[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 125 (Tuesday, June 30, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37323-37326]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15994]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-75290; File No. SR-OCC-2014-810]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation;
Notice of No Objection to an Advance Notice Concerning Modifications To
Backtesting Procedures in Order To Enhance Monitoring of Margin
Coverage and Model Risk Exposure

June 24, 2015.
    On November 13, 2014, The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'')
advance notice SR-OCC-2014-810 (``Advance Notice'') pursuant to Section
806(e)(1) of the Payment, Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of
2010 (``Payment, Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act'') \1\ and
Rule 19b-4(n)(1)(i) under

the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'') to modify
backtesting procedures to better identify and make improvements to its
monitoring of its margin methodology and to enhance its ability to
manage risk.\2\ The Advance Notice was published for comment in the
Federal Register on December 11, 2014.\3\ On January 9, 2015, pursuant
to section 806(e)(1)(D) of the Payment, Clearing and Settlement
Supervision Act,\4\ the Commission required OCC to provide additional
information concerning the Advance Notice.\5\ The Commission did not
receive any comments on the Advance Notice. This publication serves as
a notice of no objection to the Advance Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1). The Financial Stability Oversight
Council designated OCC a systemically important financial market
utility on July 18, 2012. See Financial Stability Oversight Council
2012 Annual Report, Appendix A, http://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/fsoc/Documents/2012%20Annual%20Report.pdf. Therefore, OCC is
required to comply with the Clearing Supervision Act and file
advance notices with the Commission. See 12 U.S.C. 5465(e).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(n)(1)(i).
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 73749 (December 5,
2014), 79 FR 73673 (December 11, 2014) (SR-OCC-2014-810)
(``Notice'').
    \4\ 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1)(D).
    \5\ The Commission received a response from OCC with the
additional information for consideration on April 29, 2015, which,
pursuant to Sections 806(e)(1)(E) and (G) of the Payment, Clearing
and Settlement Supervision Act, initiated a new 60 day period of
review. See 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1)(E) and 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1)(G).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Description of the Advance Notice

    As described in OCC's Notice,\6\ the proposed change modifies OCC's
backtesting procedures to enhance its monitoring of margin coverage and
model risk exposure. Such monitoring will allow OCC to better identify
and make improvements to its margin methodology and thus enhance OCC's
ability to manage risk.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See supra note 3.
    \7\ If OCC determines that the results of these modified
backtesting procedures require changes to its margin model, OCC may
be required to file an advance notice to effect those changes. See
id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OCC implements backtesting procedures to test its methodology for
determining the amount of margin to collect from clearing members and
validate the assumptions and mechanisms inherent in its methodology and
to make any necessary changes to the methodology. Each trading day, OCC
estimates the risk exposure of accounts and uses this estimate as a
basis for each account's margin charge. On the following business day,
OCC's current backtesting procedures compare an account's observed
profit and loss (``P&L'') with the prior day's estimated risk using a
variety of analytical and statistical tools. These daily tests measure
the performance of OCC's risk measures for each account, and,
therefore, also measure the performance of OCC's underlying margin
methodology. OCC's backtesting program enables OCC to assess
performance of its margining systems and determine whether financial
risks are adequately or inadequately captured by the quantitative
models in use.
    OCC has conducted daily backtesting of margin accounts since 2006.
OCC employs the ``traffic light'' test published by the Basel Committee
on Banking Supervision in 1996 (the ``Traffic Light Test'').\8\ In
conducting the Traffic Light Test, OCC determines the actual number of
instances in which the realized loss on an account exceeded the margin,
referred to as an ``exceedance,'' over an observation period of one
year. The number of exceedances during the observation period is
compared against the number of expected exceedances under the
assumption that the exceedances are independent and identically
distributed over time. When backtesting results reveal the potential
opportunity for remediation of OCC's margin methodology, OCC undertakes
a root cause analysis to determine the cause of any issues. Any
significant shortcomings of OCC's methodology lead to OCC undertaking a
model improvement project designed to correct the problems. After
analyzing the exceedances, OCC provides monthly reports to OCC's
Enterprise Risk Management Committee (``ERMC''), which include, among
other things, pertinent conclusions based on results from the full set
of backtests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See ``Supervisory Framework for the Use of `Backtesting' in
Conjunction with Internal Model Approach to Market Risk Capital
Requirement.'' Located at http://www.bis.org/publ/bcbs22.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OCC analyzed its backtesting program and identified several
enhancements to the program, as discussed in more detail below: (1)
Enhancement of and increase in the number of statistical tests, (2)
data set changes, (3) forecast horizon changes, and (4) root cause
analysis changes.

1. Enhancement of and Increase in the Number of Statistical Tests

    As proposed in the Notice, OCC will enhance an existing statistical
test and add three new statistical tests. OCC proposed to enhance its
existing Traffic Light Test so that it may be applied to exceedances
across all of OCC's margin accounts. Given that exceedances are not
independent across margin accounts, OCC will enhance this test to
address the dependency of exceedances between accounts.
    In addition to the enhanced Traffic Light Test, OCC will implement
three other industry standard tests related to exceedances in order to
provide a more comprehensive set of tests. First, OCC will add the
Kupiec Test,\9\ which is a new proportion of failures test that
compares the actual number of exceedances with the number that would be
expected in light of the confidence level associated with the
calculation of margin. For example, when calculating margin with a
confidence level of 99%, the number of exceedances is expected to be 1%
of the total observations (i.e., the P&Ls for all accounts for all days
during the measurement period). If the actual number of exceedances is
near the expected number, this is an indication that the calculated
margin requirements are not inaccurate estimates of the accounts'
estimated losses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See, Kupiec, P. ``Techniques for Verifying the Accuracy of
Risk Management Models,'' Journal of Derivatives, v3, P73-84 (1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, OCC will add the Christoffersen Independence Test,\10\
which is a new statistical test that measures the extent to which
exceedances are independent of each other. Specifically, if OCC's
margin models are correctly assessing risk, the probability of an
exceedance occurring at any two points in time should be the same as
the probability of an exceedance occurring at either point in time,
individually, without the exceedance occurring at the other point in
time. Third, OCC will add the Probtile test, which compares the
distribution of the daily observed P&L to the daily forecasted P&L
distribution. If the distribution of these P&L ratios approximates a
uniform random distribution, this is an indication that OCC's margin
models are not providing inaccurate forecasts of potential losses in an
account. Combined, these new statistical tests will provide OCC with
additional pertinent information to evaluate the effectiveness of its
models in determining margin coverage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See, Christoffersen, Peter, ``Evaluating Interval
Forecasts.'' International Economic Review, 39 (4), 841-862 (1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Data Set Changes

    In addition to the changes to its backtesting program, as described
above, OCC also will make two enhancements to the data sets being
backtested to allow for testing against various assumed portfolio and
market data scenarios, in addition to the performance of actual
portfolios against actual, current market conditions. First, OCC will
backtest hypothetical portfolios, allowing for the design and
monitoring of portfolios that have magnified sensitivities to
particular aspects of the models used in the

margin computations. Backtesting against hypothetical portfolios will
provide a more comprehensive insight into the adequacy of the
underlying model assumptions under market conditions prevailing in the
backtest observation periods.
    Under the second data set enhancement, OCC will backtest current
accounts against earlier observation periods. The market data observed
over the observation period is used to generate the margin forecasts
and P&L and observation periods will be chosen to reflect special
market conditions. OCC believes this enhancement should be useful
because even though margin coverage might be adequate in the current
environment, margin coverage could be inadequate under stressed
conditions, such as periods of high volatility. The ability to select
specific observation periods will not limit the backtesting to the
current environments but rather will highlight performance of margin
coverage and model performance in market scenarios other than
prevailing market conditions.

3. Forecast Horizons Changes

    Currently, OCC conducts backtesting using a one-day time horizon,
which means that it compares calculated margin with realized P&Lthat
occur on the business day following the calculation. However, OCC's
margin calculations assume that positions will be liquidated over a
two-day period, resulting in the test comparing two-day margin numbers
to a one-day P&L calculation. This difference requires OCC to make
adjustments to its existing backtesting methodology in its testing to
account for the difference between the two-day liquidation period used
in its margin calculation and the one-day horizon used in the P&L
calculation.
    Pursuant to the proposal, OCC will revise its backtesting
methodology to take into account losses over a two-day time horizon,
which will match the two-day liquidation period used in the margin
calculation without such adjustments. OCC will implement the necessary
functionality into its backtesting system to conduct a two-day time
horizon backtest, which will compare calculated margin against a two-
day P&L calculation. OCC also will revise its backtesting methodology
to compare one-day margin calculations against one-day P&L
calculations, and will implement system functionality for such a test.
All issues identified in any of these backtesting results will be
reported to the ERMC. OCC believes that its adoption of the additional
forecast horizons tests will allow it to have a more accurate view of
the sufficiency of its margin methodology.

4. Root Cause Analysis Changes

    Currently, OCC's backtesting staff conducts investigations, as
necessary, in order to identify the root cause of exceedances. The
investigation itself is a manual process that is dependent upon the
facts and circumstances pertaining to a given exceedance. Pursuant to
its proposal, OCC will now make system modifications that will provide
OCC's backtesting staff with additional tools to facilitate such
investigations. Specifically, OCC will add system functionality that
should reveal attribution of losses due to underlying price movements
and implied volatility movements. Further, these improvements will
allow OCC to incorporate hypothetical accounts and positions into the
tests and will allow OCC to identify risk factors that move above or
below the projected values. These changes should improve OCC's ability
to conduct investigations and root cause analyses that identify the
root cause of exceedances by providing OCC with additional automated
investigative tools which should, in turn, lead to improving OCC's
backtesting methodology and its margin coverage.

II. Discussion and Commission Findings

    Although Title VIII does not specify a standard of review for an
advance notice, the Commission believes that the stated purpose of
Title VIII is instructive.\11\ The stated purpose of Title VIII is to
mitigate systemic risk in the financial system and promote financial
stability by, among other things, promoting uniform risk management
standards for systemically-important financial market utilities and
strengthening the liquidity of systemically important financial market
utilities.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See 12 U.S.C. 5461(b).
    \12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 805(a)(2) of the Payment, Clearing and Settlement
Supervision Act \13\ authorizes the Commission to prescribe risk
management standards for the payment, clearing, and settlement
activities of designated clearing entities and financial institutions
engaged in designated activities for which it is the supervisory agency
or the appropriate financial regulator. Section 805(b) of the Payment,
Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act \14\ states that the objectives
and principles for the risk management standards prescribed under
Section 805(a) shall be to:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 12 U.S.C. 5464(a)(2).
    \14\ 12 U.S.C. 5464(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Promote robust risk management;
     promote safety and soundness;
     reduce systemic risks; and
     support the stability of the broader financial system.
    The Commission has adopted risk management standards under Section
805(a)(2) of the Payment, Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act
(``Clearing Agency Standards'').\15\ The Clearing Agency Standards
became effective on January 2, 2013, and require registered clearing
agencies that perform central counterparty (``CCP'') services to
establish, implement, maintain, and enforce written policies and
procedures that are reasonably designed to meet certain minimum
requirements for their operations and risk management practices on an
ongoing basis.\16\ As such, it is appropriate for the Commission to
review advance notices against these Clearing Agency Standards, and the
objectives and principles of these risk management standards as
described in Section 805(b) of the Payment, Clearing and Settlement
Supervision Act.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22.
    \16\ The Clearing Agency Standards are substantially similar to
the risk management standards established by the Board of Governors
of the Federal Reserve System governing the operations of designated
financial market utilities that are not clearing entities and
financial institutions engaged in designated activities for which
the Commission or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission is the
Supervisory Agency. See Financial Market Utilities, 77 FR 45907
(August 2, 2012).
    \17\ 12 U.S.C. 5464(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the proposal in this Advance Notice is
designed to further the objectives and principles of Section 805(b) of
the Payment, Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act.\18\ The
Commission believes that the additional backtesting improvements should
promote robust risk management by providing OCC with additional tools
to test the performance of its margin methodology in a more
comprehensive manner and better evaluate the effectiveness of its
models in determining model coverage. First, the enhancement to OCC's
existing Traffic Light Test and the adoption of the three new
statistical tests should provide a more comprehensive set of tests for
it to use to evaluate its margin models. Second, the enhancement of the
data sets to be backtested should provide OCC with additional
informative data on the performance of margin coverage and model
performance in market scenarios other than prevailing market
conditions.

Third, revising the backtesting methodology to take into account losses
over a two-day time horizon, should allow OCC to have a more accurate
view of the sufficiency of its margin methodology. Finally, system
modifications that should reveal attribution of losses due to
underlying price movements and implied volatility movements should
provide OCC with additional, automated investigative tools to conduct
analysis into the root causes of exceedances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 12 U.S.C. 5464(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Commission believes that the proposal in this
Advance Notice is consistent with Clearing Agency Standards, in
particular, Rule 17Ad-22(b)(4) under the Exchange Act,\19\ which, in
relevant part, requires registered clearing agencies that perform
central counterparty services establish, implement, maintain, and
enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to provide
for an annual model validation consisting of evaluating the performance
of the clearing agency's margin models and the related parameters and
assumptions associated with such models. The Commission believes that
this proposal is consistent with Exchange Act Rule 17Ad-22(b)(4) \20\
because it provides OCC with the ability to employ improved statistical
tests to better evaluate the performance of its margin models and thus
improving its ability to validate such models.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(b)(3).
    \20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Conclusion

    It is therefore noticed, pursuant to Section 806(e)(1)(I) of the
Payment, Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act,\21\ that the
Commission does not object to advance notice proposal (SR-OCC-2014-810)
and that OCC is authorized to implement the proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1)(I).

    By the Commission.
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-15994 Filed 6-29-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 173 (Friday, September 8, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42571-42572]
[FR Doc No: 2017-19015]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[U.S. DOT Docket Number NHTSA-2017-0050]

Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping Requirements

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Request for public comment on an extension of a currently
approved collection.

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

SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from
the public, it must receive approval from the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit
public comment on proposed collections of information, including
extensions and reinstatement of previously approved collections.
    This document describes one collection of information for which
NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 7, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Comments must refer to the docket notice numbers cited at
the beginning of this notice and be submitted to Docket Management,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590 by any of the following methods.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery/Courier: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Supplementary
Information section of this document. Note that all comments received
will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including
any personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading
below.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65FR 19477-78) or you may visit  http://DocketInfo.dot.gov.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to the street address listed above. The internet
access to the docket will be at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for accessing the dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Complete copies of each request for
collection of information may be obtained at no charge from Hisham
Mohamed or Carlita Ballard, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., Room W43-
437, NRM-310, Washington, DC 20590. Mr. Mohamed's telephone number is
(202) 366-0307 and Ms. Ballard's telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Please identify the relevant collection of information by referring to
its OMB Control Number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
before an agency submits a proposed collection of information to OMB
for approval, it must first publish a document in the Federal Register
providing a 60-day comment period and otherwise consult with members of
the public and affected agencies concerning each proposed collection of
information. The OMB has promulgated regulations describing what must
be included in such a document. Under OMB's regulation (at 5 CFR
1320.8(d)), an agency must ask for public comment on the following:
    (i.) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have practical utility;
    (ii.) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
    (iii.) How to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected and;
    (iv.) How to minimize the burden of the collection of information
on those

who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g. permitting electronic
submission of responses.
    In compliance with these requirements, NHTSA asks for public
comments on the following proposed collections of information:
    Title: Automobile Parts Content Labeling for 49 CFR part 583.
    OMB Control Number: 2127-0573.
    Form Number: The collection of this information uses no standard
form.
    Affected Public: Vehicle manufacturers.
    Requested Expiration Date of Approval: Three years from approval
date.
    Abstract: 49 CFR 583 establishes requirements for the disclosure of
information relating to the countries of origin of the equipment of new
passenger motor vehicles. This information will be used by NHTSA to
determine whether manufacturers are complying with the American
Automobile Labeling Act (49 U.S.C. 32304). The American Automobile
Labeling Act requires all new passenger motor vehicles (including
passenger cars, certain small buses, all light trucks and multipurpose
passenger vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 8,500 pounds
or less), to bear labels providing information about domestic and
foreign content of their equipment. The labels, which are affixed to
new passenger motor vehicles, serve as an aid to potential purchasers
in the selection of new passenger motor vehicles by providing them with
information about the value of the U.S./Canadian and foreign parts of
each vehicle, the countries of origin of the engine and transmission,
and the site of the vehicle's final assembly.
    Estimated Annual Burden: NHTSA anticipates approximately 20 vehicle
manufacturers will be affected by these reporting requirements. NHTSA
does not believe that any of these 20 manufacturers are a small
business (i.e., one that employs less than 500 persons) since each
manufacturer employs more than 500 persons. Manufacturers of new
passenger motor vehicles, including passenger cars, certain small
buses, and light trucks with a gross vehicle weight rating of 8,500
pounds or less, must file a report annually.
    NHTSA estimates that the vehicle manufacturers will incur a total
reporting annual hour burden and cost burden of 50,440 hours and
$3,716,740 respectively. The amount includes annual burden hours
incurred by multi-stage manufacturers and motor vehicle equipment
suppliers.
    Number of Respondents: 20.
    Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Department, including whether the information will have practical
utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimate of the burden of the
proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility
and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize
the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including
the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.

    Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.95.
Raymond R. Posten,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2017-19015 Filed 9-7-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


 [Federal Register Volume 82, Number 159 (Friday, August 18, 2017)] [Notices] [Page 39422] [FR Doc No: 2017-17477]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER17-2281-000]

Swamp Fox Solar, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-

Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204

Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding

Swamp Fox Solar, LLC's application for market-based rate authority,

with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes

a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future

issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,

DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's

Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone

filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that

document on the Applicant.

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with

regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18

CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of

liability, is August 31, 2017.

    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and

interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet

access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an

intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the

eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the

intervention or protests.

    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and

5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in

the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in

the above list. They are also available for electronic 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

email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).

For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY,

call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 11, 2017.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2017-17477 Filed 8-17-17; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: July 29, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 145)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 44727-44728]
[DOCID:fr29jy10-8]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0660; Airspace Docket No. 10-ANM-4]

Proposed Revocation and Establishment of Class E Airspace; St.
George, UT

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to remove Class E airspace at St. George
Municipal Airport, St. George, UT, as the airport will be closing,
eliminating the need for controlled airspace. This action also would
establish Class E airspace for the new St. George Municipal Airport
located to the south of the original airport. Controlled airspace is
necessary to accommodate aircraft using a new Area Navigation (RNAV)
Global Positioning System (GPS), VHF Omni-Directional Radio Range/
Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME), Localizer Type Directional Aid/
Distance Measuring Equipment (LDA/DME) Standard Instrument Approach
Procedures (SIAPs) at the new St. George Municipal Airport, St. George,
UT. The FAA is proposing this action to enhance the safety and
management of aircraft operations at the airport.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 13, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2010-
0660; Airspace Docket No. 10-ANM-4, at the beginning of your comments.
You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601
Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA 2010-0660 and Airspace Docket No. 10-ANM-4) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management System (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped
postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to FAA
Docket No. FAA-2010-0660 and Airspace Docket No. 10-ANM-4''. The
postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified closing date
for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the closing date
for comments. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRM's

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://
www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_
amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number)
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the Northwest Mountain Regional Office of the Federal
Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Western Service
Center, Operations Support Group, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA
98057.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRM's should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by removing Class E surface airspace and
Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at
St. George Municipal Airport, St. George, UT. The airport is closing,
and SIAPs removed, eliminating the need for controlled airspace. This
action also would establish Class E surface airspace within a 4.5-mile
radius of the new St. George Municipal Airport; and Class E airspace
upward from 700 feet above the surface at the new airport. Controlled
airspace is necessary to accommodate aircraft using the new RNAV (GPS),
VOR/DME and LDA/DME SIAPs at the new St. George Municipal Airport, St.
George, UT. This action would enhance the safety and management of
aircraft operations at the airport.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6002 and
6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.9T, signed August 27, 2009, and
effective September 15, 2009, which is incorporated by reference in 14
CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designation listed in this document will
be published subsequently in this Order.
    The FAA has determined this proposed regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this proposed regulation; (1) Is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a
``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44
FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a
regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since
this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures
and air navigation, it is certified this proposed rule, when
promulgated, would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, section 106, describes
the authority for the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is

promulgated under the authority described in subtitle VII, part A,
subpart I, section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with
prescribing regulations to assign the use of the airspace necessary to
ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This
regulation is within the scope of that authority as it establishes
controlled airspace at St. George Municipal Airport, St. George, UT.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

    1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the FAA Order
7400.9T, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, signed August 27,
2009, and effective September 15, 2009 is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6002 Class E airspace designated as surface areas.

* * * * *

ANM UT E2 St. George, UT [Removed]

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

ANM UT E5 St. George, UT [Removed]

Paragraph 6002 Class E airspace designated as surface areas.

* * * * *

ANM UT E2 St. George, UT [New]

St. George Municipal Airport, UT
    (Lat. 37[deg]02'11'' N., long. 113[deg]30'37'' W.)

    Within a 4.5-mile radius of St. George Municipal Airport. This
Class E airspace is effective during specific dates and times
established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and
time will thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/
Facility Directory.

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

ANM UT E5 St. George, UT [New]

St. George Municipal Airport, UT
    (Lat. 37[deg]02'11'' N., long. 113[deg]30'37'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within 25.8 miles northeast and 4 miles each side of the 030[deg]
bearing of the St. George Municipal Airport, and 20 miles southwest
and 4 miles each side 200[deg] bearing of the St. George Municipal
Airport, and 15 miles west and 4 miles each side of the 260[deg]
bearing of the St. George Municipal Airport; and that airspace
extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface within the 30-
mile radius of lat. 36[deg]48'52'' N., long. 113[deg]29'24'' W.,
extending clockwise from the 030[deg] bearing to the 360[deg]
bearing, thence from the 360[deg] bearing 30-mile radius to lat.
37[deg]31'02'' N., long. 113[deg]21'25'' W., to lat. 37[deg]23'09''
N., long. 113[deg]04'34'' W., thence to the 030[deg] bearing 30-mile
radius.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on July 21, 2010.
Rob Henry,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center
[FR Doc. 2010-18721 Filed 7-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 128 (Thursday, July 6, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31245-31250]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13949]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-3984; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-119-AD;
Amendment 39-18945; AD 2017-14-01]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2013-10-03,
which applied to all Airbus Model A330-200, -200 Freighter, and -300
series airplanes; and Model A340-200, -300, -500, and -600 series
airplanes. AD 2013-10-03 required one-time inspections for deformation
and damage of the bogie beams of the main landing gear (MLG);
repetitive inspections for damage and corrosion of the sliding piston
sub-assembly on certain airplanes; and related investigative and
corrective actions if necessary. This new AD removes Model A340-500 and
600 series airplanes from the applicability; removes certain one-time
inspections of the MLG bogie beams and the sliding piston sub-assembly;
revises certain compliance times; and requires replacement of certain
MLGs with MLGs having an improved bogie beam, which constitutes
terminating action for the repetitive inspections on the modified MLG.
This AD was prompted by reports of corroded and cracked bogie beams
under the bogie stop pad. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective August 10, 2017.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of August 10,
2017.

ADDRESSES: For Airbus service information identified in this final
rule, 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.
    For Messier-Bugatti-Dowty service information identified in this
final rule, contact Messier Services Americas, Customer Support Center,
45360 Severn Way, Sterling, VA 20166-8910; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
703-404-1621; Internet: https://techpubs.services/messier-dowty.com.
    You may view this referenced service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425-
227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
3984.

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-
3984; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-
647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

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:

Discussion

    We issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to
amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2013-10-03, Amendment 39-17456 (78
FR 31386, May 24, 2013) (``AD 2013-10-03''). AD 2013-10-03 applied to
all Airbus Model A330-200, -200 Freighter, and -300 series airplanes;
and Model A340-200, -300, -500, and -600 series airplanes. The SNPRM
published in the Federal Register on March 22, 2017 (82 FR 14642)
(``the SNPRM''). We preceded the SNPRM with a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) that published in the Federal Register on March 1,
2016 (81 FR 10540) (``the NPRM''). The NPRM was prompted by reports of
corroded and cracked bogie beams under the bogie stop pad. The NPRM
proposed to remove Model A340-500, and -600 series airplanes from the
applicability, remove certain one-time inspections of the MLG bogie
beams and the sliding piston sub-assembly; revise certain compliance
times and provide, for certain airplanes, an optional terminating
action for the repetitive actions. The SNPRM proposed to require
replacement of a MLG having part number (P/N) 201252 series and P/N
201490 series with a MLG that has an improved bogie beam, which would
constitute terminating action for the repetitive inspections on the
modified MLG. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct damage or
corrosion under the bogie stop pad of both MLG bogie beams; this
condition could result in a damaged bogie beam and consequent
detachment of the beam from the airplane, collapse of the MLG, or
departure of the airplane from the runway, possibly resulting in damage
to the airplane and injury to occupants.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD
2016-0108, dated June 8, 2016 (referred to after this as the Mandatory
Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an
unsafe condition for certain Airbus Model A330-200, -200 Freighter, and
-300 series airplanes; and Model A340-200 and -300 series airplanes.
The MCAI states:

    During a scheduled maintenance inspection on the Main Landing
Gear (MLG), the bogie stop pad was found deformed and cracked. Upon
removal of the bogie stop pad for replacement, the bogie beam was
also found cracked. The results of a laboratory investigation
indicated that an overload event had occurred and no fatigue
propagation of the crack was evident. A second bogie beam crack was
subsequently found on another aeroplane, located under a bogie stop
pad which only had superficial paint damage.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to
landing gear bogie detachment from the aeroplane, or landing gear
collapse, or a runway excursion, possibly resulting in damage to the
aeroplane and injury to the occupants and/or people on the ground.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, EASA issued AD 2008-
0223 [which corresponds to FAA AD 2010-02-10, Amendment 39-16181 (75
FR 4477, January 28, 2010)] to require accomplishment of a one-time
detailed inspection under the bogie stop pad of both MLG bogie
beams. As a result of the one-time inspection required by that
[EASA] AD, numerous bogie stop pad were found corroded and a few
cracked. The one-time inspection was retained in EASA AD 2011-0211
[which corresponds to FAA AD 2013-10-03], which superseded EASA AD
2008-0223, which also introduced repetitive inspections, except for
A340-500/-600 aeroplanes.
    After EASA AD 2011-0211 was issued, further investigation led to
the conclusion that the one-time inspection was no longer necessary
and only the repetitive inspections should remain. In addition, it
was determined that repetitive inspections were also necessary for
MLG on A340-500/-600 aeroplanes.
    Prompted by these conclusions, EASA issued AD 2014-0120,
partially retaining the requirements of EASA AD 2011-0211, which was
superseded, and introducing repetitive detailed inspections of the
MLG on A340-500 and A340-600 aeroplanes. Subsequently, further
analysis indicated that repetitive inspections of the MLG on A340-
500/-600 aeroplanes were not necessary after all. In addition, the
threshold for the inspection of MLG P/N 10-210 series was raised
from 24 to 126 months, and Airbus developed a modification of the
MLG P/N 10-210 series which provides an (optional) terminating
action for the repetitive inspections.
    Consequently, EASA AD 2014-0120 was revised to delete the
requirements for A340-500/-600 aeroplanes, to amend the inspection
threshold for MLG P/N 10-210 series, and to introduce an optional
terminating action for aeroplanes with MLG P/N 10-210 series.
    Since EASA AD 2014-0120R1 was issued, Airbus developed a
modification (mod 205289) of the MLG P/N 201252 series and P/N
201490 series that must be embodied in service with Airbus SB A330-
32-3275 or SB A340-32-4305. It was also identified that A340-500/-
600 aeroplanes could be removed from the applicability of this
[EASA] AD as no more actions were required on these aeroplanes.
    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD retains the
requirements of EASA AD 2014-0120R1, which is superseded, removes
the A340-500/-600 aeroplanes from the Applicability and requires the
modification of the MLG P/N 201252 series and P/N 201490 series,
which constitutes terminating action for the repetitive inspections
required by this [EASA] AD.

The required actions include repetitive detailed inspections for damage
and corrosion of the sliding piston sub-assembly, and related
investigative and corrective actions if necessary. Related
investigative actions include a test for indications of corrosion and
damage to the bogie assembly base material, and a magnetic particle
inspection for cracks, corrosion, and damage of the bogie beam.
Corrective actions include repairing affected parts.
    The required terminating action (for a MLG having P/N 201252 series
or P/N 201490 series) and the optional terminating action (for a MLG
having P/N 10-210 series) are modifications of the bogie beam of a MLG,
which consist of installing a nickel under chrome

coating, a new bogie beam stop pad, and new stop pad brackets.
    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-
3984.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comment received. Air Line Pilots
Association, International supported the SNPRM.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD as proposed except for minor editorial changes. We have
determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
SNPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the SNPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued the following service information.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3248, Revision 05,
including Appendix 1, dated May 4, 2016; and Airbus Service Bulletin
A340-32-4286, Revision 02, including Appendix 1, dated January 5, 2016;
which describe procedures for doing an inspection for damage and
corrosion of the MLG sliding piston sub-assembly, bogie beam stop pad
and the bogie beam under the stop pad, and related investigative and
corrective actions. These documents are distinct since they apply to
different airplane models.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3268, Revision 01, dated
September 21, 2015, which describes procedures for modification of the
bogie beam of a MLG having P/N 10-210 series on Model A330 airplanes
that includes installing a nickel under chrome coating, a new bogie
beam stop pad, and new stop pad brackets.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3275, dated December 23,
2015, which describes procedures for modification of the bogie beam of
a MLG having P/N 201252 series or P/N 201490 series on Model A330
airplanes that includes installing a nickel under chrome coating, a new
bogie beam stop pad, and new stop pad brackets.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A340-32-4300, dated April 20,
2015; and Revision 01, dated September 21, 2015; which describe
procedures for modification of the bogie beam of a MLG having P/N 10-
210 series on Model A340 airplanes that include installing a nickel
under chrome coating, a new bogie beam stop pad, and new stop pad
brackets. These service bulletins are distinct due to editorial
revisions.
     Airbus Service Bulletin A340-32-4305, dated December 23,
2015, which describes procedures for modification of the bogie beam of
a MLG having P/N 201252 series or P/N 201490 series on Model A340
airplanes that includes installing a nickel under chrome coating, a new
bogie beam stop pad, and new stop pad brackets.
    Messier-Bugatti-Dowty has issued the following service information.
     Messier-Bugatti-Dowty Service Bulletin A33/34-32-305,
including Appendix A, dated April 13, 2015, which describes procedures
for modification of the bogie beam of a MLG having MLG P/N 10-210
series that includes installing a nickel under chrome coating, a new
bogie beam stop pad, and new stop pad brackets.
     Messier-Bugatti-Dowty Service Bulletin A33/34-32-306,
Revision 1, including Appendix A, dated May 31, 2016, which describes
procedures for modification of the bogie beam of a MLG having P/N
201252 series or P/N 201490 series that includes installing a nickel
under chrome coating, a new bogie beam stop pad, and new stop pad
brackets.
    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.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 89 Model A330-200, -200 Freighter,
and -300 series airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate that it will take about 13 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of
this AD on U.S. operators to be $98,345, or $1,105 per product.
    Currently, there are no Model A340-200 or -300 series airplanes on
the U.S. Register. However, if an affected airplane is imported and
placed on the U.S. Register in the future, it would be subject to the
same per-airplane cost specified above for the Model A330-200, -200
Freighter, and -300 series airplanes.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions will
take about 24 work-hours and require parts costing $78, for a cost of
$2,118 per product. We have no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these actions.
    According to the manufacturer, all of the parts costs of the
optional terminating action specified in this AD may be covered under
warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. We
do not control warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result,
we have included all costs in our cost estimate. We have received no
definitive data that would enable us to provide the work-hour cost
estimates for the optional terminating action specified in this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2013-10-03, Amendment 39-17456 (78 FR 31386, May 24, 2013), and adding
the following new AD:

2017-14-01 Airbus: Amendment 39-18945; Docket No. FAA-2016-3984;
Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-119-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective August 10, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2013-10-03, Amendment 39-17456 (78 FR 31386,
May 24, 2013) (``AD 2013-10-03'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus airplanes identified in paragraphs
(c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, certificated in any category, all
serial numbers, except those airplanes that have embodied Airbus
Modification 204421 or Airbus Modification 205289 in production.
    (1) Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, -223F, -243, -243F, -301,
-302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342, and -343 airplanes.
    (2) Model A340-211, -212, -213, -311, -312, and -313 airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32, Landing
gear.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of corroded and cracked bogie
beams under the bogie stop pad. We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct damage or corrosion under the bogie stop pad of both main
landing gear (MLG) bogie beams; this condition could result in a
damaged bogie beam and consequent detachment of the beam from the
airplane, collapse of the MLG, or departure of the airplane from the
runway, possibly resulting in damage to the airplane and injury to
occupants.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Repetitive Inspections, Related Investigative Actions, and
Corrective Actions

    For Model A330-200, -200 Freighter, and -300 series airplanes;
and Model A340-200 and -300 series airplanes; equipped with a MLG
having part number (P/N) 201252 series, P/N 201490 series, or P/N
10-210 series: Do the applicable actions required by paragraph
(g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD.
    (1) For airplanes equipped, as of the effective date of this AD,
with a MLG that has been previously inspected, as specified in
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3220, Airbus Service Bulletin A330-
32-3248, Airbus Service Bulletin A340-32-4264, or Airbus Service
Bulletin A340-32-4286, as applicable: At the applicable times
specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD, do a detailed
inspection for damage (e.g., cracking and fretting) and corrosion of
the MLG sliding piston sub-assembly, bogie beam stop pad, and the
bogie beam under the stop pad; and do all applicable related
investigative and corrective actions; in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3248,
Revision 05, including Appendix 1, dated May 4, 2016; or Airbus
Service Bulletin A340-32-4286, Revision 02, including Appendix 1,
dated January 5, 2016; as applicable; except as required by
paragraph (j) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative
and corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the inspection
of the MLG sliding piston sub-assembly, bogie beam stop pad, and the
bogie beam under the stop pad, thereafter, at intervals not to
exceed 2,500 flight cycles or 24 months, whichever occurs first.
    (2) For airplanes equipped, as of the effective date of this AD,
with a MLG that has not been previously inspected, as specified in
Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3220, Airbus Service Bulletin A330-
32-3248, Airbus Service Bulletin A340-32-4264, or Airbus Service
Bulletin A340-32-4286, as applicable: At the applicable times
specified in paragraphs (h)(3) and (h)(4) of this AD, do a detailed
inspection for damage (e.g., cracking and fretting) and corrosion of
the MLG sliding piston sub-assembly, bogie beam stop pad, and the
bogie beam under the stop pad; and do all applicable related
investigative and corrective actions; in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3248,
Revision 05, including Appendix 1, dated May 4, 2016; or Airbus
Service Bulletin A340-32-4286, Revision 02, including Appendix 1,
dated January 5, 2016; as applicable; except as required by
paragraph (j) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative
and corrective actions before further flight. Repeat the inspection
of the MLG sliding piston sub-assembly, bogie beam stop pad, and the
bogie beam under the stop pad, thereafter, at intervals not to
exceed 2,500 flight cycles or 24 months, whichever occurs first.

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

    Do the applicable actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD
at the applicable time specified in paragraph (h)(1), (h)(2),
(h)(3), or (h)(4) of this AD.
    (1) For airplanes identified in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD
having a MLG P/N 201252 series or P/N 201490 series: Before the
accumulation of 2,500 total flight cycles or 24 months, whichever
occurs first since the later of the times specified in paragraphs
(h)(1)(i) and (h)(1)(ii) of this AD.
    (i) Since first flight after a MLG overhaul.
    (ii) Since first flight after the most recent accomplishment of
an inspection of the MLG, as specified in Airbus Service Bulletin
A330-32-3220, Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3248, Airbus Service
Bulletin A340-32-4264, or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-32-4286, as
applicable.
    (2) For airplanes identified in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD
having a MLG P/N 10-210 series: Before the accumulation of 126
months since first flight of the MLG on an airplane or since first
flight on an airplane after the most recent inspection of the MLG,
as specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3248, or Airbus
Service Bulletin A340-32-4286, as applicable.
    (3) For airplanes identified in paragraph (g)(2) of this AD
having a MLG P/N 201252 series or P/N 201490 series: At the later of
the times specified in paragraphs (h)(3)(i) and (h)(3)(ii) of this
AD.
    (i) Before the accumulation of 2,500 total flight cycles or 24
months, whichever occurs first since the later of the times
specified in paragraphs (h)(3)(i)(A) and (h)(3)(i)(B) of this AD.
    (A) Since first flight of the MLG on an airplane.
    (B) Since first flight after a MLG overhaul.
    (ii) Within 16 months after the effective date of this AD.
    (4) For airplanes identified in paragraph (g)(2) of this AD
having a MLG P/N 10-210 series: Before the accumulation of 126
months since first flight of the MLG on an airplane.

(i) Optional Overhaul

    For the purposes of this AD, accomplishment of a MLG overhaul is
acceptable instead of an inspection required by paragraph (g) of
this AD. The inspections required by paragraph (g) of this AD are
not terminated by a MLG overhaul, but are required at the next
applicable compliance time required by paragraph (g) of this AD.

(j) Service Information Exception

    If the applicable service information specified in paragraph (g)
of this AD specifies to contact Messier-Dowty for instructions, or
if any repair required by paragraph (g) of this AD is beyond the
maximum repair allowance specified in the applicable service
information specified in paragraph (g) of this AD: Before further
flight, repair 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).

(k) MLG Modification

    For airplanes equipped with a MLG having P/N 201252 series or a
MLG having P/N 201490 series: Before the accumulation of 126 months
since first flight of the MLG on an airplane or since first flight
on an airplane after the most recent overhaul as of the

effective date of this AD, as applicable, replace that MLG with a
MLG having P/N 201252 series or a MLG having P/N 201490 series that
has an improved bogie beam, as defined in Airbus Service Bulletin
A330-32-3275, dated December 23, 2015; or Airbus Service Bulletin
A340-32-4305, dated December 23, 2015; as applicable; and in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Messier-Bugatti-
Dowty Service Bulletin A33/34-32-306, Revision 1, including Appendix
A, dated May 31, 2016.

(l) Terminating Action Limitation

    Accomplishment of corrective actions required by paragraph (g)
of this AD does not constitute terminating action for the repetitive
inspections required by this AD.

(m) Terminating Action for Certain Airplanes

    (1) For airplanes with any MLG having P/N 10-210 series:
Modification of the bogie beam of each MLG having P/N 10-210 series,
as specified in Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3268, Revision 01,
dated September 21, 2015; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340-32-4300,
dated April 20, 2015; or Revision 01, dated September 21, 2015; as
applicable; and in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions
of Messier-Bugatti-Dowty Service Bulletin A33/34-32-305, including
Appendix A, dated April 13, 2015; constitutes terminating action for
the repetitive inspection requirements of this AD for that airplane,
provided that, following in-service modification, the airplane
remains in the post-service bulletin configuration.
    (2) For airplanes with any MLG having P/N 201252 series or P/N
201490 series: Installation of both left-hand and right-hand MLG
having P/N 201252 series or P/N 201490 series that has an improved
bogie beam, as required by paragraph (k) of this AD, constitutes
terminating action for the repetitive inspections requirements of
this AD for that airplane, provided that, following in-service
modification, the airplane remains in the post-service bulletin
configuration.

(n) Parts Installation Prohibition

    Do not install on any airplane a pre-Airbus modification MLG
having P/N 201252 series or a pre-Airbus modification MLG having P/N
201490 series, as specified in paragraph (n)(1) or (n)(2) of this
AD, as applicable; or a pre-Airbus modification MLG having P/N 10-
210 series, as specified in paragraph (n)(3) or (n)(4) of this AD,
as applicable.
    (1) For any airplane that is in a post-Airbus Modification
205289 configuration, or on which the modification required by
paragraph (k) of this AD has been done: From the effective date of
this AD.
    (2) For any airplane that is in a pre-Airbus Modification 205289
configuration, or on which the modification required by paragraph
(k) of this AD has not been done: After modification of that
airplane, as required by paragraph (k) of this AD.
    (3) For any airplane that is in post-Airbus Modification 204421
configuration, or on which the modification specified in paragraph
(m)(1) of this AD has been done: From the effective date of this AD.
    (4) For an airplane that is in pre-Airbus Modification 204421,
or on which the modification specified in paragraph (m)(1) of this
AD has not been done: After modification of that airplane, as
specified in paragraph (m)(1) of this AD.

(o) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using the service information identified
in paragraphs (o)(1)(i) through (o)(1)(vii) or (o)(2) of this AD, as
applicable.
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3248, dated October 5, 2011,
which is not incorporated by reference in this AD.
    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3248, Revision 01,
including Appendix 01, dated December 13, 2012, which was
incorporated by reference in AD 2013-10-03.
    (iii) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3248, Revision 02, dated
April 16, 2014, which is not incorporated by reference in this AD.
    (iv) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3248, Revision 03, dated
November 27, 2014, which is not incorporated by reference in this
AD.
    (v) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3248, Revision 04, dated
January 5, 2016, which is not incorporated by reference in this AD.
    (vi) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-32-4286, dated October 5,
2011, which was incorporated by reference in AD 2013-10-03.
    (vii) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-32-4286, Revision 01, dated
November 27, 2014, which is not incorporated by reference in this
AD.
    (2) This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraph (k) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Messier-Bugatti-Dowty Service
Bulletin A33/34-32-306, dated December 21, 2015, which is not
incorporated by reference in this AD.

(p) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the manager of the International Branch, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (q)(2) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (i) 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.
    (ii) AMOCs approved previously for AD 2013-10-03 are not
approved as AMOCs with this AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: As of the effective date of
this AD, for any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions
from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method
approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus's EASA DOA. If
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized
signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by
paragraph (j) 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.

(q) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA AD 2016-0108, dated June 8, 2016, 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-2016-3984.
    (2) For more information about this AD, 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>.
    (3) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (r)(3), (r)(4), and (r)(5) of this AD.

(r) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3248, Revision 05, including
Appendix 1, dated May 4, 2016.
    (ii) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3268, Revision 01, dated
September 21, 2015.
    (iii) Airbus Service Bulletin A330-32-3275, dated December 23,
2015.
    (iv) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-32-4286, Revision 02,
including Appendix 1, dated January 5, 2016.
    (v) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-32-4300, dated April 20, 2015.
    (vi) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-32-4300, Revision 01, dated
September 21, 2015.
    (vii) Airbus Service Bulletin A340-32-4305, dated December 23,
2015.
    (viii) Messier Bugatti Dowty Service Bulletin A33/34-32-305,
including Appendix A, dated April 13, 2015.
    (ix) Messier Bugatti Dowty Service Bulletin A33/34-32-306,
Revision 1, including Appendix A, dated May 31, 2016.
    (3) For Airbus 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.
    (4) For Messier-Bugatti-Dowty service information identified in
this final rule, contact Messier Services Americas, Customer Support
Center, 45360 Severn Way, Sterling, VA 20166-8910; phone: 703-450-
8233; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet: https://techpubs.services/messier-dowty.com.
    (5) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (6) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 23, 2017.
Chris Spangenberg,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-13949 Filed 7-5-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P