This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

12414 

Vol. 79, No. 43 

Wednesday, March 5, 2014 

1See Complementary Activities, Merchant 

Banking Activities, and Other Activities of 

Financial Holding Companies related to Physical 

Commodities, 79 FR 3329 (Jan. 21, 2014). 2 Id. 

3See Comment letter to the Board from the 

American Bankers Association et al. (Feb. 7, 2014). 

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 

12 CFR Chapter II 

[Docket No. R–1479 RIN 7100–AE–10] 

Complementary Activities, Merchant 

Banking Activities, and Other Activities 

of Financial Holding Companies 

Related to Physical Commodities 

AGENCY: Board of Governors of the 

Federal Reserve System. 

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking; extension of comment 

period. 

SUMMARY: On January 21, 2014, the 

Board of Governors of the Federal 

Reserve System (Board) published in the 

Federal Register an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking inviting public 

comment on various issues related to 

physical commodity activities 

conducted by financial holding 

companies and the restrictions imposed 

on these activities to ensure they are 

conducted in a safe and sound manner 

and consistent with applicable law. 

Due to the range and complexity of 

the issues addressed in the advance 

notice of proposed rulemaking, the 

Board has determined that an extension 

of the public comment period until 

April 16, 2014, is appropriate. This 

action will allow interested persons 

additional time to analyze the notice 

and prepare their comments. 

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule 

must be received on or before April 16, 

2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the methods identified in the 

advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking.1 Please submit your 

comments using only one method. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Laurie Schaffer, Associate General 

Counsel, (202) 452–2272, Michael 

Waldron, Special Counsel, (202) 452– 

2798; Benjamin McDonough, Senior 

Counsel, (202) 452–2036, April Snyder, 

Senior Counsel, (202) 452–3099, or Will 

Giles, Counsel, (202) 452–3351, Legal 

Division; or Mark Van Der Weide, 

Deputy Director, (202) 452–2263, 

Timothy Clark, Senior Associate 

Director, (202) 452–5264, Todd 

Vermilyea, Senior Associate Director, 

(202) 912–4310, or Robert Brooks, 

Senior Supervisory Financial Analyst, 

(202) 452–3103, Division of Banking 

Supervision and Regulation. Board of 

Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System, 20th and C Streets, NW., 

Washington, DC 20551. 

Telecommunications Device for the Deaf 

(TDD) users may contact (202–263– 

4869). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

January 21, 2014, the Board published 

in the Federal Register (79 FR 3329) an 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking 

(ANPR) inviting public comment on 

various issues related to physical 

commodity activities conducted by 

financial holding companies (FHCs) and 

the restrictions imposed on these 

activities to ensure they are conducted 

in a safe and sound manner and 

consistent with applicable law. The 

ANPR is designed to elicit views from 

the public on the risks and benefits of 

allowing FHCs to conduct physical 

commodity activities under the various 

provisions of the Bank Holding 

Company Act, whether risks to the 

safety and soundness of a FHC and its 

affiliated insured depository institutions 

and to the financial system warrant 

Board action to impose limitations on 

the scope of authorized activities and/or 

the manner in which those activities are 

conducted, and if so, what those limits 

should be. Once the Board has 

completed its review of this 

information, it will consider what 

further actions, including a rulemaking, 

are warranted. 

In recognition of the complexities of 

the issues addressed and the variety of 

considerations involved with possible 

further actions, the Board requested that 

commenters respond to numerous 

questions. The ANPR stated that the 

public comment period would close on 

March 17, 2014.2

The Board has received a request from 

the public for an extension of the 

comment period to allow for additional 

time for comments related to the 

provisions of the proposed rule.3 The 

Board believes that the additional 

period for comment will facilitate 

public comment on the questions posed 

by the Board in the ANPR. Therefore, 

the Board is extending the end of the 

comment period for the ANPR from 

March 17, 2014, to April 16, 2014. 

By order of the Board of Governors of the 

Federal Reserve System, acting through the 

Secretary of the Board under delegated 

authority, February 27, 2014. 

Robert deV. Frierson, 

Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. 2014–04742 Filed 3–3–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6210–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0828; Directorate 

Identifier 2012–NM–036–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM); 

reopening of comment period. 

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier 

proposed airworthiness directive (AD) 

for certain Airbus Model A330–200 and 

–300 series airplanes; and Model A340– 

200 and –300 series airplanes. The 

NPRM proposed to supersede AD 2009– 

15–17 to continue to require inspections 

for damage to the protective treatments 

or any corrosion of all main landing gear 

(MLG) bogie beams, application of 

protective treatments, and corrective 

action if necessary. The NPRM also 

proposed to require modification of the 

MLG bogie beams, which would 

terminate the repetitive inspections for 

any modified bogie beam. The NPRM 

also proposed to allow optional 

methods of compliance for certain 

actions. The NPRM was prompted by 

reports of thin paint coats and paint 

degradation on enhanced MLG bogie 

beams, as well as reports that some 

airplanes have been inspected too early 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 43 / Wednesday, March 5, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12415 

and not re-inspected as needed. This 

action revises the NPRM by revising the 

compliance times and adding a one-time 

inspection for airplanes that have been 

inspected too early. We are proposing 

this supplemental NPRM (SNPRM) to 

detect and correct damage or corrosion 

of the MLG bogie beams, which could 

cause a runway excursion event, bogie 

beam detachment from the airplane, or 

MLG collapse, which could result in 

damage to the airplane and injury to the 

occupants. Since these actions impose 

an additional burden over that proposed 

in the NPRM, we are reopening the 

comment period to allow the public the 

chance to comment on these proposed 

changes. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this SNPRM by April 21, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

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

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (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 Airbus service information 

identified in this proposed 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 airworthiness.A330–A340@

airbus.com; Internet http://

www.airbus.com. For Messier-Dowty 

service information identified in this 

proposed AD, contact Messier-Dowty: 

Messier Services Americas, Customer 

Support Center, 45360 Severn Way, 

Sterling, VA 20166–8910; telephone 

703–450–8233; fax 703–404–1621; 

Internet http://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. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Management Facility between 9 

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

Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD 

docket contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket 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: 

Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; telephone 425–227–1138; 

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–2013–0828; Directorate Identifier 

2012–NM–036–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 

We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 by adding an AD that would 

apply to certain Airbus Model A330– 

200 and –300 series airplanes; and 

Model A340–200 and –300 series 

airplanes. The NPRM was published in 

the Federal Register on September 25, 

2013 (78 FR 58978). The NPRM 

proposed to supersede AD 2009–15–17, 

Amendment 39–15980 (74 FR 37523, 

July 29, 2009), to require actions 

intended to address the unsafe 

condition for the specified products. 

Actions Since Previous NPRM Was 

Issued 

Since we issued the NPRM (78 FR 

58978, September 25, 2013), we have 

received reports that some airplanes 

were initially inspected too early (before 

4.5 years since the airplane’s first flight 

with a bogie beam installed or since the 

bogie was installed after overhaul) and 

have not been re-inspected. The 

European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2013–0267, 

dated November 6, 2013 (referred to 

after this as the Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the 

MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition 

for the specified products. The MCAI 

states: 

The operator of an A330 aeroplane (which 

has a common bogie beam with the A340) 

reported a fracture of the Right Hand (RH) 

main landing gear (MLG) bogie beam, which 

occurred while turning during low speed taxi 

maneuvers. The bogie fractured aft of the 

pivot point and remained attached to the 

sliding tube by the brake torque reaction 

rods. After this RH bogie failure, the 

aeroplane continued for approximately 40 

meters on the forks of the sliding member 

before coming to rest on the taxiway. 

The investigations revealed that this event 

was due to corrosion pitting occurring on the 

bore of the bogie beam. 

This condition, if not detected and 

corrected, could lead to a runway excursion 

event or to detachment of the bogie from the 

aeroplane, or to MLG collapse, possibly 

resulting in damage to the aeroplane and 

injury to the occupants. 

To enable early detection and repair of 

corrosion of the internal surfaces, EASA 

issued AD 2007–0314 [http://

ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2007-0314R1] to 

require a one-time inspection of all MLG 

bogie beams, except Enhanced MLG bogie 

beams, and the reporting of the results to 

Airbus. EASA AD 2007–0314 was revised 

and later superseded by EASA AD 2008– 

0093 [http://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2008- 

0093], reducing the inspection threshold 

period. 

The results of subsequent investigations 

showed thin paint coats and paint 

degradation, confirmed as well on Enhanced 

MLG bogie beams. To address this additional 

concern, EASA issued AD 2011–0141 [http:// 

ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2011-0141] [which was 

not mandated by the FAA], retaining the 

requirements of EASA AD 2008–0093, which 

was superseded, to require a one-time visual 

inspection of all MLG bogie beams, including 

a visual examination of the internal diameter 

for corrosion or damage to protective 

treatments of the bogie beam and 

measurement of the paint thickness on the 

internal bore, accomplishment of the 

applicable corrective actions and a 

modification of the MLG bogie beam to 

improve the coat paint application method, 

and application of corrosion protection. 

Prompted by in-service requests, EASA 

issued EASA AD 2012–0015 [http://

ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2012-0015] 

[corresponds with FAA NPRM (78 FR 58978, 

September 25, 2013)] retaining the 

requirements of EASA AD 2011–0141, which 

was superseded, and introducing repetitive 

inspections of the MLG bogie beams [for 

damage to protective treatments or 

corrosion], which allows extension of the 

compliance time for the MLG bogie beam 

modification [for improved protection from 

corrosion] from 15 years to 21 years. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
12416 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 43 / Wednesday, March 5, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

Modification of a MLG bogie beam 

constitutes terminating action for the 

repetitive inspections for that MLG bogie 

beam. 

Reports on inspection results provided to 

Airbus show that some aeroplanes were 

initially inspected too early (before 4.5 years 

since aeroplane first flight with bogie beam 

installed/installed after overhaul) and have 

not been re-inspected as required. 

For the reasons described above, this 

[EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA 

AD 2012–0015, which is superseded, and 

redefines the inspection periodicity. This 

[EASA] AD also introduces a specific onetime inspection for aeroplanes that have been 

inspected too early. 

This proposed AD also provides 

optional methods of compliance for 

inspections for corrosion and damage to 

the protective treatment, repairs, and 

modification, of both MLG bogie beams. 

You may examine the MCAI in the AD 

docket on the Internet at http://

regulations.gov by searching and 

locating it in Docket No. FAA–2013– 

0828. 

Relevant Service Information 

Airbus has issued the following 

service bulletins. The actions described 

in this service information are intended 

to correct the unsafe condition 

identified in the MCAI. 

• Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 

A330–32–3225, Revision 02, dated 

October 26, 2012. 

• Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 

A330–32–3237 (for Model A330 series 

airplanes), Revision 01, dated October 

14, 2011. 

• Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 

A340–32–4268, Revision 03, dated 

January 14, 2013. 

• Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 

A340–32–4279 (for Model A340 series 

airplanes), Revision 01, dated October 

14, 2011. 

Messier Dowty has issued the 

following service bulletins. The actions 

described in this service information are 

intended to correct the unsafe condition 

identified in the MCAI. 

• Messier Dowty Service Bulletin 

A33/34–32–271, Revision 1, dated 

November 16, 2007. 

• Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin 

A33/34–32–278, including Appendices 

A and B, Revision 1, dated August 24, 

2011. 

• Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin 

A33/34–32–283, including Appendix A, 

Revision 1, dated July 10, 2012. 

• Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin 

A33/34–32–284, including Appendix A, 

Revision 1, dated July 10, 2012. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

comment on the NPRM (78 FR 58978, 

September 25, 2013). The following 

presents the comments received on the 

NPRM and the FAA’s response to each 

comment. 

Request To Replace Modification 58896 

With Modification 54500 

Delta Air Lines Inc. and US Airways 

requested that paragraph (h) of the 

NPRM (78 FR 58978, September 25, 

2013) be changed to replace 

Modification 58896 with Modification 

54500. The commenters stated that 

paragraph (h) of the NPRM specifies 

doing repetitive inspections on 

airplanes having all serial numbers, 

except airplanes on which Modification 

58896 has been embodied in 

production; however, paragraph (g) of 

the NPRM and AD 2009–15–17, 

Amendment 39–15980 (74 FR 37523, 

July 29, 2009) are not applicable to 

airplanes with Modification 54500 

embodied in production. 

We agree with the commenters for the 

reasons provided. We have revised the 

affected airplanes specified in paragraph 

(g) of this SNPRM (paragraph (h) of the 

NPRM (78 FR 58978, September 25, 

2013)). Paragraph (g) of this SNPRM 

affects airplanes and MLGs having one 

of the configurations specified below: 

• Airbus Modification 54500 not 

embodied in production. 

• Airbus Service Bulletin A330–32– 

3212; or A340–32–4256 not embodied 

in service. 

• Airbus Service Bulletin A330–32– 

3222; or A340–32–4265 embodied in 

service. 

Request To Require Reporting 

Requirements Only For Positive 

Findings 

Delta Air Lines Inc. (Delta) requested 

that reporting be mandated only for 

positive findings, specifically for the 

findings beyond the applicable 

component maintenance manual repair 

limits. 

We disagree with the request to report 

only positive findings. All findings 

(positive and negative) must be reported 

to provide the manufacturer with 

information regarding the extent of the 

problem in the affected fleet, and to 

help determine whether a design change 

of the affected airplane part is needed. 

No change has been made to this 

SNPRM in this regard. 

Request To Extend the Compliance 

Time for Reporting Requirements 

Delta requested that we extend the 

compliance time for reporting from 90 

days to 180 days to allow findings to be 

batched together for a grouped report, 

and to preclude undue compliance 

issues related to late reporting. 

We do not agree with the request to 

extend the compliance time for 

reporting. Prompt reporting will ensure 

the timely update of the operator’s 

maintenance documentation. However, 

under the provisions of paragraph (q) of 

this SNPRM, we will consider requests 

for approval of an extension of the 

compliance time if sufficient data are 

submitted to substantiate that the new 

compliance time would provide an 

acceptable level of safety. No change has 

been made to this SNPRM in this regard. 

Request To Allow Use of Reporting 

Sheet in Messier-Dowty Service 

Bulletin A33/34–32–278, dated 

February 17, 2010 

Delta stated that the NPRM (78 FR 

58978, September 25, 2013) specifies 

using the reporting sheet in Airbus 

Service Bulletin A330–32–3237, dated 

January 18, 2011; however, this service 

bulletin does not have a reporting sheet 

included. Delta requested that we allow 

the use of the reporting sheet included 

in Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin A33/ 

34–32–278, dated February 17, 2010 

instead. 

We disagree with the request. Airbus 

Service Bulletin A330–32–3237, 

Revision 01, dated October 14, 2011, 

includes a reporting sheet that is 

required by this AD. No change has 

been made to this SNPRM in this regard. 

Other Changes to This SNPRM 

We have revised the affected airplanes 

for paragraph (k) of this SNPRM 

(paragraph (i) in the NPRM (78 FR 

58978, September 25, 2013)). All 

airplanes are affected by the actions 

specified by paragraph (k) of this 

SNPRM. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This SNPRM 

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. 

Certain changes described above 

expand the scope of the NPRM (78 FR 

58978, September 25, 2013). As a result, 

we have determined that it is necessary 

to reopen the comment period to 

provide additional opportunity for the 

public to comment on this SNPRM. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 43 / Wednesday, March 5, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12417 

Differences Between This SNPRM and 

the MCAI or Service Information 

This SNPRM differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: 

The MCAI specifies repair and 

corrective actions in accordance with 

Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin 

A330–32–3225, Revision 02, dated 

October 26, 2012; or A340–32–4268, 

Revision 03, dated January 14, 2013. 

However, Airbus Mandatory Service 

Bulletins A330–32–3225, Revision 02, 

dated October 26, 2012; and A340–32– 

4268, Revision 03, dated January 14, 

2013; do not describe those actions. 

Paragraph (j)(2) of this SNPRM specifies 

repair and corrective actions in 

accordance with Messier-Dowty Service 

Bulletin A33/34–32–272, Revision 1, 

including Appendices A, B, C, and D, 

dated September 22, 2008. In addition, 

we refer to Messier-Dowty Service 

Bulletin A33/34–32–272, Revision 1, 

including Appendices A, B, C, and D, 

dated September 22, 2008, in paragraph 

(j)(1) of this AD for applying the 

protective treatments. This has been 

coordinated with Airbus. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this SNPRM affects 

51 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it would take up 

to 34 work-hours per product to comply 

with the basic requirements of this 

SNPRM. The average labor rate is $85 

per work-hour. Required parts would 

cost about $2,890 per product. Based on 

these figures, we estimate the cost of 

this SNPRM on U.S. operators to be 

$147,390, or $2,890 per product. 

In addition, we estimate that the 

optional modification would take about 

10 work-hours and require parts costing 

$0, for a cost of $850 per product. We 

have no way of determining the number 

of aircraft that might need the corrective 

action. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

A federal agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, nor shall a person be subject 

to penalty for failure to comply with a 

collection of information subject to the 

requirements of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act unless that collection of 

information displays a current valid 

OMB control number. The control 

number for the collection of information 

required by this AD is 2120–0056. The 

paperwork cost associated with this AD 

has been detailed in the Costs of 

Compliance section of this document 

and includes time for reviewing 

instructions, as well as completing and 

reviewing the collection of information. 

Therefore, all reporting associated with 

this AD is mandatory. Comments 

concerning the accuracy of this burden 

and suggestions for reducing the burden 

should be directed to the FAA at 800 

Independence Ave. SW., Washington, 

DC 20591, ATTN: Information 

Collection Clearance Officer, AES–200. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this proposed regulation: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

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

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 

3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in 

Alaska; and 

4. Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. Amend § 39.13 by removing 

Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2009–15– 

17, Amendment 39–15980 (74 FR 

37523, July 29, 2009), and adding the 

following new AD: 

Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2013–0828; 

Directorate Identifier 2012–NM–036–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by April 21, 

2014. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Airbus Model A330– 

201, –202, –203, –223, –223F, –243, –243F, 

–301, –302, –303, –321, –322, –323, –341, 

–342, and –343 airplanes; and Model A340– 

211, –212, –213, –311, –312, and –313 

airplanes; certificated in any category; all 

manufacturer serial numbers, except those 

airplanes on which Airbus Modification 

58896 has been embodied in production. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 32, Landing gear. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by reports of thin 

paint coats and paint degradation on 

enhanced main landing gear (MLG) bogie 

beams. We are issuing this AD to detect and 

correct damage or corrosion of the MLG bogie 

beams, which could cause a runway 

excursion event, bogie beam detachment 

from the airplane, or MLG collapse, which 

could result in damage to the airplane and 

injury to the occupants. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Repetitive Inspections for Certain 

Airplane Configurations 

For airplanes and MLGs having one of the 

configurations specified in paragraphs (g)(1), 

(g)(2), or (g)(3) of this AD: After 54 months 

at the earliest, but no later than 72 months, 

since the left-hand (LH) or right-hand (RH) 

MLG bogie beam’s first flight on an airplane, 

or since its first flight on an airplane after 

overhaul, as applicable: Clean the internal 

bore and do a detailed inspection for 

corrosion and damage to the protective 

treatments, and measure the paint thickness 

on the internal bore of the internal surfaces 

of the LH and RH MLG bogie beams, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A330– 

32–3225, Revision 02, dated October 26, 

2012; or Airbus Service Bulletin A340–32– 

4268, Revision 03, dated January 14, 2013; as 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
12418 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 43 / Wednesday, March 5, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

applicable. Repeat the inspections thereafter 

at intervals of no less than 54 months, but no 

more than 72 months after the most recent 

inspection. During overhaul of a MLG bogie 

beam, any corrosion will be removed, which 

means that the first inspection after overhaul 

of that bogie beam, as required by this 

paragraph, is between 54 months and 72 

months after that overhaul. 

