39446 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 3, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

(3) Within 8 months, 

(i) Modify the pilot RVDT control box 

assembly, P/N 109–0010–81–103, by 

reference to Figures 1 through 7 and in 

accordance with the Compliance 

Instructions, Part III, paragraphs 5.1 through 

5.16 of Agusta Bollettino Tecnico No. 119– 

39 Revision A, dated May 23, 2011; and 

(ii) Modify the co-pilot RVDT control box 

assembly, P/N 109–0010–81–107, by 

reference to Figures 1 through 7 and in 

accordance with the Compliance 

Instructions, Part III, paragraphs 3.1 through 

3.16 of Agusta Bollettino Tecnico No. 119– 

39, Revision A, dated May 23, 2011. 

(4) Modifying the pilot and copilot RVDT 

control box assemblies in accordance with 

paragraph (e)(3) of this AD constitutes 

terminating action for the requirements of 

this AD. 

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Safety Management 

Group, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this 

AD. Send your proposal to: Jim Grigg, 

Manager, FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Safety 

Management Group, 2601 Meacham Blvd., 

Fort Worth, TX 76137, telephone (817) 222– 

5126, email jim.grigg@faa.gov. 

(2) For operations conducted under a 14 

CFR part 119 operating certificate or under 

14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that 

you notify your principal inspector, or 

lacking a principal inspector, the manager of 

the local flight standards district office or 

certificate holding district office before 

operating any aircraft complying with this 

AD through an AMOC. 

(g) Additional Information 

(1) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Agusta Westland, Customer 

Support & Services, Via Per Tornavento 15, 

21019 Somma Lombardo (VA) Italy, ATTN: 

Giovanni Cecchelli; telephone 39–0331– 

711133; fax 39 0331 711180; or at http:// 

www.agustawestland.com/technicalbullettins. You may review a copy of the 

service information at the FAA, Office of the 

Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 

Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, 

Texas 76137. 

(2) The subject of this AD is addressed in 

European Aviation Safety Agency AD 2011– 

0095–E, dated May 24, 2011. 

(h) Subject 

Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) 

Code: 6700: Rotors Flight Control. 

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on June 22, 

2012. 

M. Monica Merritt, 

Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–16314 Filed 7–2–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 139 

Draft Parachute Landing Area 

Standards 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Request for comment. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), U.S. Department 

of Transportation (DOT), invites the 

United States Parachute Association, 

skydiving businesses, airport operators, 

airport consultants, industry 

representatives and all other interested 

parties to review and comment on the 

draft ‘‘Parachute Landing Area 

Standards’’ contained in Change 19 to 

the Airport Design Advisory Circular 

(‘‘AC’’), AC 150/5300–13. This change 

establishes new standards and 

recommendations for parachute landing 

areas on airports. This action proposes 

to clarify the FAA policies and 

standards concerning access to federally 

obligated airports for parachute landing 

activities. It also proposes to clarify 

Grant Assurance No. 22, ‘‘Economic 

Nondiscrimination,’’ which is required 

of a sponsor as a condition of receiving 

a grant under the Airport Improvement 

Program (AIP), to incorporate these 

standards. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 17, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Comments must be 

submitted by: 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue SW., AAS–100, 

Room 621, Washington, DC 20590. 

• Fax: (202) 267–3688. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Khalil Elias Kodsi, P.E. PMP, Airport 

Engineering Division, (AAS–100), 

Federal Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Ave. SW., Washington, 

DC 20591; telephone (202) 267–7553. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA 

has posted Change 19 for the Advisory 

Circular on the Internet at: http:// 

www.faa.gov/airports/resources/ 

advisory_circulars/ 

Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 47107(h), the 

Secretary of Transportation is required 

to provide notice and comment in the 

Federal Register and an opportunity for 

the public to comment upon proposals 

to modify the assurances or add new 

assurances. 

The purpose of this document is 

twofold: (1) To provide notice of the 

proposed modification of Grant 

Assurance No. 22 and to provide an 

opportunity to comment consistent with 

49 U.S.C. 47107(h), and (2) to invite 

interested parties to review and 

comment on the draft ‘‘Parachute 

Landing Area Standards’’ contained in 

Change 19 to the Airport Design 

Advisory Circular, AC 150/5300–13. 

The FAA interprets 49 U.S.C. 

47107(a)(1), and the corollary grant 

assurance No. 22, ‘‘Economic 

Nondiscrimination,’’ to require airports 

obligated under AIP grants (which 

includes sponsors that are holders of 

Airport Operating Certificates issued 

under 14 CFR part 139) to comply with 

new PLA Standards set forth in Change 

19 to AC 150/5300–13, ‘‘Airport 

Design,’’ which address hazards, PLA 

size and location, and recommended 

markings. The FAA proposes to use 

these standards; along with changes in 

its safety assessment review process, to 

provide a more consistent and objective 

examination of requests for parachute 

landing areas on federally obligated 

airports. The new standards and the 

updated review process will ensure that 

airport sponsors are able to implement 

new PLAs safely and efficiently. The 

PLA Standards will apply at the time 

airports enter into new grant agreements 

with the FAA subsequent to the 

effective date of Change 19 to AC No. 

150/5300–13, ‘‘Airport Design.’’ 

The FAA proposes to modify AIP 

Grant Assurance No. 22, ‘‘Economic 

Nondiscrimination,’’ to clarify that 

sponsor must comply with Parachute 

Landing Area (PLA) Standards set forth 

in Change 19 to AC 150/5300–13, 

‘‘Airport Design,’’ which address 

hazards, PLA size and location, and 

recommended markings. These 

standards are designed to provide a 

more consistent and objective 

examination of requests for parachute 

landing areas on federally obligated 

airports. The standards will ensure that 

sponsors are able to implement new 

PLAs safely and efficiently. 

Title 49 of the United States Code, 

section 47108(a), provides that the 

Secretary may impose terms on the offer 

of Federal funds for AIP funded airport 

development projects that the Secretary 

considers necessary. Uniform design 

standards for airports can be found in 

FAA advisory circulars and mandatory 

use is generally required on all AIP 

projects. In exchange for AIP grant 

funds, an airport sponsor is required by 

49 U.S.C. 47107(a) to certify to the 

Secretary that it will comply with a 

number of Federal laws, policies, and 

grant assurances. Grant Assurance No. 

22, ‘‘Economic Nondiscrimination,’’ 

requires an airport sponsor to ‘‘make the 

airport available as an airport for public 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 3, 2012 / Proposed Rules 39447 

use on reasonable terms and without 

unjust discrimination to all types, kinds 

and classes of aeronautical activities, 

including commercial aeronautical 

activities offering services to the public 

at the airport.’’ 

Parachuting is an aeronautical 

activity. See AC–105.2D. For several 

years, airport sponsors, skydiving 

operators and airport users have 

expressed concerns to the FAA about 

the safety assessment process the FAA 

uses to evaluate parachute operations 

and the siting of Parachute Landing 

Areas on federally obligated airports. 

These concerns include the amount of 

time required from airport sponsors, 

skydiving operators, and the FAA to 

conduct safety assessments, and the 

resulting access delays that can occur 

for skydiving operators. The PLA 

standards and safety risk assessment 

procedures are an attempt to address 

these issues. With these standards, 

along with changes to the safety 

assessment review process, the FAA 

also seeks to gain greater national 

coordination and consistency in its 

safety assessments and to ensure that 

these standards are applied objectively 

and uniformly across the country. Some 

airport sponsors have cited reasons of 

safety and/or efficiency and have been 

generally reluctant to allow the 

establishment of on-airport parachute 

landing areas. Airport sponsors 

generally do not object to the takeoff 

and landing of aircraft that are used to 

transport skydivers, but argue that 

having the skydivers land on the airport 

property creates safety and/or efficiency 

concerns when combined with other 

aeronautical users. 

Change 19 of AC 150/5300–13, 

‘‘Airport Design,’’ establishes new 

standards for on-airport PLAs, including 

size, location and recommended 

markings. The FAA proposes to use 

these standards; along with changes in 

its safety assessment review process, to 

provide a more consistent and objective 

examination of requests for parachute 

landing areas on federally obligated 

airports. This new standard, combined 

with the new request review process, 

will ensure that airport sponsors are 

able to implement new PLAs safely and 

efficiently. 

Reviewers will also have access, via 

the FAA listed web link above, to the 

FAA William J. Hughes Technical 

Center Report entitled, ‘‘Development of 

Criteria for Parachute Landing Areas on 

Airports,’’ as well as to a database report 

of accidents and incidents related to 

parachute operations from the Aviation 

System Information Analysis and 

Sharing (ASIAS) database. 

