[Federal Register: August 5, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 149)]
[Notices]
[Page 39124-39126]
[DOCID:fr05au09-125]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60399; File No. SR-NYSE-2009-72]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Amending NYSE Rule 476A To Add Rule 104(a)(1)(A) to Its ``List of
Exchange Rule Violations and Fines Applicable Thereto Pursuant to Rule
476A''

July 30, 2009.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that, on July 22, 2009, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the
self-regulatory organization. The Commission is publishing this notice
to solicit comments on the proposed rule change 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 NYSE Rule 476A to add Rule
104(a)(1)(A) to its ``List of Exchange Rule Violations and Fines
Applicable Thereto Pursuant to Rule 476A.'' \3\ The text of the
proposed rule change is available at the Exchange, the Commission's
Public Reference Room, and http://www.nyse.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ NYSE Amex LLC has submitted a companion rule filing
proposing corresponding amendments to NYSE Amex Disciplinary Rule
476A. See SR-NYSE-Amex-2009-47, formally submitted July 22, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 self-regulatory organization
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 those 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 parts of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend NYSE Rule 476A to add Rule
104(a)(1)(A) to its ``List of Exchange Rule Violations and Fines
Applicable Thereto Pursuant to Rule 476A.''
Current NYSE Rule 104
    Current NYSE Rule 104 requires, inter alia, Designated Market
Makers (``DMMs'') registered in one or more securities traded on the
Exchange to engage in a course of dealings for their own account to
assist in the maintenance of a fair and orderly market, insofar as
reasonably practicable, by contributing liquidity when lack of price
continuity and depth, or disparity between supply and demand, exists or
is reasonably to be anticipated.\4\ This includes an affirmative
obligation to provide quotes at the National Best Bid or Offer a
minimum percentage of the trading day (``Affirmative Quote
Obligation'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See NYSE Rule 104(f)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The DMMs' Affirmative Quote Obligation is set forth in NYSE Rule
104(a)(1)(A). Section (a)(1)(A) of Rule 104 requires DMMs to maintain a
bid or an offer at the National Best Bid and National Best Offer
(``inside'') at least 10% of the trading day for securities in which
the DMM unit is registered with an average daily volume on the Exchange
of less than one million

shares, and at least 5% for securities in which the DMM unit is
registered with an average daily volume equal to or greater than one
million shares. Time at the inside is calculated as the average
percentage of time the DMM unit has a bid or offer at the inside. In
calculating whether the DMM is meeting the 10% and 5% requirement,
credit may be given for executions for the liquidity provided by the
DMM.\5\ DMM Reserve or other hidden orders are not included in the
inside quote calculations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ When a DMM sends an s-quote to establish a new best bid or
best offer, the DMM's s-quote may end up executing immediately
against dark liquidity inside the spread rather than being quoted.
Absent rule relief, the s-quote would not be counted toward the DMM
Unit's quoting requirement, even though the DMM's intent was to add
liquidity to the market, and even though the s-quote in fact
resulted in an execution. To address this, the Exchange added a
provision to NYSE Rule 104 that allows the Exchange to give credit
to a DMM unit that did not meet its quoting requirement as a result
of the continuous immediate execution of its s-quotes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Rule Change
    As noted above, the Exchange proposes to add NYSE Rule 104(a)(1)(A)
to its ``List of Exchange Rule Violations and Fines Applicable Thereto
Pursuant to Rule 476A.''
    Under the Exchange's Minor Rule Violation Plan, NYSE Rule 476A, the
Exchange may impose a fine, not to exceed $5,000, on any member, member
organization, allied member, approved person or registered or non-
registered employee of a member or member organization for a minor
violation of certain specified Exchange rules. Fines provide a
meaningful sanction for rule violations when the initiation of a
disciplinary procedure under Rule 476 is unwarranted given the facts
and circumstances of the violation, or when the violation calls for a
stronger response informal discipline than an admonition letter.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Exchange's Minor Rule Violation Plan, Rule 476A, was
originally adopted by the Exchange and approved by the Commission in
1985. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-[sic]21688 (January
25, 1985), 50 FR 5025-01 (February 5, 1985). It has been amended
numerous times since its adoption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, when a DMM fails to meet the affirmative quote
obligations set forth in Rule 104(a)(1)(A), the Exchange's only remedy
is to bring a formal disciplinary proceeding pursuant to Rule 476. This
is the case whether or not the DMM has failed to meet its obligations
once or many times and regardless of whether the DMM made a technical
error or an intentional one.
    The Exchange believes that the current regulatory approach for
dealing with DMM quoting obligations is too inflexible. The Exchange
recognizes that DMMs may, for many reasons, fail to meet their
affirmative quote obligations as prescribed under Rule 104(a)(1)(A). In
some circumstances, formal disciplinary measures in accordance with
Rule 476 are warranted. However, in other instances such a proceeding
may be unwarranted, and the Exchange is of the view that the addition
of this Rule to the list of rule violations and fines under Rule 476A
will provide a more flexible and appropriate tool to enforce potential
failure by DMMs to adhere to the quoting requirements set forth in Rule
104(a)(1)(A), while preserving the Exchange's discretion to seek formal
discipline under the appropriate circumstances.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule changes are consistent
with, and further the objectives of, Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\7\ in
that they are 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. The proposed rule changes also further the objectives
of Section 6(b)(6), in that they provide for appropriate discipline for
violations of principles of the Act, the rules and regulations
thereunder, and Exchange rules and regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule changes will provide
the Exchange with greater regulatory flexibility to enforce the DMM
quoting requirements set forth in NYSE Rule 104(a)(1)(A) in a more
informal manner while also preserving the Exchange's discretion to seek
formal discipline for more serious transgressions as warranted.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\9\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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-NYSE-2009-72 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2009-72. 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 the
filing will also be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the self-regulatory organization. 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 available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2009-72 and should be
submitted on or before August 26, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-18665 Filed 8-4-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 206 (Tuesday, October 25, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 73357-73360]
[FR Doc No: 2016-25352]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-9192; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-038-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Airbus Model A330-200, A330-300, A340-200, and A340-300 series
airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report of cracking at
fastener holes located at a certain frame on the lower shell panel
junction. This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections of
certain fastener holes, and related investigative and corrective
actions if necessary. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct
cracking on the lower shell panel junction; such cracking could lead to
reduced structural integrity of the fuselage.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 9,
2016.

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

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
9192; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2016-9192;
Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-038-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2014-0136, dated June 13, 2014 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus Model
A330, A340-200, and A340-300 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    During A330/A340 aeroplanes full scale fatigue test specimen in
the FR40-to-fuselage skin panel junction, fatigue damage has been
found. Corrective actions consisted of the following actions:

--In-service installation of an internal reinforcing strap on
related junction required by DGAC [Direction G[eacute]n[eacute]rale
de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC)] France AD 1999-448-126(B) and AD 2001-
070(B),
--retrofit improvement of internal reinforcing strap fatigue life
through recommended Airbus Service Bulletin (SB) A330-53-3145, and
--new design in production through Airbus modification 44360.

    The aeroplanes listed in the Applicability section of this AD
are all aeroplanes post-mod 44360 and pre-mod 55792 (fuselage
reinforcement at FR40 in production).
    Recently, during embodiment of a FR40 web repair on an A330
aeroplane and during FR40 keel beam fitting replacement on an A340
aeroplane, the internal strap was removed and rototest inspection
was performed on several holes.
    Cracks were found on both left-hand (LH) and right-hand (RH)
sides on internal strap, or butt strap, or keel beam fitting, or
forward fitting FR40 flange.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to
crack propagation, possibly resulting in reduced structural
integrity of the fuselage.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires
repetitive rototest inspections of 10 fastener holes located at FR40
lower shell panel junction on both LH and RH sides, and, depending
on findings, accomplishment of the applicable corrective actions
[which include oversizing, installing

fasteners and repair; and accomplishment of applicable related
investigative actions, which include a rototest inspection for
cracking after oversizing].

    The compliance time ranges between 20,000 flight cycles or 65,400
flight hours and 20,800 flight cycles or 68,300 flight hours, depending
on airplane utilization and configuration. The repetitive inspection
interval ranges between 14,000 flight cycles or 95,200 flight hours and
24,600 flight cycles or 98,700 flight hours, depending on airplane
configuration. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2016-9192.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3215, Revision 01,
dated April 17, 2014; and Airbus Service Bulletin A340-53-4215,
Revision 01, dated April 17, 2014. The service information describes
procedures for repetitive rototest inspections of certain fastener
holes, and corrective actions if necessary. These documents are
distinct since they apply to different airplane models. 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 and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 41 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                  Action                                Labor cost               Parts cost    product                Cost on U.S. operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection...............................  41 work-hours x $85 per hour =                $0       $3,485  $142,885 per inspection cycle.
                                            $3,485 per inspection cycle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary repairs that
would be required based on the results of the proposed inspection. We
have no way of determining the number of airplanes that might need
these repairs:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                   Action                                 Labor cost                Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repair.....................................  46 work-hours x $85 per hour =               $4,186          $8,096
                                              $3,910.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2016-9192; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-
038-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by December 9, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the airplanes, certificated in any category,
identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, having serial
numbers 0176 through 0915 inclusive.
    (1) Airbus Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, -243, -301, -302, -
303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342, and -343 airplanes.
    (2) Airbus Model A340-211, -212, -213, -311, -312, and -313
airplanes.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of cracking at fastener holes
located at frame (FR)40 on the lower shell panel junction. We are
issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking at FR40 on the lower
shell panel junction; such cracking could lead to reduced structural
integrity of the fuselage.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Repetitive Inspections and Related Investigative and Corrective
Actions

    Within the compliance times defined in table 1 to paragraph (g)
of this AD, and, thereafter, at intervals not to exceed the
compliance times defined in Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3215,
Revision 01, dated April 17, 2014; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-
53-4215, Revision 01, dated April 17, 2014; as applicable, depending
on airplane utilization and configuration: Accomplish a special
detailed inspection of fastener holes located at FR40 lower shell
panel junction on both left-hand (LH) and right-side (RH) sides, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service
Bulletin A330-53-3215, Revision 01, dated April 17, 2014; or Airbus
Service Bulletin A340-53-4215, Revision 01, dated April 17, 2014; as
applicable.

    Table 1 to Paragraph (g) of This AD--Compliance Time for Initial
                               Inspection
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Compliance time (whichever occurs
                                               later, A or B)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A................................  Before exceeding the compliance time
                                    ``threshold'' defined in table 1 of
                                    Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-
                                    3215, Revision 01, dated April 17,
                                    2014; or Airbus Service Bulletin
                                    A340-53-4215, Revision 01, dated
                                    April 17, 2014; as applicable,
                                    depending on airplane utilization
                                    and configuration and to be counted
                                    from airplane first flight.
B................................  For Model A330 airplanes: Within
                                    2,400 flight cycles or 24 months,
                                    whichever occurs first after the
                                    effective date of this AD.
                                   For Model A340 airplanes: Within
                                    1,300 flight cycles or 24 months,
                                    whichever occurs first after the
                                    effective date of this AD.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of this
AD, any crack is detected, before further flight, accomplish all
applicable related investigative and corrective actions, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service
Bulletin A330-53-3215, Revision 01, dated April 17, 2014; or Airbus
Service Bulletin A340-53-4215, Revision 01, dated April 17, 2014; as
applicable, except where Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3215,
Revision 01, dated April 17, 2014; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-
53-4215, Revision 01, dated April 17, 2014, specifies to contact
Airbus for repair instructions, and specifies that action as ``RC''
(Required for Compliance), this AD requires repair before further
flight using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch,
ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization
Approval (DOA).
    (2) If, during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of this
AD, the hole diameter is not within tolerance of the transition fit
as nominal, or first oversize, or second oversize, or next nominal,
as applicable, and Airbus Service Bulletin A330-53-3215, Revision
01, dated April 17, 2014; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-53-4215,
Revision 01, dated April 17, 2014, specifies to contact Airbus for
repair instructions, and specifies that action as ``RC'' (Required
for Compliance), before further flight, repair using a method
approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA.
    (3) Accomplishment of corrective actions, as required by
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, does not constitute terminating action
for the repetitive inspections required by the introductory text of
paragraph (g) of this AD.
    (4) Accomplishment of a repair on an airplane, as required by
paragraph (g)(2) of this AD, does not constitute terminating action
for the repetitive inspections required by the introductory text of
paragraph (g) of this AD for that airplane, unless the method
approved in accordance with the Manager, International Branch, ANM-
116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA
DOA indicates otherwise.

(h) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by the
introductory text of paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were
performed before the effective date of this AD using Airbus Service
Bulletin A330-53-3215, dated June 21, 2013; or Airbus Service
Bulletin A340-53-4215, dated June 21, 2013; as applicable.
    (2) This paragraph provides credit for the inspections and
corrective actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those
actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using
Airbus Technical Disposition (TD) Reference LR57D11023360, Issue B,
dated July 12, 2011.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Vladimir
Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information
may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office. The
AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by
paragraph (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD: If any service information
contains procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those
procedures and tests must be done to comply with this AD; any
procedures or tests that are not identified as RC are recommended.
Those procedures and tests that are not identified as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the
operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the procedures and tests identified as
RC can be done and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition. Any substitutions or

changes to procedures or tests identified as RC require approval of
an AMOC.

(j) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014-0136, dated June 13, 2014,
for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on
the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9192.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus SAS, Airworthiness Office--EAL, 1 Rond Point Maurice
Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96;
fax +33 5 61 93 45 80; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 12, 2016.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-25352 Filed 10-24-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on August 11, 2004

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2004-18860

________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________This serves as notice to the public of the
action described below, taken by the Department official indicated (no
additional confirming order will be issued in this matter).

Application of NORTHWEST AIRLINES, INC., filed 8/6/04 for:

XX  Exemption authority, for two years, under 49 U.S.C. §40109 to
provide the following service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between the terminal point Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota, and the
terminal point Mazatlan, Mexico.

Applicant rep:   Megan Rae Rosia<PHONE_NUMBER>    DOT Analyst:  Linda
L. Lundell<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted, subject to conditions (see below).

The action above was effective when taken: August 11, 2004 through
August 11, 2006.

Action taken by:     Paul L. Gretch, Director

  		        Office of International Aviation

XX  Authority granted is consistent with the aviation agreement between
the United States and Mexico.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

XX  Holder’s certificates of public convenience and necessity

XX  Standard Exemption Conditions (attached)

________________________________________________________________________
____________________Special Conditions:  The U.S.-Mexico exemption
authority granted is subject to the dormancy notice requirements set
forth in condition 7 of Appendix A of Order 88-10-2.  Consistent with
our policy, the dormancy notice period will begin on January 8, 2005,
Northwest’s proposed startup date for these services.

Remarks:  We acted on this application without awaiting expiration of
the 15-day answer period with the consent of all parties served with the
application.

________________________________________________________________________
____________________

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department’s regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.

- see next page -   					2

To the extent not granted, we denied all requests in the referenced
Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority granted in this
Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

  HYPERLINK "http://dms.dot.gov/reports_aviation.asp"
http://dms.dot.gov/reports_aviation.asp

U.S. Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the U.S. carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

(5)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 203, concerning
waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(6)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1544.
To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing any new service
(including charter flights) to or from a foreign airport, contact its
International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise the IPSI of
its plans and to find out whether the Transportation Security
Administration has determined that security is adequate to allow such
airport(s) to be served; and

(7)  Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department of Transportation, with all applicable orders and regulations
of other U.S. agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the
United States.

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

   Under the U.S.-Mexico aviation agreement, up to a total of two U.S.
air carriers may be designated to serve a given city-pair market.  At
the time this application was filed, two U.S. air carriers were already
designated to provide direct-carrier services in the Minneapolis/St.
Paul-Mazatlan market (MN Airlines, LLC d/b/a Sun Country Airlines and
Grand Holdings, Inc., d/b/a Champion Air).  On August 10, 2004, Champion
Air advised the Department that its authority in the market is dormant.
Thus, we will withdraw the designation of Champion Air to serve the
Minneapolis/St. Paul-Mazatlan market and will designate Northwest in its
place.

05/2004