[Federal Register: August 24, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 164)]
[Notices]
[Page 48709-48712]
[DOCID:fr24au07-130]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56277; File No. SR-DTC-2007-04]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Depository Trust Company;
Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change Relating to a Policy
Statement on the Eligibility of Foreign Securities

August 17, 2007.

I. Introduction

    On April 19, 2007, The Depository Trust Company (``DTC'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') proposed
rule change SR-DTC-2007-04 pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'').\1\ Notice of the proposal
was published in the Federal Register on June 28, 2007.\2\ One comment
letter

was received.\3\ For the reasons discussed below, the Commission is
granting approval of the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55940 (June 21, 2007),
72 FR 35532.
    \3\ Letter from Noland Cheng, Chairman, Operations Committee,
Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (July 17,
2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    The proposed rule change adds a new Policy Statement on the
Eligibility of Foreign Securities to DTC's rules.\4\ The purpose of the
Policy Statement is to set forth in a single place and in an accessible
manner the criteria and procedures for making the securities of foreign
issuers (``Foreign Securities'') eligible for deposit and book-entry
transfer through the facilities of DTC in accordance with the
Securities Act of 1933 (``Securities Act'') \5\ and the rules and
regulations of the Commission thereunder. For purposes of the Policy
Statement, (1) The term ``security'' has the meaning provided in
section 2(a)(1) of the Securities Act,\6\ (2) the term ``foreign
issuer'' has the meaning provided in Rule 405 under the Securities Act,
which and includes both a ``foreign government'' and a ``foreign
private issuer'' as defined in Rule 405,\7\ and (3) capitalized terms
that are used but not otherwise defined in the Policy Statement have
the meanings given to such terms in the Rules of DTC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Policy Statements are used by DTC to clarify and consolidate
the Rules of DTC with respect to the subject of a Policy Statement.
A Policy Statement is a part of the Rules of DTC. As such, pursuant
to Rule 2, Section 1 of the DTC Rules and the Participants Agreement
that participants enter into with DTC, a Policy Statement is binding
on DTC participants.
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 77 et seq.
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 77b(a)(1).
    \7\ 17 CFR 230.405. The term foreign issuer means any issuer
which is a foreign government, a national of any foreign country or
a corporation or other organization incorporated or organized under
the laws of any foreign country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Policy Statement covers both Foreign Securities deposited with
DTC at the time that such Foreign Securities are first distributed
(referred to as ``new issues'' in the DTC system) and Foreign
Securities deposited with DTC subsequent to the time that such Foreign
Securities are first distributed (referred to as ``older issues'' in
the DTC system). The criteria and procedures for making new issues of
Foreign Securities eligible for deposit and book-entry transfer through
the facilities of DTC have previously been codified by DTC. The
criteria and procedures for making older issues of Foreign Securities
eligible for deposit and book-entry transfer through the facilities of
DTC have not previously been codified by DTC. Accordingly, what would
be new in the Policy Statement are the criteria and procedures for
making older issues of unregistered Foreign Securities DTC-eligible.\8\
These older issues are generally securities that are freely tradable
outside the U.S. over the counter or on foreign exchanges or are traded
in the U.S. over the counter subject to the resale restrictions of the
Securities Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Registered securities, whether new issues or older issues,
whether foreign or domestic, can always be made DTC-eligible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change, as it relates to older issues of
unregistered Foreign Securities, represents an extension with no
material change in arrangements that now apply to new issues of
unregistered Foreign Securities, including securities that may be
resold without registration under the Securities Act pursuant to
Regulation S or Rule 144A. By establishing the criteria and procedures
for a wider but not fundamentally different range of unregistered
Foreign Securities to be DTC-eligible, the proposed rule change, should
increase the transparency and reduce the risk and cost of transactions
in these securities.
    At the present time, purchases and sales of older issues of
unregistered Foreign Securities by U.S. investors typically settle
through foreign intermediaries and central securities depositories in
multiple jurisdictions. By having these transactions settle at DTC,
U.S. investors and intermediaries would be able to benefit from (1) DTC
risk management controls approved by the Commission, (2) a more visible
and less complicated settlement process, and (3) greater control over
settlement costs with fees determined by the user-representative board
of directors of DTC.
    In all cases and circumstances, participants of DTC would be
responsible for determining that their deposit of older issues of
unregistered Foreign Securities with DTC and that their transactions in
such securities through the facilities of DTC, are in compliance with
the Rules of DTC and the federal securities laws.