As required under 49 U.S.C. 47107(h), 

the FAA is providing notice that it 

interprets 49 U.S.C. 47107(a) (1), and 

the corollary grant assurance No. 22, 

‘‘Economic Nondiscrimination,’’ to 

require airports that accept new AIP 

grants (which would include sponsors 

that are holders of Airport Operating 

Certificates issued under 14 CFR part 

139) to comply with new PLA Standards 

set forth in Change 19 to AC 150/5300– 

13, ‘‘Airport Design.’’ The new 

standards address hazards, PLA size and 

location, and recommended markings. 

In consideration of the above, the FAA 

proposes to modify the current version 

of Grant Assurance No.22, ‘‘Economic 

Nondiscrimination,’’ to add new 

paragraph (j) to read as follows: 

C. Sponsor Certification. The sponsor 

hereby assures and certifies, with 

respect to this grant, that: 

22. Economic Nondiscrimination 

j. It will comply with Parachute Landing 

Area (PLA) Standards set forth to 150–5300 

series AC ‘‘Airport Design,’’ which addresses 

hazards, PLA size and location, and 

recommended markings. 

The PLA Standards will take effect at 

the time airports enter into new grant 

agreements with the FAA subsequent to 

the effective date of Change 19 to AC 

No. 150/5300–13, ‘‘Airport Design.’’ For 

an airport that has an existing parachute 

landing area, the airport will have 60 

months from the date it enters into the 

grant agreement to come into 

compliance with the new PLA 

standards. If an airport is not able to 

modify its existing parachute landing 

area to comply within this timeframe, 

the airport must provide the FAA with 

a plan prior to the end of the 60 months. 

This plan must be submitted to the local 

FAA Airports District Office or Regional 

Airports Office (where applicable) for 

approval, and must include a timetable 

describing how the airport will meet the 

PLA Standards within a timeframe 

acceptable to the Administrator. For 

other airports, the Standards are 

recommended. 

It should be noted that in Change 19, 

the FAA has modified paragraph 3, 

‘‘Application,’’ to reflect that the 

standards in the Airport Design AC may 

be used by certificated airports as a 

means of satisfying specific 

requirements in subparts C and D of 14 

CFR part 139. This text was 

inadvertently removed from the prior 

version of the Airport Design AC. The 

next text reads, 

The standards and recommendations 

contained in this AC may be used by 

certificated airports to satisfy specific 

requirements of Federal Aviation 

Regulations (FAR) part 139, 

‘‘Certification of Airports,’’ subparts C 

(Airport Certification Manual) and D 

(Operations). 

Issued in Washington, DC, on June 22, 

2012. 

Michael J. O’Donnell, 

Director, Office of Airport Safety and 

Standards. 

[FR Doc. 2012–15912 Filed 6–29–12; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

18 CFR Part 35 

Revisions to Electric Quarterly Report 

Filing Process 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, DOE. 

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission (Commission) 

proposes to amend a Rule which 

governs the filing of Electric Quarterly 

Reports (EQRs), to change the process 

for filing EQRs. Currently, EQRs are 

filed by downloading EQR software 

from the Commission’s Web site, 

installing it on the filer’s Microsoft 

Windows-based computer, entering the 

EQR data into the software, and then 

submitting the EQR data to the 

Commission. The EQR software is 

designed in Microsoft Visual FoxPro. 

Technological changes and limitations 

will render the current filing process 

outmoded, ineffective, and 

unsustainable. Microsoft has 

discontinued Visual FoxPro and will 

not support the software after 2015. 

Visual FoxPro also is constrained by 

data size limitations that will soon 

restrict the Commission’s ability to add 

data fields in the EQR. Therefore, the 

Commission proposes a new filing 

system that will provide EQR filers with 

two new options for filing EQRs. 

One option would allow an EQR filer 

to use a web interface on the 

Commission’s Web site to file its EQR. 

This web interface would look and 

operate like the current EQR software 

that uses Visual FoxPro. However, an 

EQR filer would not need to download 

and install software from the 

Commission’s Web site to file because 

the data would be filed directly with the 

Commission through the web interface. 

The other option would allow an EQR 

filer to file its EQR in an Extensible 

Mark-Up Language (XML) format via the 

Commission’s Web site. By proposing a 

process with two options for filing 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS