[Federal Register: October 10, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 195)]
[Notices]
[Page 57613-57615]
[DOCID:fr10oc07-122]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. IA-2667; 803-186]

IronBridge Capital Management LP; The Hirtle Callaghan Trust;
Notice of Application

October 3, 2007.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of Application for Exemption under the Investment
Advisers Act of 1940 (``Advisers Act'').

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

Applicants:  IronBridge Capital Management LP (``IronBridge''); The
Hirtle Callaghan Trust (``Trust''); together (``Applicants'').

Relevant Advisers Act Sections:  Exemption requested under section 206A
of the Advisers Act from section 205 of the Advisers Act and Advisers
Act rule 205-1.

Summary of Application:  Applicants request an order permitting
IronBridge to charge a performance fee based on the performance of that
portion of a Trust portfolio managed by IronBridge (``IronBridge
Account''). Applicants further request that the order permit them to
compute the performance-related portion of the fee using changes in the
IronBridge Account's gross asset value rather than net asset value.

Filing Dates:  The application was filed on July 7, 2005, and amended
and restated on August 3, 2006 and October 1, 2007.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing:  An order granting the application
will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested
persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary
and serving Applicants with copies of the request, personally or by
mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30
p.m. on October 29, 2007, and should be accompanied by proof of service
on Applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, the reason for the request, and the issues
contested. Persons may request notification of a hearing by writing to
the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants, IronBridge Capital
Management LP, c/o Samuel T. Eddins, One Parkview Plaza, Suite 600,
Oakbrook Terrace, Illinois 60181; The Hirtle Callaghan Trust, c/o
Rhonda Fell, Five Tower Bridge, 300 Barr Harbor Drive, Suite 500, West
Conshohocken, PA 19428.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David W. Blass, Assistant Director, or
Vivien Liu, Senior Counsel, at<PHONE_NUMBER> (Office of Investment
Adviser Regulation, Division of Investment Management).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained for a fee at the
Commission's Public Reference Branch, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549-0102 (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>).

Applicant's Representations

    1. IronBridge is an investment adviser registered under the
Advisers Act. The Trust is an open-end management investment company
registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940. The Trust was
organized in 1994 by Hirtle, Callaghan & Co. (``Hirtle Callaghan''), an
investment adviser registered under the Advisers Act. The Trust is a
series company that currently consists of several separate investment
portfolios. Shares of the Trust are available only to clients of Hirtle
Callaghan or clients of financial intermediaries, such as investment
advisers that are acting in a fiduciary capacity with investment
discretion and that have established relationships with Hirtle
Callaghan.
    2. Hirtle Callaghan serves as a ``manager of managers'' for the
Trust. Hirtle Callaghan is responsible for monitoring the overall
investment performance of the Trust's portfolios and the performance of
the portfolio managers that manage the Trust's portfolios. Hirtle
Callaghan may also from time to time recommend that the Trust's Board
of Trustees (the ``Board'') retain additional portfolio managers or
terminate existing portfolio managers. Authority to select new
portfolio managers and reallocate assets among the portfolio managers,
however, resides with the Trust's Board.
    3. IronBridge is one of five investment advisers that provide
portfolio management services to the Small Capitalization Equity
Portfolio (``Portfolio'') of the Trust. Each of these advisers is
responsible for the management of a discrete portion of the Portfolio's
assets on a day-to-day basis. In doing so each acts as though it were
advising a separate investment company. Percentage limitations on
investments are applied to each portion of the Portfolio without regard
to the investments in the other advisers' portions of the Portfolio.
When each adviser receives information about portfolio positions from
the Trust or its custodian, the adviser generally receives only
information about the portion of the Portfolio assigned to it, and not
information about the positions held by the Portfolio as a whole. Each
adviser generally is responsible for preparing reports to the Trust and
the Board only with respect to its discrete portion of the Portfolio.
    4. IronBridge is not affiliated with Hirtle Callaghan, the Trust or
any other investment advisory organization that provides portfolio
management and services to the Trust.\1\ Services provided to the Trust
by IronBridge are limited to investment selection for the IronBridge
Account, placement of transactions for

