FAA declined to comment on the European document. A trim-related "equivalent level of safety" (ELOS) memorandum listed in its 737 MAX certification document is not available on the FAA website. The agency declined to provide it to Reuters.
In a way this was a statement that I was waiting for. This based on my earlier question about what the effect of ODA was on the public availability of certification process documents.
In my view a set of core certification documents should be publicly available, this not depending on who is the operational party doing the certification. There are multiple reasons for that. So in the special case that an accident happens such documents should be directly available in the public domain. And such documents should not be withdrawn from the public domain in the case of accidents. Transparency is key in aviation safety. So declining to provide a document to a reputable agency like Reuters should be accompanied by a very well founded explanation by the certifying authority involved.
In my view it would be unacceptable to hide behind 'the investigation' in such 'public document' cases.
It would also be unacceptable to decline for proprietary reasons if the document would be defined as a public document.