Categories of Foreign Securities Eligible for DTC Services

    Under the Policy Statement, the following categories of Foreign
Securities will be eligible for DTC book-entry delivery services as and
to the extent set forth below.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The categories of Foreign Regulation S Securities, Foreign
Rule 144A Securities, Foreign Restricted Securities, and Foreign
Other Eligible Securities are not all mutually exclusive. For
example, (i) Foreign Regulation S Securities may be resold to
qualified institutional buyers (as defined in Rule 144A) pursuant to
Rule 144A, (ii) Foreign Rule 144A Securities may be resold in
offshore transactions (as defined in Regulation S) pursuant to
Regulation S, and (iii) Foreign Regulation S Securities and Foreign
Rule 144A Securities that are restricted securities (as defined in
Rule 144) may be resold pursuant to Rule 144.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Foreign Securities that are registered under the Securities Act
(``Registered Foreign Securities'') will be eligible for all DTC
services.
    (2) Foreign Securities that are exempt from registration under the
Securities Act pursuant to an exemption that does not involve any
resale restrictions (``Exempt Foreign Securities'') will be eligible
for all DTC services.
    (3) Foreign Securities that may be offered and sold without
registration under the Securities Act pursuant to Regulation S
(``Foreign Regulation S Securities'') \10\ will be eligible for all DTC
services. This includes Category 1 securities, Category 2 securities,
and Category 3 securities under Regulation S.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 230.901 through 905.
    \11\ Category 1 of the primary offering safe harbor of
Regulation S includes the securities of foreign issuers for which
there is no substantial U.S. market in the subject securities,
securities being offered by foreign (or domestic) issuers in
overseas directed offerings, securities of foreign governments and
securities being offered by foreign issuers pursuant to employee
benefit plans. Category 2 of the primary offering safe harbor of
Regulation S includes the equity securities of reporting foreign
issuers, the debt securities of foreign (or domestic) reporting
issuers, and the debt securities of nonreporting foreign issuers
even if there is substantial U.S. market interest in the subject
securities. Category 3 of the primary offering safe harbor of
Regulation S includes the equity securities of non-reporting foreign
issuers with substantial U.S. market interest in the subject
securities. 17 CFR 230.903.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (4) Foreign Securities that may be resold without registration
under the Securities Act pursuant to Rule 144A (``Foreign Rule 144A
Securities'') \12\ will be eligible for all DTC services. If such
Foreign Rule 144A Securities are not investment grade securities (i.e.,
nonconvertible debt securities or nonconvertible preferred stock rated
in one of the top four categories by a nationally recognized
statistical rating agency), then to be eligible for DTC services such
Foreign Rule 144A Securities will have to be securities designated for
inclusion in a system of a self-regulatory organization approved by the
Commission for the reporting of quotation and trade information on Rule
144A transactions (``SRO Rule 144A System'').\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 17 CFR 230.144A.
    \13\ For the requirement that securities other than investment
grade securities be designated for inclusion in a Self Regulatory
Organization (``SRO'') Rule 144A System approved by the Commission,
see Securities Exchange Act Release No. 33327 (December 13, 1993),
58 FR 67878 (December 22, 1993) (File No. SR-DTC-90-06) (Order
Approving a Proposed Rule Change by DTC Relating to the Eligibility
of Rule 144A Securities at DTC).
    The original SRO Rule 144A System approved by the Commission was
the Private Offerings, Resales, and Trading through Automated
Linkages (``PORTAL'') Market System operated by the National
Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (``NASD''). For a
description of the PORTAL Market System and the relationship between
the PORTAL Market System and DTC, see Securities Exchange Act
Release Nos. 27956 (April 27, 1990), 55 FR 18781 (May 4, 1990) (File
No. SR-NASD-88-23) (Order Approving Proposed Rule Change and Notice
of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval to Amendments to
Proposed Rule of NASD Relating to the Operation of the PORTAL
Market) and 33326 (December 13, 1993), 58 FR 66388 (December 22,
1993) (File No. SR-NASD-91-5) (Order Approving a Proposed Rule
Change Relating to the Operation of the PORTAL Market).
    In 2001, the Commission approved an NASD proposed rule change to
require PORTAL participants to submit trade reports of secondary
market transactions in PORTAL equity securities through the NASD
Automated Confirmation and Transaction Service (``ACT'') and PORTAL
high-yield debt securities through the NASD Trade Reporting and
Comparison Entry Service (``TRACE'') and to redefine the PORTAL
Market System to include ACT and TRACE. Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 44042 (March 6, 2001), 66 FR 14969 (March 13, 2001)
(File No. SR-NASD-99-66) (Order Approving Proposed Rule Change
Relating to the Implementation of Mandatory Trade Reporting for
PORTAL Securities). As a result, ACT and TRACE are each an SRO Rule
144A System for purposes of the DTC Rule 144A eligibility
requirement.
    On July 31, 2007, the Commission approved a proposed rule change
by The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'') to reestablish a
quotation and trading system, The PORTAL Market, for securities that
are designated by Nasdaq as PORTAL securities. The system would
allow PORTAL Participants to trade with one another in a closed
system. Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56172, 72 FR 44196
(August 7, 2007) (File No. SR-NASDAQ-2006-065).

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

    (5) Foreign Securities that may be resold without registration
under the Securities Act pursuant to Rule 144 (``Foreign Restricted
Securities'') \14\ will be eligible for all DTC services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 230.144.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (6) Foreign Securities that may be resold without registration
under the Securities Act pursuant to any other exemption (``Foreign
Other Eligible Securities'') will be eligible for all DTC services.
This shall include without limitation an exemption pursuant to
Commission Rule 801 \15\ in connection with a rights offering or an
exemption pursuant to Commission Rule 802 \16\ in connection with an
exchange offer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 230.801.
    \16\ 17 CFR 230.802.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although all the foregoing categories of Foreign Securities will be
eligible for deposit and book-entry transfer through the facilities of
DTC, DTC will have the right adopt associated procedures to determine
in accordance with Rule 5, Section 1 of the DTC Rules and in accordance
with its obligations as a registered clearing agency subject to
regulation by the Commission whether any particular issue will be
accepted for deposit and made eligible for some or all DTC services.

Responsibilities of Issuers and Participants

    Issuers and participants will be responsible for determining that
their deposit of Foreign Securities with DTC and that their
transactions in Foreign Securities through the facilities of DTC are in
compliance with the Rules of DTC and the federal securities laws. In
particular and without limitation, issuers and participants will be
responsible not to engage in any transactions in Foreign Securities,
including any distribution of unregistered Foreign Securities through
the facilities of DTC, in violation of the Securities Act and the rules
and regulations of the Commission thereunder. These responsibilities of
issuers and participants are based on the following.
    (1) Issuers and participants depositing Foreign Securities with DTC
and participants engaging in transactions in Foreign Securities through
the facilities of DTC are subject to the Rules of DTC and the federal
securities laws.
    (2) Rule 2, Section 7 of DTC's Rules provides, ``In connection with
their use of the Corporation's [DTC's] services, Participants and
Pledgees must comply with all applicable laws, including all applicable
laws relating to securities, taxation and money laundering.''
    (3) Section 7(b) of DTC's ``Operational Arrangements (Necessary for
an Issue to Become and Remain Eligible for DTC Services)'' (``DTC
Operational Arrangements'') which relate to book-entry only (``BEO'')
issues being made eligible for DTC services provides:

    Issuer recognizes that DTC does not in any way undertake to, and
shall not have any responsibility to, monitor or ascertain the
compliance of any transactions in the Securities with the following,
as amended from time to time: (1) any exemptions from registration
under the Securities Act of 1933; (2) the Investment Company Act of
1940; (3) the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974; (4)
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; (5) any rules of any self-
regulatory organizations (as defined under the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934); or (6) any other local, state, federal, or foreign
laws or regulations thereunder.

This and other representations made by issuers to DTC pursuant to the
DTC Operational Arrangements are mirrored in the Letter of
Representations that DTC receives from issuers in connection with their
deposits of BEO issues with DTC.
    (4) In 1994, in an order clarifying certain language in the Rule
144A approval order, the Commission concurred in the position taken by
DTC with respect to Rule 5 of DTC's Rules that ``Rule 5 does not
require DTC to determine whether securities, when deposited at DTC, may
be transferred lawfully by book-entry in light of the Federal
securities law.'' \17\ The original Rule 144A order included the
statement that Rule 5, Section 1 of DTC's Rules required DTC to
determine whether in light of the Federal securities laws, particularly
the provisions of Rules 144, 144A, and 145, securities when deposited
with DTC could be lawfully transferred by book-entry. DTC filed the
rule change in order to clarify that DTC Rule 5 does not require DTC to
determine whether securities deposited at DTC may be transferred
lawfully pursuant to Federal securities laws. DTC subsequently amended
Rule 5 to delete any implication that DTC was under any statutory or
contractual obligation to determine whether securities deposited with
DTC could be legally transferred by book-entry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 33672 (February 23,
1994), 59 FR 10186 (March 3, 1994) (File No. SR-DTC-93-14) (Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating to a Clarification of Rule
5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

DTC Procedures

    DTC implements a variety of measures designed to facilitate
compliance by issuers and participants with their obligations to DTC
and pursuant to the federal securities laws. With respect to new issues
of Foreign Securities, these measures include the following.
    (1) For all Foreign Securities, DTC will require (a) from the
Participant seeking DTC eligibility (e.g., the underwriter) an
Eligibility Questionnaire that sets forth inter alia the basis on which
the securities are eligible for deposit and book-entry transfer though
the facilities of DTC and (b) from the issuer a Letter of
Representations with representations that incorporate by reference
substantially all of the standard representations set forth in the DTC
Operational Arrangements.
    (2) For Foreign Regulation S Securities, DTC will require from the
issuer a rider to the Letter of Representations with inter alia
additional representations relating to the securities being eligible
for resale pursuant to Regulation S and having a CUSIP or CINS
identification number different from the CUSIP or CINS identification
number of any registered securities of the issuer of the same class.
    (3) For Foreign Rule 144A Securities, DTC will require from the
issuer a rider to the Letter of Representations with inter alia
additional representations relating to the securities being eligible
for resale pursuant to Rule 144A, having

a CUSIP or CINS identification number different from the CUSIP or CINS
identification number of any registered securities of the issuer of the
same class and whether the securities are investment grade securities
or securities designated for inclusion in an SRO Rule 144A System.
    With respect to older issues of Foreign Securities, these measures
include the following.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Foreign Securities that have historically been traded only
on foreign securities exchanges and in foreign over-the-counter
markets can be deposited as older issues and transferred by book-
entry through the facilities of DTC, provided that they may legally
be resold in the United States (i.e., they are registered under the
Securities Act or they are eligible for resale in the United States
without registration under the Securities Act).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) DTC (a) will determine that any unregistered Foreign Securities
deposited with DTC have a CUSIP or CINS identification number that is
different from the CUSIP or CINS identification of any registered
securities of the issuer of the same class and (b) would confirm that
any Foreign Rule 144A Securities deposited with DTC are investment
grade securities or securities designated for inclusion in an SRO Rule
144A System.
    (2) DTC will require from any participant that wishes to deposit
any unregistered Foreign Securities with DTC or engage in any
transactions in unregistered Foreign Securities through the facilities
of DTC a one-time blanket Letter of Representations (``Participant
Foreign Securities BLOR'') with inter alia representations that such
Participant (a) will not deposit any unregistered Foreign Securities
with DTC unless such securities are eligible for resale without
registration under the Securities Act and (b) will not engage in any
transactions in Foreign Securities, including any distribution of
unregistered Foreign Securities through the facilities of DTC, in
violation of the Securities Act and the rules and regulations of the
Commission thereunder.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ A form of the proposed Participant Foreign Securities BLOR
is attached as Exhibit 2 to the proposed rule change filed by DTC
with the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DTC will systemically block any Participant that has not executed a
Participant Foreign Securities BLOR from (a) depositing any
unregistered Foreign Securities with DTC or (b) engaging in any
transactions in unregistered Foreign Securities through the facilities
of DTC.

Additional Documentation

    Although the foregoing documentation for new issues and older
issues would be provided by issuers or participants in connection with
the deposit of Foreign Securities with DTC and as a condition to
engaging in transactions in Foreign Securities through the facilities
of DTC, DTC will have the right to adopt associated procedures to
determine in accordance with Rule 5 Section 1 of the DTC Rules and its
obligations as a registered clearing agency subject to regulation by
the Commission whether any other or additional documentation will be
required.

III. Comments

    The Commission received one comment to the proposed rule
change.\20\ The comment letter was written on behalf of the Operations
Committee of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association
(``SIFMA'') and requests that the Commission approve the proposed rule
change. SIFMA notes in its letter that the proposed rule change
includes procedures, such as the Eligibility Questionnaire and the
Blanket Letter of Representation, that are designed (1) to prevent DTC
Participants from depositing unregistered Foreign Securities at DTC
that are not eligible for resale under the Securities Act and (2) to
prevent DTC Participants from using the facilities of DTC to engage in
transactions in unregistered Foreign Securities that would violate the
Securities Act and the rules and regulations thereunder. SIFMA states
that given these procedural controls, it believes that older issues of
unregistered Foreign Securities pose no additional risk to DTC or to
the national clearance and settlement system and that participants and
the markets will benefit from making a wider range of unregistered
Foreign Securities eligible for deposit and book-entry transfer at DTC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Letter from Noland Cheng, Chairman, Operations Committee,
Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (July 17,
2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Discussion

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires that the rules of a
clearing agency be designed to promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions. The proposed rule
change expands the kinds of Foreign Securities eligible for deposit and
book-entry transfer at DTC to include not only new issues of Foreign
Securities but also older issues of Foreign Securities such as
securities that currently may be freely traded outside the U.S. over
the counter or on foreign exchanges or traded in the U.S. in the over-
the-counter market subject to the resale restrictions of the Securities
Act. The proposed rule change also consolidates DTC's procedures for
making Foreign Securities DTC-eligible. By allowing DTC participants to
consolidate their positions in Foreign Securities at DTC instead of
using the services of several custodians, DTC participants should
benefit from the use of DTC's efficient, safe, and cost-efficient
operations. This should be particularly true in situations where one
DTC participant is transferring Foreign Securities to another DTC
participant. Accordingly, we find that the proposed rule change is
designed to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions.
    While DTC states in the filing that issuers and participants will
be responsible not to engage in any transactions in Foreign Securities,
including any distribution of unregistered Foreign Securities through
the facilities of DTC, in violation of the Securities Act and the rules
and regulations of the Commission, DTC is adopting, as set forth in the
Policy Statement, certain measures designed to facilitate compliance by
issuers and participants with the securities laws. These measures, as
outlined in section III of this approval order, and appear to be well
designed to reduce the potential for the misuse of DTC's systems and
facilities, particularly given DTC's experience with newer issuers of
Foreign Securities. However, we expect DTC to monitor the effectiveness
of these measures and to modify or adopt additional procedures where
necessary.

V. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
in particular section 17A of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-DTC-2007-04) be and hereby
is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\22\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-16752 Filed 8-23-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 11 (Tuesday, January 19, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2831-2833]
[FR Doc No: 2010-699]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0043; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-128-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Corporation Model DC-
10-10, DC-10-10F, and MD-10-10F Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, and MD-10-10F
airplanes. This proposed AD would require a one-time high frequency
eddy current inspection of fastener holes for cracks at the left and
right side wing rear spar lower cap at station Xors=345, and other
specified and corrective actions if necessary. This proposed AD results
from a report of three instances of Model DC-10-10F airplanes having
fuel leaks in the wing rear spar lower cap at station Xors=345. We are
proposing this AD to prevent cracks in the spar cap, which if not
corrected could lead to cracking of the lower wing skin, fuel leaks,
and the inability of the structure to sustain limit load.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 5, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments 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 20590, between 9 a.m.

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
3855 Lakewood Boulevard, MC D800-0019, Long Beach, California 90846-
0001; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 2; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may
review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; 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 Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl Fountain, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137;
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-2010-0043;
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-128-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 because of 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

    We have received a report of three instances of Model DC-10-10F
airplanes having fuel leaks in the wing rear spar lower cap at station
Xors=345. Investigation revealed the fuel leak was due to a crack in
the lower cap. This crack extended into all three legs (aft, forward,
and vertical) of the spar cap. Analysis of the cracked portion of the
spar cap determined that the crack was due to fatigue and began at a
fastener hole in the forward leg of the spar cap. This condition, if
not corrected, could lead to cracking of the lower wing skin, fuel
leaks, and the inability of the structure to sustain limit load.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-57A157, dated
May 12, 2009. The service bulletin describes procedures for:
     Doing a high frequency eddy current inspection of fastener
holes for cracking at the left and right side wing rear spar lower cap.
     Cold working open holes and installing new second oversize
fasteners in the left and right side wing rear spar lower cap if no
cracking is found.
     Contacting Boeing for repair instructions and doing the
repair if cracking is found.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of these same type
designs. This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions
specified in the service information described previously, except as
discussed under ``Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service
Bulletin.''

Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Bulletin

    The service bulletin specifies to contact the manufacturer for
instructions on how to repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD
would require repairing those conditions in one of the following ways:
     Using a method that we approve; or
     Using data that meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and that have been approved by the Boeing Commercial
Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) that we have
authorized to make those findings.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 68 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S.
operators to comply with this proposed AD.

                                             Table--Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of
                                                             Average      Cost per        U.S.-
                  Action                     Work hours    labor rate      product     registered    Fleet cost
                                                            per hour                    airplanes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection................................            2           $80          $160            68       $10,880
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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), 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.
    You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.

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

    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]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

McDonnell Douglas Corporation: Docket No. FAA-2010-0043; Directorate
Identifier 2009-NM-128-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by March 5, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas Corporation Model DC-
10-10, DC-10-10F, and MD-10-10F airplanes, certificated in any
category, as specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-57A157,
dated May 12, 2009.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57: Wings.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from a report of three instances of Model
DC-10-10F airplanes having fuel leaks in the wing rear spar lower
cap at station Xors=345. The Federal Aviation Administration is
issuing this AD to prevent cracking in the spar cap, which could
lead to cracking of the lower wing skin, fuel leaks, and the
inability of the structure to sustain limit load.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Inspection

    (g) Within 3,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this
AD, do a one-time high frequency eddy current inspection for
cracking of fastener holes at the left and right side wing rear spar
lower cap at station Xors=345, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin DC10-57A157, dated May
12, 2009.
    (1) If no cracking is found, before further flight, cold work
open holes and install new second oversize fasteners and nut
assemblies in the left and right side wing rear spar lower cap, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin DC10-57A157, dated May 12, 2009.
    (2) If any cracking is found during any inspection required by
this AD, before further flight, repair the left and right side wing
rear spar lower cap using a method approved in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (h) of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (h)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send
information to ATTN: Carl Fountain, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe
Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles ACO, 3960 Paramount Boulevard,
Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (562)
627-5210.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to
make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair
must meet the certification basis of the airplane and 14 CFR 25.571,
Amendment 45, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 8, 2010.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-699 Filed 1-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 181 (Tuesday, September 18, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57575-57576]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22962]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4080-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2012-0002]

Louisiana; Amendment No. 10 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Louisiana (FEMA-4080-DR), dated August 29, 2012, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: September 12, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Louisiana is hereby amended to include the following
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by
the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration
of August 29, 2012.

    The parishes of Assumption, Iberville, Lafourche, Orleans, St.
Charles, St. Helena, St. James, St. Mary, St. Tammany, Tangipahoa,
Terrebonne, and Washington for Public Assistance [Categories C-G]
(already designated for Individual Assistance and debris removal and
emergency protective measures [Categories A and B], including direct
federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program).
    The parishes of East Feliciana and Pointe Coupee for Public
Assistance [Categories C-G] (already designated for debris removal
and emergency protective measures [Categories A and B], including
direct federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program).

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially

Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and
Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to
Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--
Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039,
Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2012-22962 Filed 9-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 194 (Tuesday, October 10, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46901-46903]
[FR Doc No: 2017-21709]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2017-0792]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Camp Lejeune, NC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway in Camp Lejeune, North Carolina in
support of military training exercises. This temporary safety zone is
intended to restrict vessel traffic from a portion of the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway between Mile Hammock Bay and Onslow Beach Swing
Bridge during military training operations. This action is intended to
restrict vessel traffic on the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway to
protect mariners, vessels, and training exercise participants from the
hazards associated with military training operations. Entry of vessels
or persons into this safety zone is prohibited unless specifically
authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) North Carolina or a
designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from October 10, 2017 through October 30,
2017.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2017-0792 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
contact Petty Officer Matthew Tyson, Waterways Management Division,
U.S. Coast Guard Sector North Carolina, Wilmington, NC; telephone: 910-
772-2221, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code
ICW IntraCoastal Waterway

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule. The Coast Guard was notified of the final
dates needed for this rule on August 17, 2017. It is impracticable and
contrary to the public interest to delay this action. Waiting for a
comment period to run would inhibit the Coast Guards' ability to
protect the public and participants from the dangers associated with
the military exercises scheduled from October 10 through October 30,
2017.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this temporary rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Immediate implementation is
required to protect the public and participants from the dangers
associated with the military training exercises.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The COTP North Carolina has determined that potential hazards
associated with the military exercises scheduled from October 10
through October 30, 2017, is a safety concern for mariners and
participants. The military training exercises involve building
temporary bridges, crossing with amphibious vehicles, and other
military operations on the ICW. These military training activities will
block the waterway in a manner that restricts all vessel navigation and
movement within this segment of the ICW. This rule is necessary to
protect persons and vessels from the potential hazards associated with
the military training exercises.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    The safety zone will be enforced on the following dates and times
in October 2017:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Date                                 Time
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10th-12th...........................  8 a.m. through 11 a.m. and 1 p.m.
                                       through 4 p.m.
13th................................  9 a.m. through 12 p.m. and 1 p.m.
                                       through 4 p.m.
18th................................  8 a.m. through 12 p.m.
24th................................  8 a.m. through 12 p.m. and 1 p.m.
                                       through 4 p.m.
25th-26th...........................  9 a.m. through 1 p.m. and 2 p.m.
                                       through 5 p.m.
27th-28th...........................  7 a.m. through 5 p.m.
29th-30th...........................  7 a.m. through 11 a.m.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The safety zone will include all navigable waters of the ICW from
Mile Hammock Bay, approximate position 34[deg]32'46'' N.,
77[deg]19'17'' W., to Onslow Beach Swing Bridge approximate position
34[deg]34'25'' N., 77[deg]16'14'' W. (NAD 1983), an approximately four
mile portion of the ICW. The duration of this zone is intended to
protect mariners from the hazards associated with military training
operations. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety
zone unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port North
Carolina or a designated representative. The regulatory text appears at
the end of this document.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, and duration of the safety zone. Vessel traffic will not be
allowed to enter or transit a portion of the ICW for up to 10 hours on
12 separate days. The Coast Guard will issue a Local Notice to Mariners
and transmit a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel
16 regarding the safety zone. This portion of the ICW has been
determined to be a low traffic area. Vessels needing to transit the
area during these times can safely transit offshore using New River
Inlet to the south and Browns Inlet to the north. This rule does not
allow vessels to request permission to enter the safety zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While the precise number of small entities impacted is unknown, the
ICW has a low number of vessels transiting the area planned for the
safety zone during the enforcement period. Although some owners or
operators of vessels intending to transit the safety zone may be small
entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A. above, this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule involves a safety zone lasting for up to 10 hours on 12 separate
days that would prohibit entry into an approximately four mile portion
of the ICW for military training exercises. It is categorically
excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the
Commandant Instruction. A Record of Environmental Consideration
supporting this determination is available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-
1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T05-0792 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T05-0792   Safety Zone, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway; Camp
Lejeune, NC.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters on
the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, from approximate position
34[deg]32'46'' N., 77[deg]19'17'' W. to 34[deg]34'25'' N.,
77[deg]16'14'' W. (NAD 1983) at Camp Lejeune, NC.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, ``designated
representative'' means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a
Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer designated by the
Captain of the Port North Carolina (COTP) for the enforcement of the
safety zone. ``Captain of the Port'' means the Commander, Sector North
Carolina. ``Participants'' means persons and vessels involved in
support of a military exercise.
    (c) Regulations. (1) The general regulations governing safety zones
in Sec.  165.23 apply to the area described in paragraph (a) of this
section.
    (2) With the exception of participants, entry into or remaining in
this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port, North Carolina or designated representative(s).
    (3) All vessels within this safety zone when this section becomes
effective must depart the zone immediately.
    (4) The Captain of the Port, North Carolina can be reached through
the Coast Guard Sector North Carolina Command Duty Officer, Wilmington,
North Carolina at telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) The Coast Guard and designated security vessels enforcing the
safety zone can be contacted on VHF-FM marine band radio channel 13
(165.65 MHz) and channel 16 (156.8 MHz).
    (d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol
and enforcement of the safety zone by Federal, State, and local
agencies.
    (e) Enforcement periods. This section will be enforced on the
following dates and times in October 2017:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Date                                 Time
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10th-12th...........................  8 a.m. through 11 a.m. and 1 p.m.
                                       through 4 p.m.
13th................................  9 a.m. through 12 p.m. and 1 p.m.
                                       through 4 p.m.
18th................................  8 a.m. through 12 p.m.
24th................................  8 a.m. through 12 p.m. and 1 p.m.
                                       through 4 p.m.
25th-26th...........................  9 a.m. through 1 p.m. and 2 p.m.
                                       through 5 p.m.
27th-28th...........................  7 a.m. through 5 p.m.
29th-30th...........................  7 a.m. through 11 a.m.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: October 3, 2017.
Bion B. Stewart,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port North Carolina.
[FR Doc. 2017-21709 Filed 10-6-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 161 (Thursday, August 20, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50544-50549]
[FR Doc No: 2015-20382]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0282; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-168-AD;
Amendment 39-18242; AD 2015-17-09]
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) 98-18-02 for
certain Airbus Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series
airplanes, and Model C4-605R variant F airplanes (collectively called
A300-600 series airplanes). AD 98-18-02 required inspections to detect
cracks in the center spar sealing angles adjacent to the pylon rear
attachment and in the adjacent butt strap and skin panel, and
correction of discrepancies. This new AD continues to require
inspections for cracks. This new AD also requires a modification by
cold expansion of the center spar sealing angles, replacement of both
sealing angles and cold expansion of the attachment holes if necessary,
and post-repair repetitive inspections and corrective actions if
necessary. This AD was prompted by reports of cracking in the vertical
web of the center spar sealing angles of the wing, and subsequent
analyses that showed that the inspection threshold and interval
specified in AD 98-18-02 must be reduced to allow timely detection of
cracks on the sealing angles of the center spar, adjacent to rib 8. We
are issuing this AD to prevent crack formation in the sealing angles,
which could rupture the sealing angle and lead to subsequent crack
formation in the bottom skin of the wing, and result in reduced
structural integrity of the center spar section of the wing.

DATES: This AD becomes effective September 24, 2015.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of September 24,
2015.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0282; 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 AD, contact Airbus SAS--
EAW (Airworthiness Office), 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-2014-
0282.

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 2006-07-07, Amendment 39-14534 (71 FR 16206,
March 31, 2006; corrected April 21, 2006 (71 FR 20530)). AD 2006-07-07
applied to certain Airbus Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R
series airplanes, and Model C4-605R variant F airplanes (collectively
called A300-600 series airplanes). The NPRM published in the Federal
Register on May 9, 2014 (79 FR 26651). The NPRM was prompted by reports
of cracking in the vertical web of the center spar sealing angles of
the wing, and subsequent analyses that showed that the inspection
threshold and interval must be reduced to allow timely detection of
cracks. The NPRM proposed to continue to require the actions in AD
2006-07-07: Modification of bolt holes in the vertical flange of the
center spar sealing angles, and applicable related investigative and
corrective actions. The NPRM also proposed to require inspections for
cracks, a modification by cold expansion of the center spar sealing
angles, replacement of both sealing angles and cold expansion of the
attachment holes if necessary, and post-repair repetitive inspections
and corrective actions if necessary. We are issuing this AD to prevent
crack formation in the sealing angles, which could rupture the sealing
angle and lead to subsequent crack formation in the bottom skin of the
wing, and result in reduced structural integrity of the center spar
section of the wing.
    Although we proposed to supersede AD 2006-07-07, Amendment 39-14534
(71 FR 16206, March 31, 2006; corrected April 21, 2006 (71 FR 20530)),
this AD instead supersedes AD 98-18-02, Amendment 39-10718 (63 FR
45689, August 27, 1998). AD 98-18-02 required inspections using an
earlier revision of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07,
dated June 6, 2011, which is the appropriate source of service
information for doing the inspections required by this AD. This change
to the proposed actions is explained in the ``Request to Supersede a
Different AD'' paragraph in the preamble of this final rule.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD
2012-0194, dated September 25, 2012 (referred to after this as the
Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to
correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus Model A300 B4-600, B4-
600R, and F4-600R series airplanes, and Model C4-605R variant F
airplanes (collectively called A300-600 series airplanes). The MCAI
states:

    Fatigue testing applied to a test airframe confirmed the
initiation of cracks on the sealing angles of the centre spar,
adjacent to rib 8, which could lead to the rupture of the sealing
angles and the subsequent crack initiation in the bottom skin of the
wing.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could affect the
structural integrity of the aeroplane.
    To address this unsafe condition, DGAC [French Civil Aviation
Authority] France issued * * * [an earlier AD][which corresponds to
FAA AD 98-18-02, Amendment 39-10718, (63 FR 45689, August 27, 1998)]
to require inspection of centre spar sealing angles adjacent to
pylon rear attachment fittings of Left Hand (LH) and Right Hand (RH)
wings.
    Early cracks reported on an in-service aeroplane prompted Airbus
to conduct additional investigations. Based on the results, DGAC
France issued * * * [an AD that superseded the earlier DGAC AD], to
require modification of the affected aeroplanes as specified in
Airbus Service Bulletin (SB) A300-57-6033 (Airbus Mod 8609), as well
as post-modification repetitive inspections. [DGAC France AD 2003-
290(B)R1 (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2006-
24364-0008) revised the DGAC AD that required modification and post-
modification repetitive inspections.]
    Since DGAC France AD 2003-290(B)R1 was issued [which corresponds
to FAA AD 2006-07-07, Amendment 39-14534 (71 FR 16206, March 31,
2006; corrected April 21, 2006 (71 FR 20530))], 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 shown that the
inspection threshold and interval must be reduced to allow timely
detection of cracks on the sealing angles of the centre spar,
adjacent to rib 8.
    For the reasons described above, this new [EASA] AD retains the
requirements of DGAC France AD 2003-290(B)R1, which is superseded,
and requires the accomplishment instructions at the new thresholds
and intervals given by Revision 07 of Airbus Service Bulletin (SB)
A300-57-6027.

    The required actions also include repetitive high frequency eddy
current (HFEC) inspections of the center spar sealing angles adjacent
to the pylon rear attachment fitting for cracks, modifying the airplane
by cold expansion of the center spar sealing angles outboard of rib 8
if necessary, replacing both of the forward and aft sealing angles with
new sealing angles and cold expanding the attachment holes if
necessary, and doing post-repair repetitive inspections and corrective
actions if necessary. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-
0282-0002.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM (79
FR 26651, May 9, 2014) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Supersede a Different AD

    UPS requested that AD 98-18-02, Amendment 39-10718 (63 FR 45689,
August 27, 1998), be superseded and AD 2006-07-07, Amendment 39-14534
(71 FR 16206, March 31, 2006; corrected April 21, 2006 (71 FR 20530)),
remain a stand-alone AD to address potential conflicts with the
inspection interval differences. UPS stated that AD 98-18-02 refers to
Airbus Industrie Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 2, dated
September 13, 1994, as the appropriate source of service information
for accomplishing inspections required by AD 98-18-02.
    UPS also stated that the NPRM (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014) refers to
Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011,
as the

appropriate source of service information for accomplishing inspections
specified in the NPRM. UPS stated there is a conflict in the inspection
intervals between Airbus Industrie Service Bulletin A300-57-6027,
Revision 2, dated September 13, 1994; and Airbus Service Bulletin A300-
57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011. UPS also noted that AD 2006-
07-07, Amendment 39-14534 (71 FR 16206, March 31, 2006; corrected April
21, 2006 (71 FR 20530)), requires a one-time modification in accordance
with different service information (Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-
6033, Revision 01, dated December 18, 2003) and therefore that AD could
be a stand-alone AD.
    We agree with the commenter's request and rationale. We have
revised this AD to supersede AD 98-18-02, Amendment 39-10718 (63 FR
45689, August 27, 1998), and require inspections using Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011. This AD does
not retain the inspections specified in Airbus Industrie Service
Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 2, dated September 13, 1994, and
required by AD 98-18-02. In addition, AD 2006-07-07, Amendment 39-14534
(71 FR 16206, March 31, 2006; corrected April 21, 2006 (71 FR 20530)),
is not superseded by this AD. Therefore, we have removed paragraphs (g)
and (h) of the proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014) from this AD and
redesignated the subsequent paragraphs.
    We have also revised the ``prompted by'' sentence in the SUMMARY
section of this final rule and paragraph (e) of this AD to specify the
AD ``was prompted by reports of cracking in the vertical web of the
center spar sealing angles of the wing, and subsequent analyses that
showed that the inspection threshold and interval specified in AD 98-
18-02, Amendment 39-10718 (63 FR 45689, August 27, 1998), must be
reduced to allow timely detection of cracks on the sealing angles of
the center spar, adjacent to rib 8.''

Request To Revise Compliance Times

    UPS requested that we revise the compliance times in the proposed
AD (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014) to reflect specific times regardless of
the aircraft utilization rate. UPS stated that a comment response in AD
98-18-02, Amendment 39-10718 (63 FR 45689, August 27, 1998), noted that
the FAA did not concur with the ``average flight time'' (``AFT'')
compliance time methodology as it may not address the unsafe condition
in a timely manner. UPS stated that paragraphs (i) and (j) of the
proposed AD specify that the compliance time is at the applicable times
specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Airbus Service Bulletin
A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011, which establishes the
initial and repetitive inspection compliance times based on AFT
methodology. UPS requested changing the compliance times in paragraphs
(i) and (j) of the proposed AD to reflect specific values regardless of
the aircraft utilization rate to provide consistency in the compliance
times for the actions required by paragraph (i) of the proposed AD.
    We disagree with the commenter's request to revise the compliance
times in this AD. At the time the FAA issued AD 98-18-02, Amendment 39-
10718 (63 FR 45689, August 27, 1998), the required actions in Airbus
Industrie Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 2, dated September
13, 1994, contained inspection thresholds and intervals based on
airplane flight cycles, and provided instructions for adjusting the
flight cycle threshold and interval using each individual airplane's
AFT utilization. The FAA did not agree with the AFT method because it
could result in a different inspection threshold and interval for each
individual airplane, and the FAA did not agree with adjusting a flight
cycle based threshold and interval using the average flight time
utilization without also having a related flight hour based threshold
and interval. In Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07,
dated June 6, 2011, the inspection thresholds and intervals are now
based on the accumulation of both flight cycles and flight hours, and
are listed in tables appropriately grouping airplanes with AFT
utilization above 1.5 hours, and airplanes with AFT utilization at or
below 1.5 hours. The changes made in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-
6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011, have addressed the FAA's
original concerns with the AFT method. Therefore, the current AFT
method is acceptable for this AD.
    We acknowledge that a fixed compliance time for a fleet could be
easier for operators to schedule and record compliance. Therefore,
under the provisions of paragraph (m)(1) of this AD, we will consider
requests for approval of an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) if
a proposal is submitted that is supported by technical data that
includes fatigue and damage tolerance analysis. We have not changed
this AD in this regard.

Request To Combine Paragraphs (i) Through (m) of the Proposed AD (79 FR
26651, May 9, 2014)

    UPS requested that we combine paragraphs (i) through (m) of the
proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014) because the complexity of the
paragraphs could easily result in incorrect interpretation of the
proposed requirements and be counterproductive to the intent of the
rule. The commenter stated that the requirements are distributed over
five separate paragraphs. The commenter recommended that the
requirements be revised by first requiring operators to identify
whether Repair Drawing R57140588 or R57150404 or Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-57-6033 was done and then by specifying the corresponding
actions and compliance times for the affected airplanes.
    We acknowledge the requirements are complex. However, we disagree
with the request to combine paragraphs (g) through (k) of this AD
(which were designated as paragraphs (i) through (m) in the proposed AD
(79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014)). As stated previously, we are superseding
AD 98-18-02, Amendment 39-10718 (63 FR 45689, August 27, 1998), to
prevent any incorrect interpretation of the inspection compliance
times. This AD corresponds to EASA AD 2012-0194, dated September 25,
2012, and both ADs refer to Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027,
Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011, for compliance times, which specifies
the affected airplanes and corresponding compliance times. Paragraph
(k) of this AD also specifies exceptions to Airbus Service Bulletin
A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011, in order to clarify
certain actions and compliance times. We have not changed the final
rule regarding this issue.

Request To Revise Compliance Time Header

    UPS requested that the header for paragraph (j) of the proposed AD
(79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014) be revised from ``Initial Compliance Times''
to ``Inspection Compliance Times.'' (Paragraph (j) of the proposed AD
is redesignated as paragraph (h) of this AD.) UPS stated that ``Initial
Compliance Times'' implies that requirements for subsequent or
repetitive actions will be defined elsewhere in the final rule.
    We agree to revise the header for paragraph (h) of this AD; however
we do not agree to use the terminology specified by the commenter. The
requirements for subsequent and

repetitive actions are, in fact, identified elsewhere in the final
rule. The repetitive intervals for the inspections are specified in
paragraph (g) of this AD, which was designated as paragraph (i) of the
proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014). Paragraph (g) of this AD
contains a sentence that specifies, ``Repeat the inspection required by
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD thereafter at intervals not to exceed . . .
.'' For clarity, we have revised the header for paragraph (h) of this
AD to specify ``Initial Compliance Times for the Actions Required by
Paragraph (g) of this AD.''
    In addition, we have clarified the corrective action statement in
paragraph (i) of this AD by also referring to paragraph (g) of this AD,
which contains the repetitive interval for the inspections specified in
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.

Request To Remove Requirement To Refer to This AD in Repair Approvals

    UPS requested that we remove the sentence ``For a repair method to
be approved, the repair approval must specifically refer to this AD''
from paragraph (m)(1) of the proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014),
which is designated as paragraph (k)(1) of this AD. UPS stated that the
FAA included this sentence in the NPRM because there is a ``potential''
for operators to do repairs that do not adequately address the unsafe
condition. UPS commented that adding a reference to the applicable AD
on repair documentation does not address the root cause of repair
documentation availability. UPS stated that previously approved repairs
for an AD should have been vetted as part of the corrective action and
AD development process. However, if a repair is not identified during
that process, the operator is still responsible for adhering to the
Airworthy Product provision in an AD. UPS added that the Airworthy
Product provision, in conjunction with FAA Advisory Circular 120-77,
``Maintenance and Alteration Data,'' dated October 7, 2002 (http://
rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/
199e798c7ee4347786256c4d004ae5dc/$FILE/AC%20120-77.pdf), provides
sufficient guidance and clarification for repairs accomplished during
compliance with the requirements of an AD.
    We concur with the commenter's request to remove from this AD the
requirement that repair approvals specifically refer to this AD. We
have revised paragraph (k)(1) of this AD accordingly (designated as
paragraph (m)(1) of the proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014)).
    In addition, to address misinterpretation of the Airworthy Product
paragraph, we have changed that paragraph and retitled it ``Contacting
the Manufacturer.'' This paragraph now clarifies that for any
requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a
manufacturer, the actions must be accomplished using a method approved
by the FAA, or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), or Airbus's
EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA).
    The Contacting the Manufacturer paragraph also clarifies that, if
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized
signature. The DOA signature indicates that the data and information
contained in the document are EASA approved, which is also FAA
approved. Messages and other information provided by the manufacturer
that do not contain the DOA-authorized signature approval are not EASA
approved, unless EASA directly approves the manufacturer's message or
other information. This clarification does not remove flexibility
afforded previously by the Airworthy Product paragraph. Consistent with
long-standing FAA policy, such flexibility was never intended for
required actions. Once we determine that an action is required, any
deviation from the requirement must be approved as an alternative
method of compliance.

Request To Clarify Actions in Paragraphs (k) and (l) of the Proposed AD
(79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014)

    UPS requested that we clarify paragraphs (k) and (l) of the
proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014). UPS stated that paragraph (l)
of the proposed AD specifies ``post-modification'' actions, but
paragraph (k) refers to accomplishing a ``repair'' using Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011. UPS noted that
Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011,
includes subsequent inspection requirements for airplanes on which the
actions specified in repair drawing R57140588 or R57150404 or Airbus
Service Bulletin A300-57-6033 were done. UPS concluded that the intent
of paragraph (l) of the proposed AD was for repairs outside of Repair
Drawing R57140588 or R57150404 or Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6033.
    We agree that clarification is necessary regarding which action is
the ``modification'' specified in paragraph (j) in this AD, which was
designated as paragraph (l) of the proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May 9,
2014). We have replaced the text ``After modification of the airplane,
as specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07,
dated June 6, 2011,'' with the following text: ``For airplanes on which
the modification specified in Airbus Repair Drawing R571504040 has been
done.''

Request To Clarify Applicability

    UPS requested that we revise paragraph (c) of the proposed AD (79
FR 26651, May 9, 2014) to clarify that airplanes are excluded from the
applicability if Airbus Modification 8608 is incorporated ``in
production.''
    We agree with the commenter. Airbus Modification 8608 is a
production modification. We have revised paragraph (c) of this AD
accordingly by adding ``in production'' to the text.

Request To Fix Typographical Error

    UPS requested that the paragraph designation for paragraph (o)(3)
of the proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014) be revised because there
are only two sub-paragraphs in paragraph (o) of the proposed AD.
    We agree. Paragraph (o) of the proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May 9,
2014) has been redesignated as paragraph (m) of this AD. Therefore, we
have redesignated paragraph (o)(3) of the proposed AD (79 FR 26651, May
9, 2014) as paragraph (m)(2) of this AD.

Clarification of Compliance Times and Actions

    We have revised the compliance time exception in paragraph (k)(4)
of this AD, designated as paragraph (m)(4) of the proposed AD (79 FR
26651, May 9, 2014), to clarify the specified compliance times are
since first flight of the airplane.
    We have also revised the reference to ``paragraph (k)(3) of this
AD'' within paragraph (g) of this AD to specify ``paragraph (k) of this
AD'' for the compliance time exception.
    We have also replaced the word ``repairing'' with the word
``inspecting'' in paragraph (k)(1) of this AD because that paragraph
specifies compliance times for inspection requirements.

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 minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014) for correcting the unsafe condition;
and

     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 26651, May 9, 2014).

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued the following service information:
     Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6,
2011, describes procedures for repetitive high frequency eddy current
inspections for cracking of the center spar sealing angles adjacent to
the pylon rear attachment fitting, and repair.
     Service Bulletin A300-57-6033, Revision 02, dated
September 19, 2011, describes procedures for modifying the airplane by
cold expansion of the center spar sealing angles outboard of rib 8,
including doing the eddy current inspections for cracks of the bolt
holes.
    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 of this
AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 21 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate that it takes 8 work-hours per product to comply with
the new basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $85
per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the AD
on U.S. operators to be $14,280, or $680 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions will
take about 42 work-hours and require parts costing $10,000, for a cost
of $13,570 per product. We have no way of determining the number of
aircraft that may 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-2014-0282; 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)
98-18-02, Amendment 39-10718 (63 FR 45689, August 27, 1998), and adding
the following new AD:

2015-17-09 Airbus: Amendment 39-18242. Docket No. FAA-2014-0282;
Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-168-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective September 24, 2015.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 98-18-02, Amendment 39-10718 (63 FR 45689,
August 27, 1998).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, B4-
622, B4-605R, and B4-622R airplanes, Model A300 F4-605R and F4-622R
airplanes, and Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes, certificated
in any category, except those on which Airbus Modification 8608 is
incorporated in production.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracking in the vertical web
of the center spar sealing angles of the wing, and subsequent
analyses that showed that the inspection threshold and interval
specified in AD 98-18-02, Amendment 39-10718 (63 FR 45689, August
27, 1998), must be reduced to allow timely detection of cracks on
the sealing angles of the center spar, adjacent to rib 8. We are
issuing this AD to prevent crack formation in the sealing angles;
such cracks could rupture the sealing angle and lead to subsequent
crack formation in the bottom skin of the wing, and resultant
reduced structural integrity of the center spar section of the wing.

(f) Compliance

    You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD
performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions
have already been done.

(g) Inspection and Modification

    For all airplanes, at the applicable time specified in paragraph
(h) of this AD, accomplish the actions specified in paragraphs
(g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD concurrently. Repeat the inspection
required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD thereafter at intervals not
to exceed the values as specified in the ``Repeat Interval'' column
in Table 1 or Table 2 of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027,
Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011, as applicable to the airplane
configuration and utilization; except as required by paragraph (k)
of this AD.
    (1) Do a high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection of the
center spar sealing angles adjacent to the pylon rear attachment
fitting for cracks, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07,
dated June 6, 2011.
    (2) Unless already done: Modify the airplane by cold expansion
of the center spar sealing angles outboard of rib 8, adjacent to the
pylon rear attachment fitting, including doing the eddy current
inspections for cracks

of the bolt holes, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6033, Revision 02,
dated September 19, 2011.

(h) Initial Compliance Times for the Actions Required by Paragraph (g)
of This AD

    At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and
(h)(2) of this AD, except as required by paragraph (k) of this AD,
do the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD.
    (1) At the applicable compliance time specified in Table 1 and
Table 2 in the ``Threshold Inspection,'' column in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision
07, dated June 6, 2011.
    (2) At the applicable compliance time specified in Table 1 and
Table 2 in the ``Grace Period,'' column in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision
07, dated June 6, 2011.

(i) Corrective Actions

    If, during any inspection required by paragraph (g), (g)(1), or
(g)(2) of this AD, any crack is found: Before further flight, repair
the crack by replacing both of the forward and aft sealing angles
with new sealing angles and cold expansion of the attachment holes,
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service
Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011. The
corrective actions, as required by this paragraph, do not constitute
as a terminating action for the repetitive inspections specified in
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.

(j) Post-Modification Actions

    For airplanes on which the modification specified in Airbus
Repair Drawing R571504040 has been done: Within 3 months after the
effective date of this AD, or before further flight after doing the
modification, whichever occurs later, contact the Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA
Design Organization Approval (DOA) for repetitive post-repair
inspections and corrective actions, and do those actions.

(k) Exceptions to the Service Information

    (1) Where Note 01 and Note 02 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,''
of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6,
2011, specify to contact Airbus for inspection requirements, this AD
requires, at the applicable compliance time specified in Table 1 and
Table 2 in the ``Grace Period,'' column in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision
07, dated June 6, 2011, inspecting using a method approved by the
Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA.
    (2) Where Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07,
dated June 6, 2011, specifies a compliance time in Table 1 and Table
2 in the ``Grace Period,'' column in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,''
this AD requires compliance within the specified compliance time
after the effective date of this AD.
    (3) Where Table 1 and Table 2 in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,''
of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6,
2011, specify a choice between flight cycles or flight hours, this
AD requires a compliance time within the specified flight cycles or
flight hours, whichever occurs first.
    (4) Where Table 1 and Table 2 in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,''
of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6,
2011, specify compliance times in the ``Threshold Inspection''
column for pre-modification 8609, those compliance times are flight
cycles or flight hours since first flight of the airplane.
    (5) Where Table 1 and Table 2 in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,''
of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated June 6,
2011, specify compliance times in the ``Threshold Inspection''
column for any post modification or repair, this AD requires
compliance within the applicable compliance time specified in the
``Threshold Inspection'' column of Table 1 and Table 2 in paragraph
1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027,
Revision 07, dated June 6, 2011. Those compliance times are flight
cycles or flight hours since accomplishing the modification or
repair.

(l) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, if those actions were performed before
the effective date of this AD using the service information
specified in paragraphs (l)(1) through (l)(3) of this AD, which is
not incorporated by reference in this AD.
    (1) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 04, dated
August 4, 1999.
    (2) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 05, dated
November 21, 2002.
    (3) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 06, dated
March 2, 2005.

(m) 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 EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. If
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized
signature.

(n) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA AD 2012-0194, dated September 25, 2012, 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-2014-0282.
    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (o)(3) and (o)(4) of this AD.

(o) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6027, Revision 07, dated
June 6, 2011.
    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A300-57-6033, Revision 02, dated
September 19, 2011.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS--EAW (Airworthiness Office), 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.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on August 10, 2015.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-20382 Filed 8-19-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P