79558 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Reserve requires specific agreements to 

be executed. Information regarding 

these agreements, as set forth in 

Operating Circular No. 10, and Discount 

Window operation can be found at 

www.frbdiscountwindow.org. These 

agreements include arrangements for the 

pledging of collateral to secure 

advances. All extensions of credit must 

be secured to the satisfaction of the 

lending Federal Reserve Bank by 

collateral that is acceptable for that 

purpose. Depository institutions that do 

not envision using the Discount 

Window in the ordinary course of 

events are encouraged to execute the 

necessary documents because a need for 

Discount Window credit could arise 

suddenly and unexpectedly. 

IV. Request for Comment 

This is a crucial time for depository 

institutions, including credit unions, to 

reflect on the recent financial crisis and 

ongoing economic events and address 

potential deficiencies in their funding 

and liquidity risk management 

capabilities. Access to a contingent 

liquidity provider that can back up 

market sources of liquidity is an 

essential component of these 

capabilities that must be met. Credit 

unions can use membership in CLF or 

access with a Discount Window facility 

(and/or a combination of the two) to 

meet this need. Since USC Bridge will 

need to discontinue its role as a CLF 

agent member intermediary, a credit 

union currently covered under an agent 

membership (i.e, by belonging to a retail 

corporate credit union) will lose access 

to CLF unless it takes action to become 

a regular member or join a new agent 

member that acquires CLF membership 

stock on the credit union’s behalf. 

The Board invites comment on the 

issues raised in this ANPR. To facilitate 

consideration of the public’s views, 

please address your comments to the 

questions set forth below on each issue, 

and organize and identify them by 

corresponding question number so that 

each question is addressed separately. 

To maximize the value of public input 

on each issue, it is also important that 

commenters provide and explain the 

reasons that support each of their 

opinions. There will be a further 

opportunity to comment on these issues 

should the Board issue a proposed rule. 

(1) What are the standards and 

provisions, along with associated 

considerations, that should accompany 

a requirement for federally insured 

credit unions to maintain access to 

backup federal liquidity sources for use 

in times of financial emergency and 

distressed economic circumstances? 

Should an NCUA requirement to 

maintain access to backup federal 

liquidity sources contain an exemption 

for credit unions under a certain asset 

threshold, and if so, what should that 

threshold be? 

(2) Are there other sources of credit 

beyond the CLF and Discount Window 

the Board should consider as acceptable 

to satisfy the need for a backup federal 

liquidity source? For example, would a 

credit union’s maintenance of a certain 

percentage of its assets in highly liquid 

(maturity of 90 days or less) Treasury 

securities satisfy the need? If so, what is 

the appropriate percentage? Also, how 

should NCUA ensure that these 

securities are available to be pledged or 

sold? 

(3) How can CLF best play a role in 

the immediate term upon USC Bridge’s 

wind down and over the long term in 

satisfying a credit union’s need for a 

contingency liquidity source? How 

should that role be executed? Are 

changes to the CLF statute to modernize 

the way the CLF functions over the long 

term warranted, and if so what changes 

should be pursued? For example, 

should the CLF function more like the 

Discount Window? 

(4) What is the best way for credit 

unions to access CLF (e.g., either 

directly or through an agent)? Should 

corporate credit unions continue to play 

a role and, if so, to what extent should 

they be encouraged to purchase CLF 

stock as agents for natural person credit 

unions? 

The Board also seeks comment on 

how a proposed rule could be 

implemented to maximize economic 

benefit while minimizing regulatory 

burden on credit unions. Please 

comment on any other relevant issues 

the Board has not considered. 

By the National Credit Union 

Administration Board on December 15, 2011. 