execution, and certain compliance functions directly related to such
services. IronBridge and its affiliates do not act as a distributor or
sponsor for the Trust or Portfolio. No member of the Trust's Board is
affiliated with IronBridge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ IronBridge does not have any affiliates at this time. Future
affiliates, if any, will comply with the terms of any order issued
by the Commission in connection with this application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. IronBridge currently receives a fee at the annual rate of 0.60
percent of the average daily net assets of the IronBridge Account,
payable monthly. On August 26, 2004 the Trust's Board approved an
amendment to the portfolio management agreement between IronBridge and
the Trust under which the existing fee structure would be replaced with
a fee structure that includes a performance component (``Proposed
Amendment''). On October 25, 2004 the shareholders of the Portfolio
approved the Proposed Amendment. The Proposed Amendment would become
effective on the first day of the month following receipt of an order
from the SEC approving the application. IronBridge's fee would be
adjusted to reflect the performance of the IronBridge Account only
after the Proposed Amendment has been in effect for 12 months (the
``Initial Period'').
    6. Under the proposed fee arrangement, at the end of each of the
first three quarters of the Initial Period, IronBridge would receive a
base fee at the annual rate of 0.60 percent of the average daily net
assets of the IronBridge Account (``Base Fee'').\2\ At the end of the
fourth quarter of the Initial Period, IronBridge would receive the Base
Fee adjusted by a factor referred to as the performance component. The
performance component would equal 25 percent of the difference between
(i) the total return of the IronBridge Account during the preceding 12
months calculated without regard to the expenses incurred in the
operation of the IronBridge Account (``Gross Total Return'') and (ii)
the sum of the total return of the Russell 2000 Index (``Index
Return'') during the same 12-month period plus a performance hurdle of
60 basis points (``Performance Component'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Base Fee is calculated as follows: {[(.60%)(average
daily net assets)] /X{time}  x N, where ``X'' = the number of days
in the preceding 12 month period and ``N'' = the number of days in
the quarter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. None of the expenses of the Portfolio, including IronBridge's
advisory fee, would be deducted from the performance of the IronBridge
Account for purposes of calculating the Gross Total Return. However,
the Gross Total Return would reflect the effect (i.e., reducing
performance) of all applicable brokerage and transaction costs.
    8. Because no performance adjustment will be paid until the end of
the Initial Period, it is possible that payments of the Base Fee made
to IronBridge during the first nine months may exceed the appropriate
performance-adjusted fee if the Performance Component has been
negative. In the event of such an occurrence, the Proposed Amendment
provides a ``recoupment feature'' pursuant to which the advisory fees
payable to IronBridge will be reduced until the difference between the
aggregate quarterly fees received by IronBridge with respect to the
Initial Period and the performance adjusted fee is fully recouped by
the Trust. However, if the portfolio management agreement with
IronBridge is terminated before any recoupment has been fully accounted
for, the Trust would not be able to recoup any outstanding excess that
had been paid in previous quarters.
    9. For each quarter following the fourth quarter of the Initial
Period, IronBridge would receive the quarterly payments of the Base Fee
(approximately 15 percent (15 basis points) of the average daily net
assets of the IronBridge Account), plus or minus 25 percent of the
Performance Component multiplied by the average daily net assets of the
IronBridge Account for the immediately preceding 12-month period, on a
``rolling basis.'' \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Rolling Basis'' means that, at each quarterly fee
calculation, the Gross Total Return of the IronBridge Account, the
Index Return and the average daily net assets of the IronBridge
Account for the most recent quarter will be substituted for the
corresponding values of the earliest quarter included in the prior
fee calculation. Both the Base Fee and the Performance Component are
calculated based on the same rolling period as described in this
footnote and the accompanying text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. The maximum annual fee payable for any 12-month period would
not exceed 1.20 percent (120 basis points), or 0.30 percent (30 basis
points) with respect to any quarter. IronBridge is not guaranteed any
minimum annual fee. Therefore, it is possible that IronBridge's annual
fee may fall to zero.

