hours per product
to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor
rate is $85 per work hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost
of this AD on U.S. operators to be $85,680, or $1,190 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions will
take up to 204 work-hours and require parts costing up to $37,000, for
a cost of up to $54,340 per product. We have no way of determining the
number of aircraft that might need these actions.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more 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-2015-1417; 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 removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2004-20-14, Amendment 39-13819 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004), and
adding the following new AD:

2016-01-10 Airbus: Amendment 39-18369; Docket No. FAA-2015-1417;
Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-159-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective March 10, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2004-20-14, Amendment 39-13819 (69 FR 60809,
October 13, 2004).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes identified in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (c)(5) of this AD, certificated in any category, all
manufacturer serial numbers.
    (1) Airbus Model A300 B4-2C, B4-103, and B4-203 airplanes.
    (2) Airbus Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, and B4-622
airplanes.
    (3) Airbus Model A300 B4-605R and B4-622R airplanes.
    (4) Airbus Model A300 F4-605R and F4-622R airplanes.
    (5) Airbus Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a determination that the inspection
compliance time and repetitive inspection interval specified in AD
2004-20-14, Amendment 39-13819 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004), must
be reduced to allow timely detection of cracks in the splice fitting
at fuselage frame (FR) 47. We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct cracking of the splice fitting at fuselage FR 47; such
cracking could result in reduced structural integrity of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Repetitive Inspections for Airplanes Defined in Airbus
Service Bulletin A300-53-0350, Revision 02, Dated November 12, 2002,
With New Service Information

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (a) of AD
2004-20-14, Amendment 39-13819 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004), with
new service information. For airplanes defined in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-0350, Revision 02, dated November 12, 2002: Do a
high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection to detect cracking of
the splice fitting at fuselage FR 47 between stringers 24 and 26
(left- and right-hand sides), at the applicable times specified in
paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD. Repeat the inspection
thereafter at the earlier of the flight-cycle/flight-hour intervals
specified in the applicable column in Table 2 of Figure 1 and Sheet
1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin
A300-53-0350, Revision 02, excluding Appendix 01, dated November 12,
2002. Do the inspections in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin
A300-53-0350, Revision 02, excluding Appendix 01, dated November 12,
2002; or Revision 03, excluding Appendix 01, dated July 26, 2007. As
of the effective date of this AD, use only Airbus Service Bulletin
A300-53-0350, Revision 03, excluding Appendix 01, dated July 26,
2007.
    (1) For airplanes that have accumulated 20,000 or more total
flight cycles as of November 17, 2004 (the effective date of AD
2004-20-14, Amendment 39-13819 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004)): Do
the initial inspection at the later of the times specified in
paragraphs (g)(1)(i) and (g)(1)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) At the earlier of the flight-cycle/flight-hour intervals
after November 17, 2004 (the effective date of AD 2004-20-14,
Amendment 39-13819 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004)), as specified in
the applicable column in Table 1 of Figure 1 and Sheet 1 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0350,
Revision 02, excluding Appendix 01, dated November 12, 2002.
    (ii) Within 750 flight cycles or 1,500 flight hours after
November 17, 2004 (the effective date of AD 2004-20-14, Amendment
39-13819 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004)), whichever is first.
    (2) For airplanes that have accumulated fewer than 20,000 total
flight cycles as of November 17, 2004 (the effective date of AD
2004-20-14, Amendment 39-13819 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004)): Do
the initial inspection at the later of the times specified in
paragraphs (g)(2)(i) and (g)(2)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) At the earlier of the flight-cycle/flight-hour intervals
after November 17, 2004 (the effective date of AD 2004-20-14,
Amendment 39-13819 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004)), as specified in
the applicable column in Table 1 of Figure 1 and Sheet 1 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0350,
Revision 02, excluding Appendix 01, dated November 12, 2002.
    (ii) Within 1,800 flight cycles or 3,000 flight hours after
November 17, 2004 (the effective date of AD 2004-20-14, Amendment
39-13819 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004)), whichever is first.

(h) Retained Repetitive Inspections for Airplanes Defined in Airbus
Service Bulletin A300-53-6123, Revision 02, Dated November 12, 2002,
With New Service Information

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (b) of AD
2004-20-14, Amendment 39-13819 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004), with
new service information. For airplanes defined in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-6123, Revision 02, dated November 12, 2002: Do the
HFEC inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD at the
applicable times specified in paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD.
Repeat the inspection thereafter at the earlier of the flight-cycle/
flight-hour intervals specified in the applicable column in Table 2
of Figure 1 and Sheet 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus
Service Bulletin A300-53-6123, Revision 02, excluding Appendix 01,
dated November 12, 2002. Do the inspections in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6123,
Revision 02, excluding Appendix 01, dated November 12, 2002; or
Revision 06, dated September 28, 2011. Accomplishment of the actions

required by paragraph (j) of this AD terminates the requirements of
this paragraph.
    (1) For airplanes that have accumulated 10,000 or more total
flight cycles as of November 17, 2004 (the effective date of AD
2004-20-14, Amendment 39-13819 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004)): Do
the initial inspection within 750 flight cycles or 1,900 flight
hours after November 17, 2004, whichever is first.
    (2) For airplanes that have accumulated fewer than 10,000 total
flight cycles as of November 17, 2004 (the effective date of AD
2004-20-14, Amendment 39-13819 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004)): Do
the initial inspection at the later of the times specified in
paragraphs (h)(2)(i) and (h)(2)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) At the earlier of the flight-cycle/flight-hour intervals
after November 17, 2004 (the effective date of AD 2004-2-14,
Amendment 39-13819 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004)), as specified in
the applicable column in Table 1 of Figure 1 and Sheet 1 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6123,
Revision 02, excluding Appendix 01, dated November 12, 2002.
    (ii) Within 1,500 flight cycles or 3,800 flight hours after
November 17, 2004 (the effective date of AD 2004-20-14, Amendment
39-13819 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004)), whichever is first.

(i) Retained Repair, With Revised Repair Instructions

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (c) of AD
2004-20-14, Amendment 39-13819 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004), with
revised repair instructions. Repair any cracking found during any
inspection required by paragraphs (g) and (h) this AD before further
flight, in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0350,
Revision 02, excluding Appendix 01, dated November 12, 2002; or
Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6123, Revision 02, excluding
Appendix 01, dated November 12, 2002; as applicable. Where Airbus
Service Bulletin A300-53-0350, Revision 02, excluding Appendix 01,
dated November 12, 2002; or Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6123,
Revision 02, excluding Appendix 01, dated November 12, 2002;
specifies to contact Airbus in case of certain crack findings, this
AD requires that a repair be accomplished before further flight
using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-
116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate; or the Direction
G[eacute]n[eacute]rale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC) (or its delegated
agent); or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's
EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).

(j) New Requirement of this AD: Repetitive Inspections

    For airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(2) through (c)(5) of
this AD: At the applicable time specified in paragraph (j)(1) or
(j)(2) of this AD, remove the fasteners and accomplish an HFEC
rotating probe inspection for cracking of the splice fitting between
stringer 24 and 26, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6123, Revision 06,
dated September 28, 2011. Repeat the inspection thereafter at the
applicable intervals specified in paragraphs (k)(1) through (k)(4)
of this AD. If no cracking is found: Before further flight after
each inspection, install new fasteners, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6123,
Revision 06, dated September 28, 2011. Accomplishment of the initial
inspection required by this paragraph terminates the requirements of
paragraph (h) of this AD for that airplane.
    (1) For airplanes on which Airbus Modification 5890 or the
actions specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6131 have not
been done: At the applicable time specified in paragraphs (j)(1)(i)
and (j)(1)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) For airplanes that have an average flight time (AFT) that is
more than 1.5 hours: At the later of the times specified in
paragraphs (j)(1)(i)(A) and (j)(1)(i)(B) of this AD.
    (A) Before the accumulation of 2,500 total flight cycles or
5,500 total flight hours, whichever occurs first.
    (B) Within 800 flight cycles or 1,750 flight hours, whichever
occurs first after the effective date of this AD.
    (ii) For airplanes that have an AFT that is equal to or less
than 1.5 hours: At the later of the times specified in paragraphs
(j)(1)(ii)(A) and (j)(1)(ii)(B) of this AD.
    (A) Before the accumulation of 2,700 total flight cycles or
4,100 total flight hours, whichever occurs first.
    (B) Within 800 flight cycles or 1,750 flight hours, whichever
occurs first after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) For airplanes that have accomplished Airbus Modification
5890 or have accomplished the actions specified in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-6131: At the applicable time specified in paragraph
(j)(2)(i) or (j)(2)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) For airplanes that have an AFT that is more than 1.5 hours:
At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (j)(2)(i)(A) and
(j)(2)(i)(B) of this AD.
    (A) Before the accumulation of 6,800 total flight cycles or
14,700 total flight hours, whichever occurs first.
    (B) Within 800 flight cycles or 1,750 flight hours, whichever
occurs first after the effective date of this AD.
    (ii) For airplanes that have an AFT that is equal to or less
than 1.5 hours: At the later of the times specified in paragraphs
(j)(2)(ii)(A) and (j)(2)(ii)(B) of this AD.
    (A) Before the accumulation of 7,300 total flight cycles or
11,000 total flight hours, whichever occurs first.
    (B) Within 800 flight cycles or 1,750 flight hours, whichever
occurs first after the effective date of this AD.