Mary F. Rupp, 

Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. 2011–32720 Filed 12–21–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7535–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–1324; Directorate 

Identifier 2011–NM–104–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 all 

Airbus Model A300 B4–600, B4–600R, 

and F4–600R series airplanes, and 

Model C4–605R Variant F airplanes 

(collectively called A300–600 series 

airplanes), and Model A310 series 

airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by a report of a crack in the 

forward cargo door selector valve pipe 

located in the avionics bay opposite to 

line replaceable unit racking. This 

proposed AD would require replacing a 

certain aluminum high pressure pipe 

with a new corrosion resistant stainless 

steel pipe. We are proposing this AD to 

prevent cracking in the forward cargo 

door selector valve pipe which could 

impact the 90 VU avionics line 

replaceable unit, and could result in 

multiple computer failures, affecting 

flight safety. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by February 6, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Airbus SAS— 

EAW (Airworthiness Office), 1 Rond 

Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac 

Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 

96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; email: 

account.airworth-eas@airbus.com; 

Internet http://www.airbus.com. You 

may review copies of the referenced 

service information at the FAA, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. 

For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call (425) 227– 

1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this proposed AD, the 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules 79559 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Operations 

office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is in 

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan 

Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 227–2125; fax (425) 227–1149. 

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–2012–1324; Directorate Identifier 

2011–NM–104–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 

Community, has issued EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2011–0085, 

dated May 12, 2011 (corrected May 31, 

2011) (referred to after this as ‘‘the 

MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition 

for the specified products. The MCAI 

states: 

An A300–600 operator has reported a 

hydraulic leak at the forward cargo door area. 

After further investigation, the forward cargo 

door selector valve pipe Part Number (P/N) 

A5231006100300, located in the avionics bay 

opposite to Line Replaceable Unit (LRU) 

racking, was found cracked. 

This condition, if not detected and 

corrected, can impact the 90 VU avionics 

LRU, which could result in multiple 

computer failures, affecting flight safety. 

For the reasons described above, this AD 

requires the replacement of the aluminum 

pipe P/N A5231006100300 with a stainless 

steel pipe P/N A5231007000600. 

This [EASA] AD has been corrected to 

make clear that the use of Airbus SB A310– 

52–2067 and Airbus SB A300–52–6065 at 

original issue is acceptable to comply with 

paragraph (1) of this [EASA] AD, unless, 

inadvertently, the high pressure pipe P/N 

A5231007000600 has been replaced in 

service, after original issue of the SB’s 

accomplishment, with P/N A5231006100300. 

You may obtain further information by 

examining the MCAI in the AD docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

Airbus has issued Mandatory Service 

Bulletins A300–52–6065, Revision 01, 

dated July 5, 2010; and A310–52–2067, 

Revision 01, dated July 5, 2010. The 

actions described in this service 

information are intended to correct the 

unsafe condition identified in the 

MCAI. 

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 the same 

type design. 

Differences Between This AD and the 

MCAI or Service Information 

This AD differs from the MCAI and/ 

or service information as follows: The 

MCAI specifies that installation of P/N 

A5231006100300 is not allowed after 

modification. However, this AD does 

not allow installation of P/N 

A5231006100300 as of the effective date 

of this AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

Based on the service information, we 

estimate that this proposed AD would 

affect about 152 products of U.S. 

registry. We also estimate that it would 

take about 4 work-hours per product to 

comply with the basic requirements of 

this proposed AD. The average labor 

rate is $85 per work-hour. Required 

parts would cost about $0 per product. 

Where the service information lists 

required parts costs that are covered 

under warranty, we have assumed that 

there will be no charge for these parts. 

As we do not control warranty coverage 

for affected parties, some parties may 

incur costs higher than estimated here. 

