            Supporting Statement for a Request for OMB Review under
                          the Paperwork Reduction Act
1.	Identification of the Information Collection
1(a).  Title of the Information Collection.
     Title:  Reporting in the FIFRA Cooperative Agreement Work Plan and Report Template
     EPA ICR No.:  2511.02
     OMB Control No:  2070-0198
     Docket ID No.: EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0418

1(b).  Short Characterization/Abstract.
This ICR describes the burden activities for the electronic collection of information for the pre-award burden activity for creating a work plan and the post-award and after-the-grant award activities related to reporting accomplishments to implement EPA's Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act State and Tribal Assistance Grant (STAG) program (7 U.S.C. 136u) see Attachment A.

This ICR augments the ICR entitled "EPA's General Regulation for Assistance Programs ICR" (OMB Control No. 2030-0020; EPA ICR No. 0938.18) which accounts for the current PRA burden for the minimum management requirements for all recipients of EPA grants or cooperative agreements (assistance agreements). This ICR provides the burden assessment for the FIFRA program specific activities associated with using a standardized electronic format for only the STAG program reporting.
2.	Need for and Use of the Collection
2(a). Need/Authority for the Collection.
This ICR documents the PRA burden for STAG grantees to use a standardized electronic Template to comply with work plan and reporting requirements which grantees complete and submit to the Agency via email.

Under the STAG program (7 U.S.C. 136u) and in EPA regulations at 40 CFR Parts 30 and 31, grantees are required to provide reports on grant activities to the Office of Pesticide Programs.   These regulations implement OMB Circulars A-21, A-87, A-102, A-110, A-122, and A-133. Specifically, the PRA burden related activities set forth for the pre-award, post-award and after-the-grant requirements associated with submitting a work plan, biannual reporting and reporting enforcement violations of program specific activities (e.g., endangered species, worker protection and container containment) and general record keeping and grant closing requirements.

The burden is accounted for in the EPA's General Regulation for Assistance Programs ICR (OMB Control No. 2030-0020; EPA ICR No. 0938.18) see Attachment B.

This information is utilized by EPA project officers, grant specialists, and finance officials to manage/oversee recipient programmatic and financial performance under all EPA assistance agreements. Without the collection information, rational, fair grant awards would be extremely difficult to make, and financial and technical managerial information would not be available to judge the status of grant efforts.

2(b). Practical Utility/Users of the Data.
The pre-award information (work plan) is used to negotiate with and ensure that the applicants are proposing work activities that align with both national and regional guidance documents and priorities. The post-award information (interim reporting on work activities and updates to work plan) is used to meet the statutory and regulatory requirements concerning monitoring recipient performance.  The after-the-grant information is used to meet reporting and recordkeeping requirements and to close out awards. The information is necessary to ensure accountability of EPA funds and to deter waste, fraud, and abuse.

The benefits of using the template format include a reduction of the administrative burden on grantees and EPA by streamlining the workplan and report development. In addition, the use of a standardized template provides certainty of work expectations and aids EPA's oversight responsibility by aligning the grant guidance and the workplan. Lastly, the use of the template to report information to EPA standardizes the reporting information nationally by increasing national consistency in work plans and reports; and facilitates national compilation of data to be able to use data analytics, look for trends, significant issues or innovations

3.	Non- Duplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria
3(a).  Non-Duplication.
There is no other source for this information. Pursuant to the individual Cooperative Agreements, grantees must fulfill the work plan and reporting requirements by utilizing the Template.  Thus, grantees do not need to submit reports via paper copy.

3(b).  Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB.
Pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d) EPA will publish a Federal Register notice and provide a 60-day public comment on this proposed Information Collection activity. Any public comment EPA receives will be placed in the docket for this action, EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0418.

3(c).  Consultations.
As required under 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), the Agency will consult with stakeholders who actively interact with the Agency through the use of this collection instrument and will solicit stakeholder assessment of the regulatory burden estimates expressed by the Agency in this ICR. A record of the consultations will be placed in the EPA docket for this action

3(d).  Effects of Less Frequent Collection.
No less frequent collection is possible in accordance with OMB requirements.

3(e).  General Guidelines.
Recipients keep their records for three (3) years after the date they submit the final SF 269, "Financial Status Report" unless otherwise directed by EPA. Therefore, the recordkeeping activities briefly described herein are in compliance with OMB's guideline that agencies not require that records be retained for more than 3 years (5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2)(iv)).

3(e) (1). Forms.
Respondents (grantees) fill out the "FIFRA Cooperative Agreement Work Plan and Report," a Template that is available via the internet and available to the States, territories and Tribes who have FIFRA cooperative agreements with EPA.

3(f).  Confidentiality.
No pledge of confidentiality is given for applicant responses.

3(g).  Sensitive Questions.
No sensitive information is collected under this ICR.

3(h).  Use of Technology to Minimize Burden.
The Template was developed at the suggestion of and in collaboration with several STAG participants. The standardized Template for use in creating the work plan and subsequent reporting was created to help reduce the administrative burden of the cooperative agreement process on both the participants and EPA. By increasing consistency in the work plans and reports throughout the country, the Template is also expected to facilitate national compilation of data, and receiving the information in a standardized format does facilitate the Agency's review and use of the information provided.

4.	The Respondents and the Information Requested
4(a).  Respondents/SIC Codes.
The primary recipients of EPA grants are State and local governments and Indian tribes.  The information requested is used to make awards, pay recipients, and collect information on how Federal funds are being spent.  The corresponding North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Codes for respondents include: 9241 - Administration of Environmental Quality Programs; 921150 American Indians and Alaska Native Tribal Governments.

4(b)(i).  Information Requested - Data Items, Including Record Keeping Requirements.
The following describes the Respondent burden activities when using the Template to submit the status of the work plan and other reporting activities. Under 40 CFR part 35.107 grantees are required to submit a work plan. The FIFRA Work Plan and Report Template contains a work plan tab for the grantee to insert the exact activities the grantee will be completing based upon the priorities as specified in the National FIFRA Cooperative Agreement Guidance that is revised on a three (3) year cycle, and as negotiated between the regions and grantees. These priorities fall broadly under the categories of programmatic work, compliance and enforcement, and certification and training of pesticide applicators. Under 40 CFR part 35.115 grantees are required to submit an end of year report. The Template contains specific reporting tabs for enforcement outputs, as well as space within the work plan tab to discuss accomplishments as measured against work plan commitments.

Instructions for completing the Template are shown in Attachment E.  Since the cooperative agreement priorities among the states, tribes and territories are not the same and the national priorities change depending on the Agency budget, the Template provides a flexible format to accommodate the variety of activities and program changes over time.  Generally, the Template is sectioned into a series of "tabs" or categories, including:

Tab
Description
Start
Respondents provide responses to eight (8) basic questions: Name; Grantee; Agreement Type; Number of Years the Agreement Covers; Project Period; Which Budget Period the Work plan/Report Corresponds to; Work plan/Report Status; and Date.
Narrative
Respondents have the option to submit additional narratives that do not fit anywhere else in the Template, such as: authority to accept the cooperative agreement, legislative changes, QAPPs, neutral administrative inspection schemes, case review results, etc.
Budget
Grantees can either enter budget information directly into the spaces provided in the Template or embed a separate document (Word, PPT, PDF files) into this tab.
Work plan
The required activities areas included in the national guidance from which the grantee must select priority work.
Outcomes
This chart includes all the program areas listed in the national FY15-17 cooperative agreement guidance, and links them to potential outcomes from work done in each program area, and to the appropriate goal in EPA's Strategic Plan.  The grantee adjusts the outcomes as necessary to match work contained in the grantee's Work Plan.
Enforcement (5700 Group reports)
This section of the Template allows the grantee to complete three 5700 forms related to projections and accomplishments related to inspections for enforcement, worker protection and container/containment concerns.
Endangered Species
Grantees complete projections and accomplishments sections related to inspections for Endangered Species Inspections.
Performance Measures
Grantees collect information to help determine the effectiveness of the program; provide data for management decisions and inform Congress and the public on the value of the program.

4(b)(ii).  Information Requested  -  Respondent Activities for FIFRA Cooperative Agreements.
Whereas the information collection activities approved under OMB Control No. 2030-0020 (EPA ICR No. 0938.18) generally apply to grantees across multiple program areas, this new ICR addresses only information collection activities that are undertaken by FIFRA grantees. Grantees complete a work plan at the beginning of the project period as part of the cooperative agreement application package. In February of 2017, a workgroup comprised of EPA, state and tribal representatives began work to convert the FIFRA Work Plan and Report Template (FIFRA Template), which was in Excel, into a web-based system housed in the Central Data Exchange (CDX) platform, called the FIFRA Continuing Environmental Grant Program (FCEPG).  FCEPG incorporates the exact same information as the FIFRA Template, including: proposed work activities from the FIFRA Cooperative Agreement Guidance; the grantee's workplan; the grantee's yearend report; as well as the EPA regional project officer's yearend report.  FCEPG will be used by the same stakeholders as the FIFRA Template, and will provide a better customer experience. At this time, the FCEPG template is set to be available for Fiscal year 2020. Respondents/grantees fill out the "FIFRA Cooperative Agreement Work Plan and Report" Template that is available via the internet and available to all grantees, states, territories and tribes, participating in the STAG program.  The Template can be downloaded free of charge for use.  The minimum requirement for use of the Template is Excel[(C)] software which most states, territories and tribes currently use for business purposes. Biannually, states will fill out the Template information and send an electronic copy of the completed Template to the Agency via email. To assist the states, tribes, and territories Template guidance is provided to the grantees, https://www.epa.gov/compliance/federal-insecticide-fungicide-and-rodenticide-act-state-and-tribal-assistance-grant.  As necessary, the Agency may also provide webinar training to assist states and tribes using the Template.
5.	The Information Collected  -  Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management

5(a).  Agency Activities.
The data collected on the Template will be reviewed periodically to identify and eliminate duplication in reporting requirements. The Agency will conduct periodic on-site reviews to ensure recipients are compliant with applicable requirements.  The Template will be reviewed in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR Parts 30 and 31, see Attachment D. A summary of the annual Agency burden hours and costs are summarized in Table 2.

5(b).  Collection Methodology and Management.
The Agency's burden activities and methodology for collecting the template information include consultation with grantees with questions about template completion, developing mid-year and year-end reports, providing template submissions to Regional Management and Headquarters and working with Regional Grants offices.

5(c).  Small Entity Flexibility.
EPA believes the reporting requirements discussed in this ICR do not place an unreasonable burden on small entities; the estimated burdens cannot be further reduced for small entities. EPA needs the information requested to make award decisions, properly manage assistance agreements, maintain records, and monitor performance. This requested information may, in some cases, be dependent on the type of entity (e.g., state agency, territory, or tribe.) but is not dependent on an entity's relative size. EPA takes active steps to minimize the burden on small entities in the form of guidance materials and electronic forms. In most cases, the requirements do not impose a large burden on small entities because the information required is simple and straightforward.

5(d).  Collection Schedule.
Specific schedules for the collection of the Template information is outlined in the Cooperative Agreement Guidance, 2018-2021. See https://www.epa.gov/compliance/federal-insecticide-fungicide-and-rodenticide-act-state-and-tribal-assistance-grant.  Biannual reporting is the average reporting period.

6.	Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

6(a).  Estimating Labor Costs.
OPP is using labor cost estimates generated by Agency economists with respect to wages, benefits and overhead for all labor categories for affected industries, state government, and EPA employees.  This approach uses a transparent and consistent methodology employing publicly-available data to provide more accurate estimates and allow easy replication of the calculations.

Methodology.	The methodology uses publicly available wage data for each sector and labor type for an Unloaded wage rate (hourly wage rate) and calculates the Loaded wage rate (unloaded wage rate + benefits) and the Fully loaded wage rate (loaded wage rate + overhead).  Fully loaded wage rates are used to calculate the Agency's staffing costs. Costs use 2017 base data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

Unloaded Wage Rate.  Wages are estimated for labor types (management, technical, and clerical) within applicable sectors. The Agency uses average wage data for the relevant sectors available in the National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).  (See http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm).

Sectors.  The specific North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code and website for each sector is included in that sector's wage rate table.  Within each sector, the wage data are provided by Standard Occupational Classification (SOC).  The SOC system is used by Federal statistical agencies to classify workers into occupational categories for the purpose of collecting, calculating, or disseminating data (see http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_stru.htm).

Loaded Wage Rate.  Unless stated otherwise, all benefits represent 46.5% of unloaded wage rates, based on benefits for all civilian non-farm workers, from http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.t01.htm. However, if other sectors are listed for which 46.5% is not applicable, the applicable percentage will be stated.

Fully Loaded Wage Rate.  The fully loaded wages include benefits and overhead costs. The loaded wage rate is multiplied by 50% (EPA guidelines 20-70%) to get overhead costs.

Using these data and methodology, the BLS (unloaded) wage rates used to calculate the respondent costs for this renewal are $42.17 and $29.54 per hour for managerial and technical labor hour costs, respectively, which equates to $92.65 and $64.90, when calculated on a fully loaded basis as described above. There are no clerical costs estimated for respondents in this ICR. These wage rates reflect the average hourly wage rate estimate provided by BLS for the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code for State Government (NAICS code 999200).

6(b).  Estimating Respondent Burden.

Currently, 81 states, tribes and territories are active FIFRA grantees under the current STAG program. To establish the burden hour estimate and costs for FIFRA grantees (states, tribes and territories, hereafter referenced as "grantees") to use the Template, EPA solicited burden data from 9 states, 7 of which (Oregon, New York, Massachusetts, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Vermont) provided a detailed breakdown by activity for the Template. The responses of these 7 FIFRA STAG grantees is the basis for estimating the burden hours and costs for completing all grant reporting using the Template. Table 1 displays the "per Template" (one complete annual reporting cycle using the Template) burden and cost of the specific FIFRA program grant reporting activities as reported on the Template.

There are no capital costs related to completing EPA grant applications and the related reporting requirements in the FIFRA Template and there are no operating and maintenance costs associated with these activities. The previous section, 6 (a), describes how the labor costs are derived. The total estimated burden hours per Template is 323.40. The total estimated burden cost per Template is $25,953. Since there is only one Template per grantee, the total number of Templates is the same, 81. The total annual burden hours for all respondents is 26,195 (323.40 X 81 Templates/respondents). The total annual burden cost for all respondents is $2,102,179 ($25,953 X 81 Templates/respondents).

Table 1  -   Annual Average Burden Hour and Cost Estimate "per Template" for each FIFRA Grantee

                            Annual Burden Activity
                                 Burden hours
                              (by Labor category)
                  Total Estimated Burden Hours (by activity)
                                 Burden Costs
                              (by Labor category)
                   Total Estimated Burden Cost (by activity)
                             T5(Each Template Tab)

Managerial
Technical

Manager
Technical

92.65 /hr
64.90/hr

Start[1]
                                     11.25
                                       8
                                     19.25
 $     1,042
 $       519
 $      1,561
Narrative
                                     14.25
                                      20
                                     34.25
 $     1,320
 $     1,298
 $      2,618
Budget
                                     21.25
                                       0
                                     21.25
 $     1,969
 $         0
 $      1,969
Work Plan
                                      27
                                      32
                                      59
 $     2,502
 $     2,077
 $      4,578
Outcomes
                                     22.2
                                     28.5
                                     50.7
 $     2,057
 $     1,850
 $      3,906
5700 Main
                                      5.7
                                     11.5
                                     17.2
 $       528
 $       746
 $      1,274
5700 WPS
                                       2
                                       3
                                       5
 $       185
 $       195
 $         380
5700 Container Containment (CC)
                                      1.5
                                      7.5
                                       9
 $       139
 $       487
 $         626
Endangered Species
                                      12
                                       4
                                      16
 $     1,112
 $       260
 $      1,371
Performance Measures
                                      11
                                      10
                                      21
 $     1,019
 $       649
 $      1,668
Review Template for accuracy/errors
                                      28
                                     14.5
                                     42.5
 $     2,594
 $       941
 $      3,535
Management final review and submittal to EPA
                                     21.5
                                       1
                                     22.5
 $     1,992
 $         65
 $      2,057
File Template report (record keeping)
                                     1.25
                                      4.5
                                     5.75
 $       116
 $       292
 $         408
Total (per Template)
                                    178.90
                                    144.50
                                    323.40
 $   16,575
 $    9,378
 $    25,953
Numbers may not add due to rounding.
[1] Includes time spent in consultation with EPA to help the grantee with this process.

6(b).  Estimating Agency Burden and Costs.
To calculate the Agency burden, in 2014 EPA surveyed its Regional offices. The estimated average annual Agency burden hours is 498.3 to assist and process all the annual paperwork for STAG grantees. The program is implemented in 10 EPA regional offices. A regional office may oversee one or more STAG grants within the region. Wage rates reflect the average hourly wage rate estimate provide by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code for the federal government (NAICS code 999100). Similar to the respondent labor cost data, 2017 BLS base data is used. The unloaded wage rates from BLS are $59.10, $38.92, and $21.93 per hour for managerial, technical, and clerical labor hour costs, respectively. The fully loaded wage rates used to calculate the Agency labor costs for this renewal are $129.84, $85.51, and $48.18 per hour for managerial, technical, and clerical labor hour costs, respectively. Please see section 6(a) for details on how fully loaded wages are calculated.
The total estimated Agency burden hours (per grantee) per Template is 498.3. The total estimated Agency burden cost (per grantee) per Template is $44,253. Since there is only one Template per grantee, the total number of Templates is the same, 81. The total annual Agency burden hours is 40,362 (323.40 X 81 Grantees/ Templates). The total annual Agency burden cost is $3,584,515 ($25,953 X 81 Grantees/ Templates).

Table 2 - Agency Annual Average Burden Hour and Cost Estimate "per Template"

                                  Activity
                                    Manager
                                   Technical
                                   Clerical
                                    Totals

                                     Hrs.
                                  $129.84/hr
                                     Hrs.
                                   $85.51/hr
                                     Hrs.
                                  $48.18 /hr
                                 Burden (hrs)
                                   Costs ($)
Consult with Grantee and respond to questions about Template completion
                                       2
                                     $260
                                      102
                                    $8,722
                                       0
                                       0
                                      104
                                    $8,982
Developing mid-year and year end reports (columns P-R)
                                      27
                                    $3,506
                                      212
                                    $18,128
                                      2.5
                                     $120
                                     241.5
                                    $21,754
Submit Template to regional management and HQ
                                      0.7
                                      $91
                                     20.1
                                    $1,719
                                       0
                                       0
                                     20.8
                                    $1,810
Working with the regional grants office (Region 1)
                                       0
                                      $0
                                      12
                                    $1,026
                                       0
                                       0
                                      12
                                    $1,026

Region 6[1]
                                      9.5
                                    $1,234
                                     110.5
                                    $9,449
                                       0
                                       0
                                      120
                                    $10,682
Total (per Template)
                                     39.2
                                    $5,090
                                     456.6
                                    $39,043
                                      2.5
                                     $120
                                     498.3
                                    $44,253
Numbers may not add due to rounding.
[1]Region 6 did not provide a burden breakdown of activities so only a summary of the annual activities estimates are provided.

6(d).  Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs.
For the FIFRA program specific ICR burden hour projections, the estimates and cost projected assume that all the grantees, 81 states, territories, and tribes, are using the Template for their work plan and reporting requirements and will continue to do so. Estimates of the burden are expressed as one complete annual reporting event using the Template, which includes a mid-year and year-end report (biannual reporting). The estimate assumes that all grantees will conduct all the activities in the Template. This is a conservative estimate since not all 81 FIFRA grantees will participate in all of the FIFRA grant program activities or have the same number of grant contract years (i.e., 3 years vs. 1 year).

6(e).  Bottom Line Burden Hour and Cost.
Table 3 represents the annual grantee per Template burden of the required grant reporting for the FIFRA program specific activities. The total annual burden hours for all respondents (i.e. 81 STAG grantees) is 26,195 (323.40 X 81 Templates/respondents). The total annual burden cost for all respondents is $2,102,179 ($25,953 X 81 Templates/respondents). The total annual Agency burden hours is 40,362 (323.40 X 81 respondents). The total annual Agency burden cost is $3,584,515 ($25,953 X 81 respondents).

In this renewal ICR, the "per event" or Template burden estimates the burden will remain the same as the last ICR, at 46.15 hours to conduct the STAG grant activities.

Table 3. Total Annual Burden Hour and Cost for Respondents and Agency

                              Annual Burden Hours
                              Annual Burden Costs
Respondents /Grantees (81 States, Tribes, territories  -  per event reporting in the FIFRA Template)
                                    26,195
                                  $2,102,179

Agency processing burden for all 81 STAG grants annually
                                    40,362
                                  $3,584,515

6(f) Reasons for Change in Burden.
For this renewal ICR, there is no increase in the annual PRA burden hours for grantee to use the FIFRA grant Template over the last ICR. The FIFRA STAG Grant Template annual per respondent burden remains the same at 46.15 burden hours.  However, the burden cost in this ICR has increased relative to the previous ICR due to updating the wages (from 2012 to 2017) and using the fully loaded wage rate as described in section 6 (a). In the previous ICR, the unloaded wage rate was used. This is a program adjustment.

"Burden" is defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(b).  The 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.  OMB control numbers for certain EPA regulations in title 40, after initial display in the final rule, are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and appear on the information collection instrument as applicable, i.e., form or instructions, and in the Federal Register.

The Agency has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0418, which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the OPP Docket in the EPA Docket Center, William Jefferson Clinton (WJC) West, Rm. 3334, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. This docket facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.  The docket telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

You may submit comments regarding the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques. Comments may be submitted to EPA electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460.  You can also send comments to OMB, addressed to "OMB Desk Officer for EPA" and referencing OMB Control No. 2070-0198 (EPA ICR No. 2511.01) via email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Include docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPP-2018-0418 and OMB control number 2070-0198 (EPA ICR No. 2511.02) in any correspondence, but do not submit and any grant related information (e.g., forms, reports, etc.) to these addresses.
7.	Attachments to the Supporting Statement

The Attachments listed below can be found in the docket for this ICR, identified as Docket ID Number, EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0479, which is accessible electronically through http://www.regulations.gov. Direct links are provided for those documents that are also available online elsewhere.

Attachment A: 	EPA's Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act State and Tribal Assistance Grant (STAG) program (7 U.S.C. 136u) is attached in the docket for this action.

Attachment B:	"EPA's General Regulation for Assistance Programs ICR" (OMB Control No. 2030-0020; EPA ICR No. 0938.18) is attached as part of the docket for this action.

Attachment C:	[Reserved for Consultation Summary]

Attachment D:	40 CFR part 30: Grant Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals and other non-profits, and 40 CFR part 31: Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative agreements to States and Local Governments, available on line at: http://www.epa.gov/QUALITY/qa_cfrs.html.

Attachment E:  Instructions for completing the FIFRA Grant Work Plan and Report Template.

Attachment F:  Work Sheets used to Calculate Respondent Labor Costs for the State and Tribal Assistance Grant (STAG) program (OMB Control No. 2070-0198, EPA ICR No. 2511.02).


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 157 (Wednesday, August 14, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40472-40473]
[FR Doc No: 2019-17367]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. FAA-2019-40]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; Aurora
Flight Sciences

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

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of Federal Aviation Regulations. The
purpose of this notice is to improve the public's awareness of, and
participation in, the FAA's exemption process. Neither publication of
this notice nor the inclusion or omission of information in the summary
is intended to affect the legal status of the petition or its final
disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before September 3, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2019-0172
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140,
West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal

information the commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as
described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can
be reviewed at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linda Lane<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of
Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue
SW, Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 7, 2019.
Brandon Roberts,
Acting Executive Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2019-0172.
    Petitioner: Aurora Flight Sciences.
    Section(s) of 14 CFR Affected: Sec.  133.19 (a)(1) and (3).
    Description of Relief Sought: Aurora Flight Sciences (Aurora) is
seeking relief from Sec.  133.19 (a)(1) and (3) to allow Aurora to
apply for an External Load Operators Certificate under 14 CFR Sec.
133.17 utilizing Aurora's Bell UH-1H helicopter operating under a
Special Airworthiness Certificate in the Experimental Category, for the
purposes of research and development, crew training, and market survey.

[FR Doc. 2019-17367 Filed 8-13-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 122 (Tuesday, June 25, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29821-29824]
[FR Doc No: 2019-13332]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0482; Product Identifier 2019-NM-066-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for all Airbus SAS Model A300 series airplanes; Airbus SAS Model A300
B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series airplanes, and Model A300 C4-605R
Variant F airplanes (collectively called Model A300-600 series
airplanes); and Airbus SAS Model A310 series airplanes. This proposed
AD was prompted by a report indicating that the trimmable horizontal
stabilizer (THS) actuator ball nut trunnion lower attachment was
missing parts. This proposed AD would require a one-time detailed
inspection of the THS actuator right-hand spherical bearing and
retaining parts (bolt, tab washer, and end cap) for correct
installation of the retaining parts and correct bolt position, and
applicable corrective actions, as specified in an European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which will be incorporated by reference. The
FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 9,
2019.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For the material identified in this proposed AD that will be
incorporated by reference (IBR), contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; phone: +49 221 89990 1000; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet: www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this IBR
material on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view
this IBR material at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in the AD
docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0482; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2019-0482;
Product Identifier 2019-NM-066-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. The FAA will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
NPRM based on those comments.
    The FAA will post all comments, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide.
The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact the agency receives about this NPRM.

Discussion

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2019-0078, dated March 29, 2019
(``EASA AD 2019-0078'') (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing
Airworthiness Information, or ``the

MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus SAS Model A300
series airplanes; Airbus SAS Model A300-600 series airplanes; and
Airbus SAS Model A310 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    During maintenance on an A300-600 aeroplane, affected parts were
found missing from THS actuator ball nut trunnion lower attachment.
The THS actuator lower attachment has a fail-safe design through a
primary and secondary load path, which ensures the load path
continuity between the horizontal tail plane and the actuator. The
primary load path is engaged thanks in particular to these affected
parts.
    Investigation results highlighted that human error is the most
likely scenario to have caused the affected parts to have been
missing. In flight, absence of affected parts would cause THS
actuator secondary load path engagement, which is designed to
withstand the full loads only for a limited period of time.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to THS
actuator failure, possibly resulting in loss of control of the
aeroplane.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, Airbus issued the
applicable SB [Airbus Service Bulletin A300-27-0206; Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-27-6073; and Airbus Service Bulletin A310-27-2108] to
provide inspection instructions.
    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD requires a one-
time detailed inspection (DET) of the affected parts [for correct
installation of the retaining parts and correct bolt position] to
establish fleet-wide status and, depending on findings,
accomplishment of applicable corrective action(s).

Related IBR Material Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2019-0078 describes procedures for a one-time detailed
inspection of the THS actuator right-hand spherical bearing and
retaining parts for correct installation of the retaining parts and
correct bolt position, and applicable corrective actions. Corrective
actions include torqueing and securing the bolt with new lockwire, or
installing new dowel, end cap, washer, bolt, and securing with new
lockwire. This material 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.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

Proposed Requirements of This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in EASA AD 2019-0078 described previously, as incorporated by
reference, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the
regulatory text of this AD.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA worked with Airbus and EASA to develop a process to
use certain EASA ADs as the primary source of information for
compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. As a result,
EASA AD 2019-0078 will be incorporated by reference in the FAA final
rule. This proposed AD would, therefore, require compliance with the
provisions specified in EASA AD 2019-0078, through that incorporation,
except for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory
text of this proposed AD. Service information specified in EASA AD
2019-0078 that is required for compliance with EASA AD 2019-0078 will
be available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-0482 after the FAA final rule is
published.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 128 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                           Labor cost                               Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 work-hours x $85 per hour = $170..............................              $0            $170         $21,760
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition repairs that would be required based on the results of any
required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these on-condition repairs:

                 Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
               Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 work-hours x $85 per hour = $170......               *          $170 *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable the agency
  to provide parts cost estimates for the on-condition repairs specified
  in this proposed AD.

    The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable us to
provide cost estimates for the other on-condition action specified in
this proposed AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is 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.
    This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated
by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as
authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order,
issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and
Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the
Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable
to transport category airplanes and associated appliances to the
Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

Airbus SAS: Docket No. FAA-2019-0482; Product Identifier 2019-NM-
066-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments by August 9, 2019.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all the Airbus SAS airplanes identified in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(6) of this AD, certificated in any
category.
    (1) Model A300 B2-1A, B2-1C, B2K-3C, B2-203, B4-2C, B4-103, and
B4-203 airplanes.
    (2) Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, and B4-622 airplanes.
    (3) Model A300 B4-605R and B4-622R airplanes.
    (4) Model A300 F4-605R and F4-622R airplanes.
    (5) Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes.
    (6) Model A310-203, -204, -221, -222, -304, -322, -324, and -325
airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27, Flight
controls.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report indicating that the trimmable
horizontal stabilizer (THS) actuator ball nut trunnion lower
attachment was missing the THS actuator right-hand spherical
bearings and retaining parts (bolt, tab washer, and end cap). The
FAA is issuing this AD to address missing THS actuator right-hand
spherical bearings and retaining parts from the THS actuator ball
nut trunnion lower attachment, which could lead to THS actuator
failure, possibly resulting in loss of control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2019-
0078, dated March 29, 2019 (``EASA AD 2019-0078'').

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2019-0078

    (1) For purposes of determining compliance with the requirements
of this AD: Where EASA AD 2019-0078 refers to its effective date,
this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2019-0078 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, 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 Section, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (j)(2) of this AD. Information
may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's
EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the
approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): For any service information
referenced in EASA AD 2019-0078 that contains RC procedures and
tests: Except as required by paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, RC
procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any
procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended.
Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the
operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as
RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition. Any substitutions or changes to procedures or tests
identified as RC require approval of an AMOC.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For information about EASA AD 2019-0078, contact the EASA,
Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; phone: +49 221 89990
6017; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet: www.easa.europa.eu. You
may find this EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this EASA AD at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195. EASA AD 2019-0078 may be found in the AD docket on the
internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2019-0482.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Dan Rodina,
Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on June 18, 2019.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-13332 Filed 6-24-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 15 (Friday, January 23, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 3510-3513]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00993]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-1043; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-079-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Airbus Model A330-200, A330-200 Freighter, and A330-300 series
airplanes; and Model A340-200 and A340-300 series airplanes. This
proposed AD was prompted by reports of cracked support strut body ends
at a certain frame location of the trimmable horizontal stabilizer
(THS). This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections for
cracking of the strut ends of the THS support located at a certain
frame in the tail cone, and replacement if necessary; and
reinstallation or installation of reinforcing clamps on certain strut
ends. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct cracked support
strut body ends of the THS, which could lead to the loss of all four
THS support struts and which would make the remaining structure unable
to carry limit loads, resulting in the loss of the horizontal tail
plane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 9, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte,
31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61
93 45 80; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this referenced service information at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-
1043; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vladimir Ulyanov, 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:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2014-1043;
Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-079-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2014-0068, dated March 18, 2014 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition on all Airbus Model A330-
200, A330-200 Freighter, and A330-300 series airplanes; and Model A340-
200 and A340-300 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    During scheduled maintenance on A330 aeroplanes, several
Trimmable Horizontal Stabilizer (THS) support struts at frame (FR)
91 were found cracked at strut body ends.
    The THS is supported and articulated at FR 91 by four struts to
fix the hinges (Y-bolts) and keep the structural integrity in
lateral direction.
    Analysis revealed that cracks can reduce ability of the support
struts to carry specified tension loads.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to the
loss of all four THS support struts at FR91, which would make the
remaining structure unable to carry limit loads, resulting in the
loss of Horizontal Tail Plane.
    A340-500/600 aeroplanes are not affected by this [EASA] AD as
different material is used on THS support struts.
    To address this potentially unsafe condition, EASA issued AD
2013-0076 [http://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/easa_ad_2013_0076_superseded.pdf/AD-2013-0076_1] to require
repetitive special detailed inspections [high frequency eddy current
(HFEC) inspections for cracking] of all 8 strut ends of the THS
support located at FR91 in the tail cone and, depending on findings,
replacement of THS support struts. That

[EASA] AD also required, for aeroplanes on which Airbus Modification
203493 had not been embodied in production, or Airbus Service
Bulletin (SB) A330-53-3204 or SB A340-53-4199, as applicable, has
not been embodied in service, the installation of a clamping device
on each support strut end to stop growth of possible cracks (crack
stopper function) in order to secure integrity of the struts.
    Since issuance of EASA AD 2013-0076, it has been discovered that
several aeroplanes are fitted with another strut configuration
(SARMA Strut) [Societ[eacute] Anonyme de Recherche M[eacute]canique
Appliqu[eacute]e] than the TAC (Technical Airborne Components
Industries) strut, which caused the other strut not to be
considered. Consequently, Airbus revised Airbus SB A330-53-3206 and
SB A340-53-4208, accordingly in order to add a one-time [HFEC]
inspection [for cracking] for SARMA struts and in case of finding to
replace it with a TAC strut and thereafter to accomplish repetitive
inspections and EASA issued AD 2013-0219 [http://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/easa_ad_2013_0219_superseded.pdf/AD-2013-0219_1], which is
superseded, and required accomplishment of the instructions as
specified in the latest revision of each SB, as applicable.
    Since issuance of EASA AD 2013-0219, based on the reporting
received from operators, it has been determined that repetitive
inspections are also to be accomplished for aeroplanes equipped with
SARMA strut. Airbus introduced that inspection in the applicable SB
at revision 3.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD retains the
requirements of EASA AD 2013-0219, which is superseded, and requires
accomplishment of repetitive [HFEC] inspective inspection [for
cracking] for aeroplanes equipped with SARMA strut.
    This [EASA] AD is considered as an interim action, pending the
development of a terminating action.

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-
1043.

Related Service Information

    Airbus has issued the following service information:
     Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3206, Revision 03, dated
February 28, 2014. This service information describes procedures for
inspections for cracking of the strut ends of the THS support located
in the airplane tail cone for Model A330 airplanes.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A340-53-4208, Revision 03, dated
February 28, 2014. This service information describes procedures for
inspections for cracking of the strut ends of the THS support located
in the airplane tail cone for Model A340 airplanes.
    The actions described in this service information are intended to
correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service
Information

    Although EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0068, dated March 18,
2014, Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3206, Revision 03, dated February
28, 2014, and Airbus Service Bulletin A340-53-4208, Revision 03, dated
February 28, 2014, allow further flight after certain cracks are found
during compliance with the proposed action, paragraph (j)(2) of this
proposed AD would require that any cracked THS support strut be
replaced with a new or serviceable TAC strut before further flight.

Interim Action

    We consider this proposed AD interim action. If final action is
later identified, we might consider further rulemaking then.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 84 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We also estimate that it would take about 9 work-hours per product
to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average
labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate
the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $64,260, or $765
per product.
    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition replacement specified in this
proposed AD.
    We estimate that any necessary follow-on strut reinforcements would
take about 2 work-hours and require parts costing $5,680, for a cost of
$5,850 per product. We have no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need this action.
    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this proposed
AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on
affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2014-1043; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-
079-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by March 9, 2015.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the airplanes identified in paragraphs
(c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of this AD, certificated in any category,
all manufacturer serial numbers.
    (1) Airbus Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, -223F, -243, and -
243F airplanes.
    (2) Airbus Model A330-301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -
342, and -343 airplanes.
    (3) Airbus Model A340-211, -212, -213, -311, -312, and -313
airplanes.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracked support strut body
ends at a certain frame location of the trimmable horizontal
stabilizer (THS). We are issuing this AD to detect and correct
cracked support strut body ends of the THS, which could lead to the
loss of all four THS support struts and which would make the
remaining structure unable to carry limit loads, resulting in the
loss of the horizontal tail plane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Definition of Strut Types

    For the purpose of this AD, a Societ[eacute] Anonyme de
Recherche M[eacute]canique Appliqu[eacute]e (SARMA) strut is a strut
on which the diameter of the strut end is lower than 43 millimeters.
All other struts are Technical Airborne Components Industries (TAC)
struts.

(h) Repetitive Inspections of TAC Strut Ends

    At the applicable time specified in paragraph (i) of this AD, do
a high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection for cracking of all
TAC strut ends of the THS support located at frame (FR) 91 in the
tail cone, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3206, Revision 03, dated February
28, 2014; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-53-4208, Revision 03,
dated February 28, 2014; as applicable. Repeat the inspection
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 42 months or 20,000 flight
hours, whichever occurs first. For airplanes on which Airbus
Modification 203493 has been embodied in production, or Airbus
Service Bulletin A330-53-3204 or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-53-
4199, as applicable, has been embodied in service, remove the clamp
from each strut end before accomplishing the inspections required by
this paragraph.

(i) Compliance Times for Paragraphs (h) and (k) of This AD

    Do the inspections required by paragraphs (h) and (k) of this AD
at the applicable times specified in paragraphs (i)(1), (i)(2), and
(i)(3) of this AD.
    (1) For Model A330 series airplanes having manufacturer serial
numbers 012 through 209 inclusive, and Model A340 series airplanes
having manufacturer serial numbers 002 through 210 inclusive: Within
6 months after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) For Model A330 series airplanes having manufacturer serial
numbers 211 through 422 inclusive, and Model A340 series airplanes
having manufacturer serial numbers 212 through 447 inclusive: Within
24 months after the effective date of this AD.
    (3) For Model A330 series airplanes having manufacturer serial
numbers 423 and subsequent, and Model A340 series airplanes having
manufacturer serial numbers 450 through 955 inclusive: Within 36
months after the effective date of this AD or since the first flight
of the airplane, whichever occurs later.

(j) Corrective Action for TAC Strut Ends and Installation of
Reinforcing Clamps

    (1) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (h) of this
AD, no cracks are found: Before further flight, reinstall or
install, as applicable, reinforcing clamps on the strut ends, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service
Bulletin A330-53-3206, Revision 03, dated February 28, 2014; or
Airbus Service Bulletin A340-53-4208, Revision 03, dated February
28, 2014.
    (2) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (h) of this
AD, any crack is found: Before further flight, replace any affected
strut with a new or serviceable TAC strut and install reinforcing
clamps on the strut end, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3206, Revision 03,
dated February 28, 2014; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-53-4208,
Revision 03, dated February 28, 2014; as applicable.

(k) Repetitive Inspections of SARMA Strut Ends

    At the applicable time specified in paragraph (i) of this AD, do
an HFEC inspection for cracking of all SARMA strut ends of the THS
support located at FR 91 in the tail cone, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3206,
Revision 03, dated February 28, 2014; or Airbus Service Bulletin
A340-53-4208, Revision 03, dated February 28, 2014; as applicable.
Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 12
months.

(l) Corrective Action for SARMA Strut Ends

    If any crack is found on a strut end during the inspection
required by paragraph (k) of this AD: Before further flight, replace
any affected SARMA strut with a new or serviceable TAC strut and
install reinforcing clamps on the strut end, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3206,
Revision 03, dated February 28, 2014; or Airbus Service Bulletin
A340-53-4208, Revision 03, dated February 28, 2014; as applicable.

(m) No Terminating Action

    Replacement of THS struts on an airplane does not constitute
terminating action for the repetitive inspections required by this
AD.

(n) No Reporting

    Although Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3206, Revision 03,
dated February 28, 2014, and Airbus Service Bulletin A340-53-4208,
Revision 03, dated February 28, 2014, specify to submit certain
information to the manufacturer, this AD does not include that
requirement.

(o) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraphs (g) through (k) of this AD, if those actions were
performed before the effective date of this AD using any of the
service information identified in paragraphs (n)(1) through (n)(6)
of this AD. This service information is not incorporated by
reference in this AD.
    (1) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3206, dated February 7,
2013.
    (2) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3206, Revision 01, dated
June 10, 2013.
    (3) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3206, Revision 02, dated
August 8, 2013.
    (4) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-53-4208, dated February 7,
2013.
    (5) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-53-4208, Revision 01, dated
June 10, 2013.
    (6) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-53-4208, Revision 02, dated
August 8, 2013.

(p) 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: Vladimir
Ulyanov, 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: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or

the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(q) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0068, dated March 18, 2014,
for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on
the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2014-1043.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 11, 2015.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-00993 Filed 1-22-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P