Applicants' Legal Analysis

    1. Section 205(a)(1) of the Advisers Act generally prohibits an
investment adviser from entering into any investment advisory agreement
that provides for compensation to the adviser on the basis of a share
of capital gains or capital appreciation of a client's account.
    2. Section 205(b) of the Advisers Act provides a limited exception
to this prohibition, permitting an adviser to charge a registered
investment company and certain other persons a fee that is based on
asset value of the company or fund under management averaged over a
specified period and increases and decreases ``proportionately with the
investment performance of the company or fund over a specified period
in relation to the investment record of an appropriate index of
securities prices or such other measure of investment performance as
the Commission by rule, regulation or order may specify.''
    3. Rule 205-1 under the Advisers Act requires that the investment
performance of an investment company be computed based on the change in
the net (of all expenses and fees) asset value per share of the
investment company.
    4. Applicants request exemptive relief from section 205 of the
Advisers Act and rule 205-1 thereunder to permit them to (i) apply the
proposed fee only to the IronBridge Account and not to the Portfolio as
a whole, and (ii) compute the Performance Component measured by the
change in the IronBridge Account's gross asset value, rather than the
change in its net asset value.
    5. Applicants state that Congress, in adopting and amending section
205 of the Advisers Act, and the SEC, in adopting rule 205-1, put into
place safeguards designed to ensure that investment advisers would not
take advantage of advisory clients.
    6. Applicants assert that the Commission required that performance
fees be calculated based on the net asset value of the investment
company's shares to prevent a situation where an adviser could earn a
performance fee even though investment company shareholders did not
derive any benefit from the adviser's performance after the deduction
of fees and expenses.
    7. Applicants state that, unlike traditional performance fee
arrangements, IronBridge would not receive the Performance Component of
its fee unless its management of the IronBridge Account has resulted in
performance in excess of the Index performance plus a ``performance
hurdle'' equal to the 0.60 percent of the average daily net asset value
of the IronBridge Account. Applicants assert that increasing the
performance of the Index by the 0.60 percent hurdle would have an
effect similar to deducting IronBridge's fees. In the event the Base
Fee changes, the performance hurdle also would be changed to match the
Base Fee. Applicants state that since the fee structure contains a
performance hurdle, the Portfolio's shareholders will have protections
similar to those contemplated by the net asset value requirement of
rule 205-1.
    8. Applicants suggest that Congress' concern, in enacting the
safeguards of section 205, came about because the

vast majority of investment advisers exercised a high level of control
over the structuring of the advisory relationship. Applicants state
that the proposed fee, however, was negotiated actively at arm's length
between the Trust and IronBridge. Applicants state that IronBridge has
little, if any, influence over the overall management of the Trust or
the Portfolio beyond stock selection, and does not control the
Portfolio or the Trust. Management functions of the Trust and the
Portfolio reside in the Trust's Board. The Trust is directly and fully
responsible for supervising the Trust's service providers and
monitoring expenses of each of the Trust's portfolios. The Trust's
Board is responsible for allocating the assets of the several
portfolios among the portfolio managers. Neither IronBridge nor any of
its affiliates sponsored or organized the Trust, or serves as a
distributor or principal underwriter of the Trust. IronBridge and its
affiliates do not own any shares issued by the Trust. No officer,
director or employee of IronBridge, nor any of its affiliates, serves
as an executive officer or director of the Trust. Neither IronBridge
nor any of its affiliates is an affiliated person of Hirtle Callaghan
or any other person who provides investment advice with respect to the
Trust's advisory relationships (except to the extent that such
affiliation may exist by reason of IronBridge or any of its affiliates
serving as investment adviser to the Trust). No member of the Trust's
Board is affiliated with IronBridge.
    9. Applicants state that the proposed fee arrangement satisfies the
purpose of rule 205-1 because it was negotiated at arms-length and the
Trust, for the reasons stated in the previous paragraphs, does not need
the protections afforded by calculating a performance fee based on net
assets. Applicants argue that the proposed fee arrangement is therefore
consistent with the underlying policies of section 205 and rule 205-1
under the Advisers Act and that the exemption would be consistent with
the protection of investors.

Applicants' Conditions

    Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will
be subject to the following conditions:
    1. If the Base Fee changes, the performance hurdle will be changed
to match the Base Fee and to ensure that the investment advisory fee
continue to have the potential to increase and decrease
proportionately.
    2. To the extent IronBridge relies on the requested order with
respect to advisory arrangements with other investment companies that
it advises, those arrangements will meet the following requirements:
(i) The investment advisory fee will be negotiated on an arm's-length
basis between IronBridge and the investment company or its primary
investment adviser; (ii) the fee structure will contain a performance
hurdle that is, at all times, no lower than the base fee; and should
the base fee change, the hurdle also will be changed to match the base
fee and to ensure that the investment advisory fee continue to have the
potential to increase and decrease proportionally; (iii) neither
IronBridge nor any of its affiliates will serve as distributor or
sponsor of the investment company; (iv) no member of the board of the
investment company will be affiliated with IronBridge or its
affiliates; (v) neither IronBridge nor any of its affiliates will
organize the investment company; (vi) neither IronBridge nor any of its
affiliates will be an affiliated person of any primary adviser to the
investment company or of any other person who provides advice with
respect to the investment company's advisory relationships (except to
the extent that IronBridge and/or its affiliates may be affiliated with
another portfolio manager by virtue of the fact that IronBridge or the
affiliate serves as a portfolio manager to the investment company or to
another investment company); and (vii) other than described in this
application, Applicants will comply with section 205 and rules 205-1
and 205-2 under the Advisers Act.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
pursuant to delegated authority.
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-19913 Filed 10-9-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 137 (Wednesday, July 19, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46112-46115]
[FR Doc No: 2023-15197]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 88 , No. 137 / Wednesday, July 19, 2023 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2023-1494; Project Identifier MCAI-2023-00382-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2020-01-13, which applies to all Dassault Aviation Model MYSTERE-FALCON
200 airplanes. AD 2020-01-13 requires revising the existing maintenance
or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations. Since the FAA issued AD 2020-01-
13, the FAA has determined that new or more restrictive airworthiness
limitations are necessary. This proposed AD would continue to require
the actions in AD 2020-01-13 and would require revising the existing
maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or
more restrictive airworthiness limitations, as specified in a European
Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is proposed for
incorporation by reference (IBR). The FAA is proposing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by September
5, 2023.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2023-1494; or in person at Docket Operations between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this NPRM, the mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI), any comments received, and other information. The
street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
    Material Incorporated by Reference:
     For material that is proposed for IBR in this NPRM, EASA,
Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999
000; email: [email protected]; website: easa.europa.eu. You may find
this material on the EASA website: ad.easa.europa.eu. It is also
available at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-1494.
     For service information identified in this NPRM, contact
Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation, Teterboro Airport, P.O. Box 2000,
South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; website
dassaultfalcon.com.
     You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th Street, Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aviation Safety
Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590;
phone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2023-1494; Project Identifier
MCAI-2023-00382-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
the proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. The
agency will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Tom
Rodriguez, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite
410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected]. Any commentary that the FAA receives that is not
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for
this rulemaking.

Background

    The FAA issued AD 2020-01-13, Amendment 39-19819 (85 FR 5313,
January 30, 2020) (AD 2020-01-13), for all Dassault Aviation Model
MYSTERE-FALCON 200 airplanes. AD 2020-01-13 was prompted by an MCAI
originated EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of
the European Union. EASA issued AD 2019-0153, dated July 3, 2019 (EASA
AD 2019-0153) (which corresponds to FAA AD 2020-01-13), to correct an
unsafe condition.

    AD 2020-01-13 requires revising the existing maintenance or
inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations. The FAA issued AD 2020-01-13 to
address fatigue cracking, damage, and corrosion in principal structural
elements; such fatigue cracking, damage, and corrosion could result in
reduced structural integrity of the airplane. AD 2020-01-13 specifies
that accomplishing the revision required by that AD terminates the
requirements of AD 2010-26-05, Amendment 39-16544 (75 FR 79952,
December 21, 2010) (AD 2010-26-05). This proposed AD would therefore
continue to allow that terminating action.

Actions Since AD 2020-01-13 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 2020-01-13, EASA superseded AD 2019-0153
and issued EASA AD 2023-0045, dated March 2, 2023; corrected March 3,
2023 (EASA AD 2023-0045) (referred to after this as the MCAI) to
correct an unsafe condition on all Dassault Aviation Model MYSTERE-
FALCON 200 airplanes. The MCAI states that new or more restrictive
airworthiness limitations have been developed.
    The FAA is proposing this AD to address fatigue cracking, damage,
and corrosion in principal structural elements; such fatigue cracking,
damage, and corrosion could result in reduced structural integrity of
the airplane. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at
regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-1494.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed EASA AD 2023-0045. This service information
specifies new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations for
airplane structures and safe life limits.
    This proposed AD would also require Chapter 5-40-00, Airworthiness
Limitations, Revision 18, dated January 15, 2019, of the Dassault
Falcon 200 Maintenance Manual, which the Director of the Federal
Register approved for incorporation by reference as of March 5, 2020
(85 FR 5313, January 30, 2020).
    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.

FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority,
it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
and service information referenced above. The FAA is issuing this NPRM
after determining that the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

Proposed Requirements of This NPRM

    This proposed AD would retain the requirements of AD 2020-01-13.
This proposed AD would also require revising the existing maintenance
or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations, which are specified in EASA AD
2023-0045 already described, as proposed for incorporation by
reference. Any differences with EASA AD 2023-0045 are identified as
exceptions in the regulatory text of this AD.
    This proposed AD would require revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to include new actions (e.g., inspections).
Compliance with these actions is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For
airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in
the areas addressed by this proposed AD, the operator may not be able
to accomplish the actions described in the revisions. In this
situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request
approval for an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) according to
paragraph (m)(1) of this proposed AD.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA developed a process to use some civil aviation
authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance
with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been
coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result, the
FAA proposes to incorporate EASA AD 2023-0045 by reference in the FAA
final rule. This proposed AD would, therefore, require compliance with
EASA AD 2023-0045 through that incorporation, except for any
differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this
proposed AD. Using common terms that are the same as the heading of a
particular section in EASA AD 2023-0045 does not mean that operators
need comply only with that section. For example, where the AD
requirement refers to ``all required actions and compliance times,''
compliance with this AD requirement is not limited to the section
titled ``Required Action(s) and Compliance Time(s)'' in EASA AD 2023-
0045. Service information required by EASA AD 2023-0045 for compliance
will be available at regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2023-1494 after the FAA final rule is published.

Airworthiness Limitation ADs Using the New Process

    The FAA's process of incorporating by reference MCAI ADs as the
primary source of information for compliance with corresponding FAA ADs
has been limited to certain MCAI ADs (primarily those with service
bulletins as the primary source of information for accomplishing the
actions required by the FAA AD). However, the FAA is now expanding the
process to include MCAI ADs that require a change to airworthiness
limitation documents, such as airworthiness limitation sections.
    For these ADs that incorporate by reference an MCAI AD that changes
airworthiness limitations, the FAA requirements are unchanged.
Operators must revise the existing maintenance or inspection program,
as applicable, to incorporate the information specified in the new
airworthiness limitation document. The airworthiness limitations must
be followed according to 14 CFR 91.403(c) and 91.409(e).
    The previous format of the airworthiness limitation ADs included a
paragraph that specified that no alternative actions (e.g.,
inspections) or intervals, may be used unless the actions and intervals
are approved as an AMOC in accordance with the procedures specified in
the AMOCs paragraph under ``Additional AD Provisions.'' This new format
includes a ``New Provisions for Alternative Actions and Intervals''
paragraph that does not specifically refer to AMOCs, but operators may
still request an AMOC to use an alternative action, or interval.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 9 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following
costs to comply with this proposed AD:
    The FAA estimates the total cost per operator for the retained
actions from AD 2020-01-13 to be $7,650 (90 work-hours x $85 per work-
hour).
    The FAA has determined that revising the existing maintenance or
inspection program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator,
although the agency recognizes that this number may vary from operator
to operator. Since

operators incorporate maintenance or inspection program changes for
their affected fleet(s), the FAA has determined that a per-operator
estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane estimate.
    The agency estimates the average total cost per operator for the
new proposed actions to be $7,650 (90 work-hours x $85 per work-hour).

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by:
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive 2020-01-13, Amendment 39-19819 (85
FR 5313, January 30, 2020); and
0
b. Adding the following new airworthiness directive:

Dassault Aviation: Docket No. FAA-2023-1494; Project Identifier
MCAI-2023-00382-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by September 5, 2023.

(b) Affected ADs

    (1) This AD replaces AD 2020-01-13, Amendment 39-19819 (85 FR
5313, January 30, 2020) (AD 2020-01-13).
    (2) This AD affects AD 2010-26-05, Amendment 39-16544 (75 FR
79952, December 21, 2010) (AD 2010-26-05).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Dassault Aviation Model MYSTERE-FALCON
200 airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code: 05, Time
Limits/Maintenance Checks.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a determination that new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address fatigue cracking, damage, and corrosion
in principal structural elements; such fatigue cracking, damage, and
corrosion could result in reduced structural integrity of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Revision of the Existing Maintenance or Inspection
Program, with No Changes.

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (i) of AD
2020-01-13, with no changes. Within 90 days after March 5, 2020 (the
effective date of AD 2020-01-13), revise the existing maintenance or
inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate the information
specified in Chapter 5-40-00, Airworthiness Limitations, Revision
18, dated January 15, 2019, of the Dassault Falcon 200 Maintenance
Manual. The initial compliance time for doing the tasks is at the
applicable time specified in Chapter 5-40-00, Airworthiness
Limitations, Revision 18, dated January 15, 2019, of the Dassault
Falcon 200 Maintenance Manual; or within 90 days after March 5,
2020; whichever occurs later. Accomplishing the revision of the
existing maintenance or inspection program required by paragraph (i)
of this AD terminates the requirements of this paragraph.

(h) Retained Restrictions on Alternative Actions or Intervals, With a
New Exception

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (j) of AD
2020-01-13, with a new exception. Except as required by paragraph
(i) of this AD, after the existing maintenance or inspection program
has been revised as required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no
alternative actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals may be used
unless the actions or intervals are approved as an alternative
method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (m)(1) of this AD.

(i) New Revision of the Existing Maintenance or Inspection Program

    Except as specified in paragraph (j) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2023-0045, dated March 2, 2023; corrected March 3, 2023 (EASA AD
2023-0045). Accomplishing the revision of the existing maintenance
or inspection program required by this paragraph terminates the
requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD.

(j) Exceptions to EASA AD 2023-0045

    (1) This AD does not adopt the requirements specified in
paragraphs (1) and (2) of EASA AD 2023-0045.
    (2) Paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2023-0045 specifies revising ``the
approved AMP'' within 12 months after its effective date, but this
AD requires revising the existing maintenance or inspection program,
as applicable, within 90 days after the effective date of this AD.
    (3) The initial compliance time for doing the tasks specified in
paragraph (3) of EASA 2023-0045 is at the applicable ``limitations''
as incorporated by the requirements of paragraph (3) of EASA AD
2023-0045, or within 90 days after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later.
    (4) This AD does not adopt the provisions specified in
paragraphs (4) and (5) of EASA AD 2023-0045.
    (5) This AD does not adopt the ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD
2023-0045.

(k) New Provisions for Alternative Actions and Intervals

    After the existing maintenance or inspection program has been
revised as required by paragraph (i) of this AD, no alternative
actions (e.g., inspections) and intervals are allowed unless they
are approved as specified in the provisions of the ``Ref.
Publications'' section of EASA AD 2023-0045.

(l) Terminating Action for AD 2010-26-05

    Accomplishing the actions required by paragraph (g) or (i) of
this AD terminates the requirements of paragraph (g)(1) of AD 2010-
26-05, for Dassault Aviation Model MYSTERE-FALCON 200 airplanes
only.

(m) Additional AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Validation Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your
principal inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the International
Validation Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified
in paragraph (n) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected]. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your
appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Validation Branch, FAA; or the European Union Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA); or Dassault Aviation's EASA Design Organization Approval
(DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-
authorized signature.

(n) Additional Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Tom Rodriguez,
Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; phone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].

(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.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
[DATE 35 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE].
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2023-0045,
dated March 2, 2023; corrected March 3, 2023.
    (ii) [Reserved].
    (4) The following service information was approved for IBR on
March 5, 2020 (85 FR 5313, January 30, 2020).
    (i) Chapter 5-40-00, Airworthiness Limitations, Revision 18,
dated January 15, 2019, of the Dassault Falcon 200 Maintenance
Manual.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (5) For EASA AD 2023-0045, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email:
[email protected]; website: easa.europa.eu. You may find this EASA
AD on the EASA website: ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (6) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation, Teterboro Airport, P.O. Box 2000,
South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; website
dassaultfalcon.com.
    (7) You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th Street, Des Moines, WA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (8) 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, email [email protected], or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on July 12, 2023.
Victor Wicklund,
Deputy Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-15197 Filed 7-18-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P