Based on these figures, we estimate the 

cost of the proposed AD on U.S. 

operators to be $51,680, or $340 per 

product. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this proposed regulation: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 

3. Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD and placed it in the 

AD docket. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
79560 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new AD: 

Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2012–1324; 

Directorate Identifier 2011–NM–104–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by February 6, 

2012. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Airbus Model A300 B4– 

601, B4–603, B4–620, B4–622, B4–605R, B4– 

622R, F4–605R, F4–622R, and C4–605R 

Variant F airplanes; and Model A310–203, 

–204, –221, –222, –304, –322, –324, and –325 

airplanes; certificated in any category; all 

certificated models, all manufacturer serial 

numbers. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 52: Doors. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by a report of a 

crack in the forward cargo door selector valve 

pipe located in the avionics bay opposite to 

line replaceable unit racking. We are issuing 

this AD to prevent cracking in the forward 

cargo door selector valve pipe which could 

impact the 90 VU avionics line replaceable 

unit, and could result in multiple computer 

failures, affecting flight safety. 

(f) Compliance 

You are responsible for having the actions 

required by this AD performed within the 

compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

(g) Replacement 

Except as provided by paragraph (h) of this 

AD: Within 30 months or 6,000 flight hours 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs first, replace the aluminum high 

pressure pipe having part number (P/N) 

A5231006100300 with a new pipe made of 

corrosion resistant stainless steel having P/N 

A5231007000600, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Mandatory Service Bulletin A300–52–6065, 

Revision 01, dated July 5, 2010 (for Model 

A300 B4–600 series airplanes); or A310–52– 

2067, Revision 01, dated July 5, 2010 (for 

Model A310 series airplanes). 

(h) Exception 

Any airplane that has incorporated Airbus 

Modification 12464 in production has the 

new P/N A5231007000600 installed and is 

therefore compliant with the requirements of 

paragraph (g) of this AD. If the high pressure 

pipe has been replaced with P/N 

A5231006100300 in service after delivery of 

the airplane, replace the high pressure pipe 

in accordance with paragraph (g) of this AD 

within the times specified in paragraph (g) of 

this AD. 

(i) Parts Installation 

As of the effective date of this AD, no 

person may install an aluminum high 

pressure pipe having P/N A5231006100300, 

on any airplane. 

(j) Credit for Actions Accomplished in 

Accordance With Previous Service 

Information 

Replacements done before the effective 

date of this AD in accordance with Airbus 

Mandatory Service Bulletins A300–52–6065, 

dated July 9, 2002 (for Model A300–600 

series airplanes); and A310–52–2067, dated 

July 9, 2002 (for Model A310 series 

airplanes); are acceptable for compliance 

with the requirements of paragraph (g) of this 

AD. 

(k) Other FAA AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, International 

Branch, ANM–116, FAA, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your 

request to your principal inspector or local 

Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: 

Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057– 

3356; telephone (425) 227–2125; fax (425) 

227–1149. Information may be emailed to: 

9-ANM-116-AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. 

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) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(l) Related Information 

Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety 

Agency (EASA) Airworthiness Directive 

2011–0085, dated May 12, 2011 (corrected 

May 31, 2011); Airbus Mandatory Service 

Bulletin A300–52–6065, Revision 01, dated 

July 5, 2010; and Airbus Mandatory Service 

Bulletin A310–52–2067, Revision 01, dated 

July 5, 2010; for related information. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

December 14, 2011. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–32844 Filed 12–21–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–1323; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NM–212–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 all 

Model A330–200 and –300 series 

airplanes; Model A330–223F and –243F 

airplanes; and Model A340–200, –300, 

–500, and –600 series airplanes. This 

proposed AD was prompted by a report 

that during the evaluation of specific 

engine failure cases at take-off on Airbus 

flight simulators. It has been shown that 

with flight control primary computer 

(FCPC)1 inoperative, in worst case 

scenario, when FCPC2 and FCPC3 resets 

occur during rotation at take off, a 

transient loss of elevator control 

associated with a temporary incorrect 

flight control law reconfiguration could 

occur. This proposed AD would require 

revising the Limitations section of the 

applicable airplane flight manual. We 

are proposing this AD to prevent 

movement of the elevators to zero 

position, which could result in inducing 

a pitch down movement instead of a 

pitch up movement needed for lift off, 

resulting in loss of controllability of the 

airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by February 6, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS