[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 123 (Thursday, June 26, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36304-36305]
[FR Doc No: 2014-14984]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP14-1049-000.
    Applicants: American Midstream (Midla), LLC.
    Description: Midla Off-System Capacity Filing to be effective 7/16/
2014.
    Filed Date: 6/16/14.
    Accession Number: 20140616-5119.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/30/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-1050-000.
    Applicants: Leaf River Energy Center LLC.
    Description: Tariff Changes to Update Contact Information to be
effective 7/16/2014.
    Filed Date: 6/16/14.
    Accession Number: 20140616-5213.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/30/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-1051-000.
    Applicants: Honeoye Storage Corporation.
    Description: June 2014 Show Cause Order issued March 20 2014 Change
to be effective 7/20/2014.
    Filed Date: 6/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140617-5059.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/30/14.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP14-764-001.
    Applicants: Millennium Pipeline Company, LLC.
    Description: Negotiated Rate Service Agmt--WPX Compliance Filing to
be effective 5/1/2014.

    Filed Date: 6/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140617-5118.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/30/14.

    Any person desiring to protest in any of the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified
comment date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: June 18, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-14984 Filed 6-25-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: May 8, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 88)]
[Notices]
[Page 26760]
[DOCID:fr08my06-46]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP97-255-068]

TransColorado Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Compliance
Filng

May 1, 2006.
    Take notice that on April 24, 2006, TransColorado Gas Transmission
Company (TransColorado) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas
Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, Thirteenth Revised Sheet No. 21 and
Sixth Revised Sheet No. 22B, to be effective April 20, 2006.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests
must be filed in accordance with the provisions of section 154.210 of
the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing a protest
must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the
proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons

unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies
of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-6896 Filed 5-5-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 34 (Friday, February 18, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 9398]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03552]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-94181A; File No. SR-NYSE-2021-74]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC,
Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend the Provisions of Rule 7.35B; Correction

February 15, 2022.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission published a document in
the Federal Register on February 14, 2022, concerning a Notice of
Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule
Change To Amend the Provisions of Rule 7.35B. The document contained a
typographical error.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Naomi P. Lewis, Securities and
Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, (202) 551-
5400.

Correction

    In the Federal Register of February 14, 2022, in FR Doc. 2022-
03018, on page 8305, in the first column, on the 47th line, on the
first line under the heading ``SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION''
correct the reference to ``Release No. 94181'' instead to ``Release No.
34-94181.''

    Dated: February 15, 2022.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-03552 Filed 2-17-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 41 (Wednesday, March 2, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11331-11332]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4593]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 516

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0534]
RIN 0910-AG58

New Animal Drugs for Minor Use and Minor Species; Confirmation of
Effective Date

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is confirming the
effective date of March 30, 2011, for the final rule that appeared in
the Federal Register of November 15, 2010 (75 FR 69586). The direct
final rule amends the regulations regarding new animal drugs for minor
use and minor species (MUMS) to update language and clarify the intent
of the regulations consistent with the preambles to the proposed and
final rules. This document confirms the effective date of the direct
final rule.

DATES: Effective date confirmed: March 30, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Meg Oeller, Center for Veterinary
Medicine (HFV-50), Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of November 15, 2010
(75 FR 69586), FDA solicited comments concerning the direct final rule
for a 75-day period ending January 31, 2011. FDA stated that the
effective date of the

direct final rule would be on March 30, 2011, 60 days after the end of
the comment period, unless any significant adverse comment was
submitted to FDA during the comment period. FDA did not receive any
significant adverse comments.

    Authority:  21 U.S.C. 360ccc-1, 360ccc-2, 371. Accordingly, the
amendments issued thereby are effective.

    Dated: February 24, 2011.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-4593 Filed 3-1-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register: December 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 238)]
[Notices]
[Page 70625-70626]
[DOCID:fr12de07-85]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56901; File No. SR-Amex-2007-20]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto
Related To Amending Complex Orders Procedures

December 5, 2007.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on February 15, 2007, the American Stock Exchange LLC (``Amex'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the
Amex. On November 28, 2007, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the
proposed rule change. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend complex orders procedures to allow
the adjustment of the options leg of the order if market conditions
prevent the execution of the non-option leg at the price agreed upon.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available at http://www.amex.com
, at the Exchange's principal office, and at the

Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    Amendment No. 1 makes revisions to the 19b-4, as originally filed,
and replaces and supersedes the original filing in its entirety.
    Complex orders involving orders consisting of stock or securities
futures and option legs are effective hedging strategies that would
permit Members to initially offset the risk of price movements in an
option position, with a corresponding purchase or sale of stock
underlying the option position or securities futures. The Exchange
recently adopted language to allow for the execution of stock-option
orders and security future-option orders.\3\ These rules currently
provide that complex orders consisting of stock or security futures and
options legs that fall within their proposed definition will be
afforded the same priorities as spread, straddle, ratio, and
combination orders.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Exchange Act Release No. 53588 (April 3. 2006), 71 FR
18122 (April 10, 2006).
    \4\ See Commentary .01 to Rule 950-ANTE(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Amex Rule 953-ANTE provides the execution procedures for stock-
option orders and security future-options orders. Currently, under Amex
Rule 953-ANTE, if the security or security

futures leg of the order cannot be executed at the price(s) agreed upon
due to market conditions, a trade representing the execution of the
options leg of the transaction may be cancelled at the request of any
member that is a party to that trade.
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 953--ANTE (b)(ii) to provide
that if the security or security futures leg of the order cannot be
executed at the price agreed upon due to market conditions, the price
of a trade representing the execution of the options leg of the
transaction may be adjusted to be consistent with the net debit or
credit price \5\ of the original order, if market conditions in any of
the non-Exchange markets prevent the execution of the non-option leg at
the price agreed upon
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The net debit or credit will remain the same. The
calculation of the net debit or credit is not subject to
interpretation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For example, a floor broker walks into the ABC options crowd to
sell 20 November ABC calls at $2.00 against 1000 shares of ABC stock at
$50.00, the price where the stock is presently trading. The net debit
price for this transaction would be $46,000.\6\ A member/members agrees
to the trade. The broker then goes to cross the stock at $50.00, but is
unable to because of movement in the stock price, and crosses it at
$50.10. The price of the options would be adjusted and the broker would
print the options at $2.05 to maintain the net debit or credit price of
the original order.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The original net price for the transaction: 1000 shares at
$50.00 ($50,000) less 20 calls at $2.00 ($4,000) equals a net price
of $46,000.
    \7\ The adjusted net price for the transaction: 1000 shares at
$50.10 ($50,100) less 20 calls at $2.05 ($4,100) equals a net price
of $46,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange notes that the orders are presented as crosses and the
counterparty acknowledges the adjustment. When agreeing to the trade,
the counterparty is aware that the price of the trade representing the
options leg of the transaction may be adjusted. Lastly, the Exchange
notes that the re-pricing of the options leg must be consistent with
the Amex's priority and parity rules.\8\ If the transaction does not
satisfy the Exchange's priority and parity rules by the end of the
trading day, then the transaction would be cancelled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Commentary .01 and .02 to Rule 950-ANTE(c). As noted in
the aforementioned example, if there was a public customer order on
the book for $2.05 at the time of the trade, the member would not be
permitted to trade through the customer's order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Act and the rules and regulations under the Act applicable to a
national securities exchange and, in particular, the requirements of
section 6(b) \9\ of the Act. Specifically, the Exchange believes the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of section
6(b)(5) \10\ of the Act in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in
general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding, or (ii) as to
which the Amex consents, the Commission will:
    A. By order approve such proposed rule change; or
    B. Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-Amex-2007-20 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2007-20. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-Amex-2007-20 and should be
submitted on or before January 2, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-24032 Filed 12-11-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: October 14, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 198)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 63054-63058]
[DOCID:fr14oc10-8]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-1229; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-106-AD;
Amendment 39-16471; AD 2010-21-11]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2B19
(Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    A specific batch of nose landing gear (NLG) and NLG door
selector valves, part number (P/N) 601R75146-1 (Kaiser Fluid
Technologies P/N 750006000), may have had their end caps incorrectly
lock-wired and/or incorrectly torqued during assembly. This
condition can lead to the end cap backing off, with consequent
damage to a seal and internal leakage within the valve.
Subsequently, if electrical power is transferred or removed from the
aircraft before the NLG safety pin is installed, any pressure,
including residual pressure, in the No. 3 hydraulic system can
result in an uncommanded NLG retraction and/or uncommanded opening
of the NLG doors. There have been six cases reported on CL[-]600-
2B19 aircraft, one of which resulted in the collapse of the NLG at
the departure gate.
* * * * *
We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective November 18, 2010.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of November 18,
2010.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cesar Gomez, Aerospace Engineer,

Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New
York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on January 5, 2010 (75
FR 258). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    A specific batch of nose landing gear (NLG) and NLG door
selector valves, part number (P/N) 601R75146-1 (Kaiser Fluid
Technologies P/N 750006000), may have had their end caps incorrectly
lock-wired and/or incorrectly torqued during assembly. This
condition can lead to the end cap backing off, with consequent
damage to a seal and internal leakage within the valve.
Subsequently, if electrical power is transferred or removed from the
aircraft before the NLG safety pin is installed, any pressure,
including residual pressure, in the No. 3 hydraulic system can
result in an uncommanded NLG retraction and/or uncommanded opening
of the NLG doors. There have been six cases reported on CL[-]600-
2B19 aircraft, one of which resulted in the collapse of the NLG at
the departure gate.
    This [Canadian] directive mandates [an inspection of the NLG and
NLG selector valves to determine the serial number and marking of
the part and] a check [to determine the torque value and correct
lockwire installation] of the [affected] NLG and NLG door selector
valves installed on all aircraft in the Applicability section * * *.
Depending on the results, replacement, rework and/or additional
identification of the valves may be required.

You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comments received.

Request for Model Designation Consistency

    Comair, Inc. states that in the NPRM, the Summary, Discussion, and
paragraph (e), refer to the airplanes as Model ``CL600-2B19'' instead
of ``CL-600-2B19.''
    From this comment, we infer that Comair, Inc. requests that we
revise the identified sections of the NPRM for model designation
consistency. In the Summary, Discussion, and paragraph (e) of this AD,
we are quoting from Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2009-19, dated
April 29, 2009. However, for clarity, we have made the change to ``CL[-
]600-2B19'' in the specified sections of this AD.

Request To Revise Proposed Costs of Compliance

    Air Wisconsin Airlines states that the Costs of Compliance section
of the NPRM indicates only the number of affected airplanes and does
not take into consideration that there are two units installed on each
airplane, making it a total of 1,304 affected components.
    From these statements we infer that Air Wisconsin Airlines is
requesting that we revise the Costs of Compliance section of the AD to
include the actual number of affected valves. We agree with Air
Wisconsin Airlines that the Costs of Compliance needs to be revised to
include the cost for both the selector valve of the NLG and the door
selector valve. We have revised the cost of parts to $80 to reflect 2
valves per product ($40 per valve). For clarification, the term
``affected product'' in the Costs of Compliance section of this AD
refers to the affected number of airplanes of U.S. registry.

Request for Credit for Compliance With Bombardier Service Bulletin
601R-32-090

    Air Wisconsin Airlines states that the problem of the door selector
valves of the NLG having their end caps incorrectly lock-wired and/or
incorrectly torqued during assembly first came to its attention through
Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-32-090. Air Wisconsin Airlines states
that Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-32-104, dated March 3, 2009, was
issued to supersede Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-32-090 to expand
the effectivity of the campaign. Air Wisconsin Airlines states that the
proposed AD should give credit for those valves that have already
complied with Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-32-090.
    We agree with Air Wisconsin Airlines request to receive credit for
actions completed in accordance with Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-
32-090, Revision B, dated December 12, 2006; and Revision C, dated
March 3, 2009. We have added new paragraph (f)(4) accordingly.

Request To Revise the Applicability

    Air Wisconsin Airlines requests that we revise the applicability in
paragraph (c) of the proposed AD to ``NLG and NLG selector valves, P/N
750006000 (601R75146-1) identified in Bombardier S/B 601R-32-104 dated
March 3, 2009 when installed on Bombardier * * * Model CL-600-2B19 * *
* airplanes * * *'' The commenter provides no justification for this
requested change.
    We disagree with Air Wisconsin Airlines' request to revise the
applicability in paragraph (c) of this AD. We have determined that
identifying each airplane by serial number and not by the valve serial
number is the best way to control the airworthiness of the fleet and to
ensure compliance with the AD.
    According to general FAA policy, if an unsafe condition results
from the installation of a particular component in only one particular
make and model of airplane, the AD should apply to the airplane model,
not the component. The reason for this is simple: If the AD applies to
the airplane model equipped with the item, operators of those airplanes
will be notified directly of the unsafe condition and the action
required to correct it. While we assume that operators can identify the
airplane models they operate, they may not be aware of specific items
installed on the airplanes. Therefore, specifying the airplane models
in the applicability as the subject of the AD prevents an operator's
``unknowing failure to comply'' with the AD. We recognize that an
unsafe condition may exist in an item that is installed in many
different airplanes. In that case, we consider it impractical to issue
an AD against each airplane; in fact, many times, the exact models and
numbers of airplanes on which the item is installed may be unknown.
Therefore, in those situations, the AD would apply to the item and
usually indicates that the item is known to be ``installed on, but not
limited to,'' various airplane models. We have not changed the AD in
this regard.

Request To Extend the Compliance Time for the Inspection

    Air Wisconsin Airlines requests that we extend the compliance time
for the inspection in the NPRM. Air Wisconsin Airlines states that the
problem of the door selector valves of the NLG having their end caps
incorrectly lock-wired and/or incorrectly torqued during assembly first
came to its attention in 2003 through Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-
32-090, which affected 645 units. Air Wisconsin Airlines also states
that Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-32-104, dated March 3, 2009,
expanded the effectivity to include 2,126 units. Air Wisconsin Airlines
states that it has been working on this issue and it has a substantial
number of valves in compliance, but since this issue has been around
for almost 7 years without any regulatory influence, the short
compliance time of within 1,600 flight hours or 18 months after the

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, cannot be justified.
Air Wisconsin Airlines states that a longer compliance window should be
given considering the number of units affected and the insufficient
amount of spares available to ensure compliance within the time
provided by a directive.
    We disagree with Air Wisconsin Airlines' request to extend the
compliance time for the inspection. In developing an appropriate
compliance time for the inspection, we considered the safety
implications, parts availability, and normal maintenance schedules for
the timely accomplishment of the modification. We have determined that
the compliance time will ensure an acceptable level of safety and allow
the modification to be done during scheduled maintenance intervals for
most affected operators. In addition, Bombardier, Inc. recommends a
compliance time of 1,600 flight hours or 18 months. We have determined
that an adequate supply of valves is available in order for operators
to accomplish the required actions within the compliance time specified
in this AD. However, operators may apply for an alternative method of
compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the provisions specified in
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD. We have not changed the AD in this regard.

Requests To Allow Review of Maintenance Records in Lieu of Inspection

    Comair, Inc. and Air Wisconsin Airlines request that a review of
airplane maintenance records be acceptable in lieu of an inspection to
determine serial number and identification markings of the selector
valve. Air Wisconsin Airlines states that a records check is sufficient
to locate valves requiring inspection.
    We agree with the commenters' request that a review of airplane
maintenance records is acceptable for determining the serial number and
identification markings of the selector valve. We have changed
paragraph (f)(1) of this AD to allow a review of maintenance records in
lieu of the inspection required by that paragraph.

Request To Clarify Paragraph (f)(2) of the NPRM

    Comair, Inc. proposes revised wording for paragraph (f)(2) of the
NPRM. The suggested wording clarifies that either the selector valve of
the NLG or the door selector valve could have certain serial numbers or
identified markings since paragraph (f)(2) identifies both valves.
    We agree with Comair, Inc. that the suggested wording is more
accurate. We have revised paragraph (f)(2) of this AD as suggested.

Request To Remove Compliance Time of Before Further Flight From
Paragraph (f)(3) of the NPRM

    Comair, Inc. and Air Wisconsin Airlines request that the compliance
time of, ``before further flight,'' be removed from paragraph (f)(3) of
the NPRM.
    Air Wisconsin Airlines states that the compliance time of ``before
further flight'' specified in paragraph (f)(3) of the NPRM is not in
Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2009-19, dated April 29, 2009, or
in any of the service information listed in that Canadian AD. Air
Wisconsin Airlines also states that there does not appear to be enough
time and available spare parts in order to do the inspections, remove
all the affected serial numbers which fail the test, and send them to
the vendor for repair.
    Comair, Inc. states that a compliance time of ``before further
flight'' seems contrary or restrictive when the actions specified in
paragraph (f)(1) of the NPRM are done. Comair Inc. states that it has
already performed a records review and determined which valves have a
serial number range specified in Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-32-
104, dated March 3, 2009, and which valves do not have a suffix ``T''
or ``SB750006000-1'' marking, as documented on FAA Form 8130-3. Comair,
Inc. also states that a compliance time of ``before further flight''
would require it to ground its airplanes on the effective date of the
final rule because it has already determined which valves require
action.
    We partially agree with the commenters. We agree that there could
be a misunderstanding in reading this AD based on the understanding
that paragraph (f)(3) of this AD is a stand-alone paragraph. However,
we disagree with Comair Inc.'s statement that the compliance time of
``before further flight'' would require Comair Inc. to ground its
airplanes. The intent of this AD is to permit operators to do the
identification check within the specified compliance time of ``within
1,600 flight hours or 18 months after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs first.'' We have revised paragraph (f)(3) of this AD
for clarity. In addition, operators may apply for an AMOC in accordance
with the provisions specified in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.

Request To Eliminate Ink Stamping of the Valve

    Air Wisconsin Airlines states that the requirement in Tactair
Service Bulletin SB750006000-1, Revision E, dated July 31, 2008 (which
was referred to in Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-32-104, dated March
3, 2009, as an additional source of guidance), includes an instruction
to ink stamp the service bulletin number on the valve. Air Wisconsin
states that this action does not provide an added level of safety, and
that this would only lead to confusion, and a meaningless issue of non-
compliance should the marking ever become eradicated. Air Wisconsin
also states that it is unnecessary to mark the valve.
    From these statements, we infer that Air Wisconsin Airlines is
requesting that we revise the AD to eliminate unnecessary part
markings. We disagree. Valves that are not inked-stamped must be
inspected to fulfill the requirements of this AD. An ink-stamped valve
demonstrates that the valve has been inspected and modified. We have
not made changes to this AD in this regard.

Explanation of Change Made To This AD

    We have revised this AD to identify the legal name of the
manufacturer as published in the most recent type certificate data
sheet for the affected airplane models.

 Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD with the changes described previously. We determined that these
changes will not increase the economic burden on any operator or
increase the scope of the AD.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow our FAA policies. Any such differences
are highlighted in a NOTE within the AD.

Explanation of Change to Costs of Compliance

    Since issuance of the NPRM, we have increased the labor rate used
in the Costs of Compliance from $80 per work-hour to $85 per work-hour.
The Costs of Compliance information, below, reflects this increase in
the specified hourly labor rate.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 652 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take about 1 work-hour per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $80 per product (2
valves per product/$40 per valve). Where the service information lists
required parts costs that are covered under warranty, we have assumed
that there will be no charge for these parts. As we do not control
warranty coverage for affected parties, some parties may incur costs
higher than estimated here. Based on these figures, we estimate the
cost of this AD to the U.S. operators to be $107,580, or $165 per
product.

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 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); 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.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
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 adding the following new AD:

2010-21-11 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-16471. Docket No. FAA-
2009-1229; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-106-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective November
18, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2B19
(Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes, serial numbers 7003 and
subsequent; certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32: Landing
Gear.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    A specific batch of nose landing gear (NLG) and NLG door
selector valves, part number (P/N) 601R75146-1 (Kaiser Fluid
Technologies P/N 750006000), may have had their end caps incorrectly
lock-wired and/or incorrectly torqued during assembly. This
condition can lead to the end cap backing off, with consequent
damage to a seal and internal leakage within the valve.
Subsequently, if electrical power is transferred or removed from the
aircraft before the NLG safety pin is installed, any pressure,
including residual pressure, in the No. 3 hydraulic system can
result in an uncommanded NLG retraction and/or uncommanded opening
of the NLG doors. There have been six cases reported on CL[-]600-
2B19 aircraft, one of which resulted in the collapse of the NLG at
the departure gate.
    This [Canadian] directive mandates [an inspection of the NLG and
NLG selector valves to determine the serial number and marking of
the part and] a check [to determine the torque value and correct
lockwire installation] of the [affected] NLG and NLG door selector
valves installed on all aircraft in the Applicability section * * *.
Depending on the results, replacement, rework and/or additional
identification of the valves may be required.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) Within 1,600 flight hours or 18 months after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first: Do an inspection to
determine the serial number and identification markings on the
selector valve of the NLG and the door selector valve of the NLG, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier
Service Bulletin 601R-32-104, dated March 3, 2009. A review of
airplane maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of this
inspection if the serial number and identification markings of the
selector valve and the door selector valve can be conclusively
determined from that review.
    (2) For any airplane having either the selector valve of the NLG
or the door selector valve of the NLG that have a serial number
outside the range 0001 through 2126 inclusive, suffix ``T''
identification, or ``SB750006000-1'' marking, no further action is
required for that valve.
    (3) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of
this AD, any selector valve of the NLG or any door selector valve of
the NLG is found that does not have any serial number or
identification marking specified in paragraph (f)(2) of this AD:
Before further flight after doing the inspection required by
paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, inspect to determine the torque value
and correct lockwire installation of the valve, and modify (replace,
rework, or re-identify) the valve, as applicable, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-
32-104, dated March 3, 2009.
    (4) For airplanes having part number (P/N) 601R75146-1 (Tactair
P/N 750006000), serial

number 001 thru 0767: Modification of the valve accomplished before
the effective date of this AD in accordance with Bombardier Service
Bulletin 601R-32-090, Revision B, dated December 12, 2006; and
Bombardier Service Bulletin Revision C, dated March 3, 2009; are
considered acceptable for compliance with the requirements of this
AD for that valve.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1:  This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service
information as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE-170, 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: Program
Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600
Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; telephone (516)
228-7300; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. 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.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection requirements and has assigned
OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2009-19,
dated April 29, 2009; and Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-32-104,
dated March 3, 2009; for related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-32-104, dated
March 3, 2009, to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD
specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information under 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 514-855-
7401; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://
www.bombardier.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the 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>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the 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/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 29, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-25458 Filed 10-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 28 (Thursday, February 10, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7770-7774]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02768]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0096; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-01092-R]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2020-22-01 which applies to all Airbus Helicopters Model AS332C,
AS332C1, AS332L, and AS332L1 helicopters. AD 2020-22-01 requires
inspecting the affected parts and associated frame bores for
discrepancies, applicable corrective actions, and reporting certain
information if necessary. Since the FAA issued AD 2020-22-01, a
significant number of reports were received of finding corrosion on the
affected parts. This proposed AD would retain the requirements of AD
2020-22-01, add recurring inspections, and update the applicable
service information. 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 March 28,
2022.

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 https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Airbus
Helicopters, 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX, 75052, telephone:
(972) 641-0000; or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at https://www.airbus.com/helicopters/services/technical-support.html. You may
view this referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321,
Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-0096; 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 European
Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for Docket Operations is listed
above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrea Jimenez, Aerospace Engineer,
COS Program Management Section, Operational Safety Branch, Compliance &
Airworthiness Division, FAA, 1600 Stewart Ave., Suite 410, Westbury, NY
11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2022-0096; Project
Identifier MCAI-2021-01092-R'' 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 this 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
https://www.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
Andrea Jimenez, Aerospace Engineer, COS Program Management Section,
Operational Safety Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, FAA,
1600 Stewart Ave., Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone (516) 228-
7330; email [email protected]. Any commentary that the FAA
receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in
the public docket for this rulemaking.

Background

    The FAA issued AD 2020-22-01, Amendment 39-21297 (85 FR 69126,
November 2, 2020), (AD 2020-22-01), for all Airbus Helicopters Model
AS332C, AS332C1, AS332L, and AS332L1 helicopters. AD 2020-22-01
requires, within certain compliance times specified in the
manufacturers service information, inspecting the attachment fittings
and attachment screws of the main gearbox (MGB) suspension bars and
their frame bores for discrepancies and corrective actions in
accordance with the actions specified in the service information. AD
2020-22-01 also requires sending certain information to the
manufacturer. AD 2020-22-01 resulted from reports of corrosion on
attachment screws and fittings fastening the MGB suspension bars to the
fuselage. The FAA issued AD 2020-22-01 to address corrosion on
attachment fittings and attachment screws for the MGB suspension bars.
    AD 2020-22-01 was prompted by EASA AD 2019-0295, dated December 5,
2019 (EASA AD 2019-0295), issued by EASA, which is the Technical Agent
for the Member States of the European Union, to correct an unsafe
condition for all Airbus Helicopters Model AS 332 C, AS 332 C1, AS 332
L, and AS 332 L1 helicopters, all manufacturer serial numbers. EASA
advised that there were reports of corrosion on attachment screws and
fittings fastening the rear MGB suspension bars, right and left hand
sides, to the fuselage, and the attachment screws and fitting fastening
the front MGB suspension bar to the fuselage. EASA advised that
subsequent investigation determined that during maintenance visits of
an identified batch of helicopters between September 2012 and April
2019, application of compound sealant on MGB suspension bar attachment
screws may not have been accomplished using the approved maintenance
data. This condition, if not addressed, could lead to structural
failure of the MGB attachment screws, resulting in detachment of MGB
suspension bars from the fuselage and subsequent loss of control of the
helicopter.
    Accordingly, EASA AD 2019-0295 required a one-time inspection of
the affected parts, and depending on findings, accomplishment of
applicable corrective actions. The compliance times varied depending on
helicopter configuration.

Actions Since AD 2020-22-01 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 2020-22-01, EASA issued EASA AD 2021-0222,
dated October 6, 2021 (EASA AD 2021-0222), which supersedes EASA AD
2019-0295. EASA advises a significant number of reports were received
about corrosion being detected on the affected parts. EASA also advises
Airbus Helicopters issued updated service information, which includes
instructions for repetitive inspections. Accordingly, EASA AD 2021-0222
retains the requirements of EASA AD 2019-0295 and adds repetitive
inspections and updated service information. Additionally, Airbus
Helicopters advised of a typo in the applicable service information in
the reference to G.2 of one of the work cards. Accordingly, the FAA has
identified this typo in the exceptions in the regulatory text of this
proposed AD.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by EASA and are approved for
operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral
agreement with the European Union, EASA has notified the FAA about the
unsafe condition described in its AD. The FAA is proposing this AD
after evaluating all known relevant information and determining that
the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop
on other products of the same type design.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin (ASB)
No. AS332-53.02.05, Revision 2, and ASB No. AS332-53.02.07, Revision 1,
both dated August 19, 2021, which specify procedures for inspecting the
attachment fittings and attachment screws of the MGB suspension bars
and their frame bores for discrepancies and corrective actions. This
inspection includes inspecting the attachment fittings for corrosion
and inspecting the attachment screws for corrosion and evidence of
sealing compound. The corrective actions include replacing or

repairing corroded parts and replacing screws that have sealing
compound on them. These documents are distinct since they apply to
different helicopter models in different configurations.
    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.

Other Related Service Information

    The FAA also reviewed Airbus Helicopters ASB No. AS332-53.02.05,
Revision 0, dated April 18, 2019; Airbus Helicopters ASB No. AS332-
53.02.05, Revision 1, dated March 2, 2020; and Airbus Helicopters ASB
No. AS332-53.02.07, Revision 0, dated October 21, 2019, which also
specify procedures for inspecting the attachment fittings and
attachment screws of the MGB suspension bars and their frame bores for
discrepancies and corrective actions.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would retain all requirements of AD 2020-22-01.
This proposed AD would add repetitive inspections and update the
applicable service information. This proposed AD would require
accomplishing the actions specified in the service information
described previously.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD would affect 10 helicopters of U.S.
Registry. Labor rates are estimated at $85 per work-hour. Based on
these numbers, the FAA estimates that operators may incur the following
costs in order to comply with this proposed AD.
    Inspecting each attachment screw and fitting of the rear MGB
suspension bars; each attachment screw and fitting of the front MGB
suspension bar; and the frame bores would take about 16 work-hours, for
an estimated cost of $1,360 per helicopter and $13,600 for the U.S.
fleet per inspection cycle.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition corrective actions that would be required based on the
results of the inspection. The agency has no way of determining the
number of helicopters that might need these on-condition replacements:
    If required, replacing an affected screw, nut, split pin, concave
washer, convex washer, or peel shim would take a minimal amount of time
with a minimal cost.
    If required, replacing an affected MGB attachment fitting would
take about 8 work-hours and parts would cost about $7,000 for an
estimated cost of $7,680 per replacement.
    If required, reporting any discrepancies to Airbus Helicopters
would take about 1 work-hour for an estimated cost of $85 per
helicopter.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. The OMB
Control Number for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public
reporting for this collection of information is estimated to be
approximately 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information. All responses to this collection of
information are mandatory. Send comments regarding this burden estimate
or any other aspect of this collection of information, including
suggestions for reducing this burden to: Information Collection
Clearance Officer, Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood
Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177-1524.

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 has 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 that the 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 AD 2020-22-01, Amendment 39-21297
(85 FR 69126, November 2, 2020); and
0
b. Adding the following new airworthiness directive:

Airbus Helicopters: Docket No. FAA-2022-0096; Project Identifier
MCAI-2021-01092-R.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) action by March 28, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2020-22-01, Amendment 39-21297 (85 FR 69126,
November 2, 2020) (AD 2020-22-01).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus Helicopters Model AS332C, AS332C1,
AS332L, and AS332L1 helicopters, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 5340, Fuselage main,
attach fittings.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of corrosion on attachment
screws and fittings fastening the main gearbox (MGB) suspension bars
to the fuselage. The FAA is issuing this AD to address corrosion on

attachment fittings and attachment screws for the MGB suspension
bars. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could lead to
structural failure of the MGB attachment screws, resulting in
detachment of MGB suspension bars from the fuselage and subsequent
loss of control of the helicopter.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Definitions

    Affected parts are attachment screws and fitting(s) fastening
the parts identified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (2) of this AD.
    (1) Rear MGB suspension bars, right and left sides, to the
fuselage.
    (2) Front MGB suspension bar to the fuselage.

(h) Repetitive Inspections

    Except as specified in paragraphs (j)(1) through (10) of this
AD: Within the applicable compliance times identified in paragraphs
(h)(1) or (2) of this AD, inspect each affected part and its frame
bores for discrepancies, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions, paragraphs 3.B.2. through 3.B.2.b.3 of Airbus
Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. AS332-53.02.05,
Revision 2, dated August 19, 2021 (ASB AS332-53.02.05 Rev 2); or in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraphs 3.B.2.
through 3.B.2.d. of Airbus Helicopters ASB No. AS332-53.02.07,
Revision 1, dated August 19, 2021 (ASB AS332-53.02.07 Rev 1), as
applicable to your model helicopter. For the purposes of this
inspection, a discrepancy may be indicated by corrosion on the MGB
attachment fitting or by sealing compound on the attachment screws.
    (1) Perform the initial inspection within the applicable
compliance times identified in the ``Deadlines'' column of Tables 1
through 4, as applicable, of paragraph 1.E.2, ``Compliance in
service,'' of ASB AS332-53.02.05 Rev 2, and thereafter, at intervals
not to exceed the compliance time identified in the ``Periodicity''
column of Table 1 through 4, as applicable.
    (2) Perform the initial inspection within the applicable
compliance times identified in the ``Deadlines'' column of Tables 1
and 2, as applicable, of paragraph 1.E.2, ``Compliance in service,''
of ASB AS332-53.02.07 Rev 1, and thereafter, at intervals not to
exceed the compliance time identified in the ``Periodicity'' column
of Table 1 and 2, as applicable.

(i) Corrective Action

    Except as required by paragraphs (j)(7) through (10) of this AD:
If, during any inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD,
there is any discrepancy, before further flight, perform the
applicable corrective action (including replacing or repairing
corroded parts and replacing screws that have sealing compound on
them), in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions,
paragraphs 3.B.2. through 3.B.2.b.3 of ASB AS332-53.02.05 Rev 2 or
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraphs
3.B.2. through 3.B.2.d. of ASB AS332-53.02.07 Rev 1, as applicable.

(j) Exceptions to Service Information Specifications

    (1) Where Tables 1 and 3 of ASB AS332-53.02.05 Rev 2 use the
phrase ``receipt of Revision 0 of this Alert Service Bulletin issued
April 18, 2019,'' this AD requires using December 7, 2020 (the
effective date of AD 2020-22-01).
    (2) Where Table 1 of ASB AS332-53.02.07 Rev 1 uses the phrase
``receipt of Revision 0 of this Alert Service Bulletin,'' this AD
requires using December 7, 2020 (the effective date of AD 2020-22-
01).
    (3) Where Tables 2 and 4 of ASB AS332-53.02.05 Rev 2 use the
phrase ``receipt of Revision 2 of this Alert Service Bulletin,''
this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (4) Where Table 2 of ASB AS332-53.02.07 Rev 1, uses the phrase
``that follow receipt of Revision 1 of this Alert Service
Bulletin,'' this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (5) Where Tables 2 and 4 of ASB AS332-53.02.05 Rev 2, and Table
2 of ASB AS332-53.02.07 Rev 1, specify certain configurations in the
``Configuration'' column, this AD requires compliance for those
configurations as of the effective date of this AD. Note 1 to
paragraph (h)(5): An example for the exception specified in (h)(5)
of this AD is where a service bulletin specifies, ``3700 flight
hours or more since compliance with this Alert Service Bulletin,''
use ``3700 flight hours or more since compliance with this Alert
Service Bulletin as of the effective date of this AD.''
    (6) Where Tables 1 and 3 of ASB AS332-53.02.05 Rev 2, and Table
1 of ASB AS332-53.02.07 Rev 1, specify certain configurations in the
``Configuration'' column, this AD requires compliance for those
configurations as of December 7, 2020 (the effective date of AD
2020-22-01).
    (7) Where the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph 3.B.2.b.3)
of ASB AS332-53.02.05 Rev 2, and the Accomplishment Instructions,
paragraph 3.B.2.b.2) of ASB AS332-53.02.07 Rev 1 specify performing
a check of the condition of the bores and frames, for this AD for
ASB AS332-53.02.05 Rev 2 replace the text, ``Perform a check of the
state of the frame bores as per paragraph G.2. of the Work Card 53-
10-00-402 (MET),'' with ``Perform a check of the state of the frame
bores as per paragraph F.2.b.(2) of the Work Card 53-10-00-402
(MET);'' and for ASB AS332-53.02.07 Rev 1 replace the text, ``Check
the condition of the bores and the frames using the endoscope (yy)
as per paragraph G.2. of Work Card 53-10-00-402 (MET),'' with
``Check the condition of the bores and the frames using the
endoscope (yy) as per paragraph F.2.b.(2) of Work Card 53-10-00-402
(MET).''
    (8) Where ASB AS332-53.02.05 Rev 2 and ASB AS332-53.02.07 Rev 1
specify discarding parts, you are not required to discard parts.
    (9) Where ASB AS332-53.02.05 Rev 2 and ASB AS332-53.02.07 Rev 1
specify contacting Airbus Helicopters for repair instructions, this
AD requires repair done in accordance with a method approved by the
Manager, General Aviation and Rotorcraft Section, International
Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus Helicopters' EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (10) Where ASB AS332-53.02.05 Rev 2, and ASB AS332-53.02.07 Rev
1, specify if sealing compound is present, or if no sealing compound
is present but there is corrosion, take a photo, place the part in
quarantine, and contact Airbus Helicopters for repair instructions,
this AD requires repair done in accordance with a method approved by
the Manager, General Aviation and Rotorcraft Section, International
Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus Helicopters' EASA DOA. If
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized
signature. This AD does not require taking a photo or placing the
part in quarantine.

(k) Reporting

    If, during any inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD,
there is any discrepancy, report the inspection results to Airbus
Helicopters at the applicable time specified in paragraphs (k)(1) or
(2) of this AD. The report should include the information specified
in Appendix 4.A. of Airbus Helicopters ASB AS332-53.02.05 Rev 2; or
ASB AS332-53.02.07 Rev 1, as applicable.
    (1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of
this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the inspection.
    (2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this
AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the effective date of
this AD.

(l) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) For helicopters identified in ASB AS332-53.02.05 Rev 2: This
paragraph provides credit for initial inspections required by
paragraph (h) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Airbus Helicopters ASB AS332-
53.02.05, Revision 1, dated March 2, 2020, or Airbus Helicopters ASB
AS332-53.02.05, Revision 0, dated April 18, 2019.
    (2) For helicopters identified in ASB AS332-53.02.07 Rev 1: This
paragraph provides credit for initial inspections required by
paragraph (h) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Airbus Helicopters ASB AS332-53-
02.07 Revision 0, dated October 21, 2019.

(m) Special Flight Permit

    Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with 14 CFR
21.197 and 21.199, provided no passengers are onboard.

(n) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) 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 local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the manager of the International Validation

Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified in
paragraph (o)(1) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
    (2) 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.

(o) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Andrea Jimenez,
Aerospace Engineer, COS Program Management Section, Operational
Safety Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, FAA, 1600
Stewart Ave., Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone (516) 228-
7330; email [email protected].
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX, 75052,
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or
at https://www.airbus.com/helicopters/services/technical-support.html. You may view this referenced service information at
the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101
Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (817) 222-
5110.
    (3) The subject of this AD is addressed in European Union
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2021-0222, dated October 6, 2021,
for more information. You may view the EASA AD on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FAA-2022-0096.

    Issued on February 4, 2022.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-02768 Filed 2-9-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P