(k) New Requirement of This AD: Repetitive Inspection Intervals for
Actions Specified in Paragraph (j) of This AD

    For airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(2) through (c)(5) of
this AD: Repeat the inspection required by paragraph (j) of this AD
at the applicable time specified in paragraphs (k)(1) through (k)(4)
of this AD.
    (1) For airplanes that have an AFT of more than 1.5 hours and
meet the applicable conditions specified in paragraphs (k)(1)(i)
through (k)(1)(iv) of this AD: Inspect at intervals not to exceed
2,000 flight cycles or 4,300 flight hours, whichever occurs first.
    (i) Airplanes on which Airbus Modification 5890 has not been
accomplished.
    (ii) Airplanes on which the actions specified in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-6131 have not been accomplished.
    (iii) Airplanes on which Airbus Modification 5890 has been
accomplished and have splice part number (P/N) A53834139-202/-203
installed.
    (iv) Airplanes on which the actions specified in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-6131 have been accomplished and have splice P/N
A53834139-202/-203 installed.
    (2) For airplanes that have an AFT that is equal to or less than
1.5 hours and meet the applicable conditions specified in paragraphs
(k)(2)(i) through (k)(2)(iv) of this AD: Inspect at intervals not to
exceed 2,100 flight cycles or 3,200 flight hours.
    (i) Airplanes on which Airbus Modification 5890 has not been
accomplished.
    (ii) Airplanes on which the actions specified in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-6131 have not been accomplished.
    (iii) Airplanes on which Airbus Modification 5890 has been
accomplished and have splice P/N A53834139-202/-203 installed.
    (iv) Airplanes on which the actions described in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-6131 have been accomplished and have splice P/N
A53834139-202/-203 installed.
    (3) For airplanes that have an AFT of more than 1.5 hours and
meet the applicable conditions specified in paragraphs (k)(3)(i) and
(k)(3)(ii) of this AD: Inspect at intervals not to exceed 1,600
flight cycles or 3,500 flight hours.
    (i) Airplanes on which Airbus Modification 5890 has been
accomplished and have splice P/N A53812635-200/-201/-202/-203
installed.
    (ii) Airplanes on which the actions specified in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-6131 have been accomplished and have splice P/N
A53812635-200-201/-202/-203 installed.
    (4) For the airplanes that have an AFT that is equal to or less
than 1.5 hours and meet the applicable conditions specified in
paragraphs (k)(4)(i) and (k)(4)(ii) of this AD: Inspect at intervals
not to exceed 1,700 flight cycles or 2,600 flight hours.
    (i) Airplanes on which Airbus Modification 5890 has been
accomplished and have splice P/N A53812635-200/-201/-202/-203
installed.
    (ii) Airplanes on which the actions specified in Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-6131 have been accomplished and have splice P/N
A53812635-200/-201/-202/-203 installed.

(l) New Requirement of This AD: Corrective Actions

    If, during any inspection required by paragraph (j) or (k) of
this AD, any crack is found: Before further flight, do the
applicable corrective actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus

Service Bulletin A300-53-6123, Revision 06, dated September 28,
2011, except as provided by paragraph (m) of this AD.

(m) New Requirement of This AD: Exception to Service Information

    If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (j) or (k) of this AD and Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-
6123, Revision 06, dated September 28, 2011; or Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-53-0350, Revision 03, dated July 26, 2007; specifies
to contact Airbus: Before further flight, repair the crack using a
method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the EASA; or Airbus's EASA
DOA.

(n) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraphs (j) and (l) of this AD, if those actions were performed
before the effective date of this AD using the applicable service
information specified in paragraphs (n)(1) through (n)(6) of this
AD.
    (1) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0350, Revision 01, dated
December 18, 2001, which is not incorporated by reference in this
AD.
    (2) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0350, Revision 02, excluding
Appendix 01, dated November 12, 2002, which was incorporated by
reference in AD 2004-20-14, Amendment 39-13819 (69 FR 60809, October
13, 2004).
    (3) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6123, Revision 01, dated
December 18, 2001, which is not incorporated by reference in this
AD.
    (4) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6123, Revision 03, dated
August 20, 2004, which is not incorporated by reference in this AD.
    (5) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6123, Revision 04, dated
April 25, 2008, which is not incorporated by reference in this AD.
    (6) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6123, Revision 05, dated
August 1, 2011, which is not incorporated by reference in this AD.

(o) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Dan Rodina,
Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. 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. The
AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: As of the effective date of
this AD, for any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions
from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method
approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. If
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized
signature.

(p) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) Airworthiness Directive 2013-0184R1, dated August 22, 2013,
for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on
the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2015-1417.
    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (q)(5) and (q)(6) of this AD.

(q) 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.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
March 10, 2016.
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-0350, Revision 03, dated
July 26, 2007.
    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6123, Revision 06, dated
September 28, 2011.
    (4) The following service information was approved for IBR on
November 17, 2004 (69 FR 60809, October 13, 2004).
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-53-6123, Revision 02, excluding
Appendix 01, dated November 12, 2002.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (5) 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.
    (6) 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.
    (7) 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<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 31, 2015.
Phil Forde,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-00379 Filed 2-3-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P