(1) Airbus Modification 54500 not 

embodied in production. 

(2) Airbus Service Bulletin A330–32–3212; 

or A340–32–4256 not embodied in service. 

(3) Airbus Service Bulletin A330–32–3222; 

or A340–32–4265 embodied in service. 

(h) Optional Methods of Compliance for 

Certain Airplane Configurations 

Inspections and corrective actions on both 

MLG bogie beams done in accordance with 

the instructions of Messier-Dowty Service 

Bulletin A33/34–32–271, Revision 1, dated 

November 16, 2007; or A33/34–32–272, 

Revision 1, dated September 22, 2008, as 

applicable, are acceptable methods of 

compliance for the requirements of paragraph 

(g) of this AD, provided each inspection is 

accomplished between 54 months and 72 

months since the first flight of the affected 

MLG bogie beam on an airplane, or since its 

first flight after its last overhaul, as 

applicable. 

(i) One-Time Specific Inspection for Certain 

Airplane Configurations 

For airplanes on which the modification 

specified in paragraph (k) or (m)(2) of this 

AD, or the inspection specified in paragraph 

(m)(1) of this AD, has not been done as of the 

effective date of this AD, and on which a LH 

or RH MLG bogie beam has been inspected 

earlier than 4.5 years since first flight of the 

affected MLG bogie beam, or since the bogie 

beam’s first flight after the bogie beam’s last 

overhaul, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Service Bulletin A330–32–3225 or A340–32– 

4268: At the applicable time specified in 

paragraph (i)(1), (i)(2), or (i)(3) of this AD, 

clean the internal bore and do a detailed 

inspection of internal surfaces of the LH and 

RH MLG bogie beams to detect corrosion, 

damage to the protective treatments, and to 

measure the paint thickness on the internal 

bore, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Service Bulletin A330–32–3225, Revision 02, 

dated October 26, 2012; or Airbus Service 

Bulletin A340–32–4268, Revision 03, dated 

January 14, 2013; as applicable. 

(1) For MLG bogie beams having the 

configurations specified in both paragraphs 

(i)(1)(i) and (i)(1)(ii) of this AD: Do the onetime specific inspection specified in 

paragraph (i) of this AD within 9 months 

after the effective date of this AD. 

(i) MLG bogie beams having between 4.5 

years and 10 years since first flight on an 

airplane, or since first flight on an airplane 

since overhaul. 

(ii) MLG bogie beam on which the first 

inspection was done after 4 years and 3 

months and before 4 years and 6 months 

since first flight of the MLG bogie beam, or 

since the bogie beam’s first flight after last 

overhaul, as applicable. 

(2) For MLG bogie beams having the 

configurations specified in both paragraphs 

(i)(2)(i) and (i)(2)(ii) of this AD: Do the onetime specific inspection specified in 

paragraph (i) of this AD within 3 months 

after the effective date of this AD. 

(i) MLG bogie beams having between 4.5 

and 10 years since first flight on an airplane, 

or since first flight on an airplane since 

overhaul. 

(ii) MLG bogie beams on which the first 

inspection was done after 3 years and 9 

months and before 4 years and 3 months 

inclusive since first flight of the MLG bogie 

beam, or since the bogie beam’s first flight 

after the bogie beam’s last overhaul, as 

applicable. 

(3) For bogie beams having the 

configurations specified in both paragraphs 

(i)(3)(i) and (i)(3)(ii) of this AD: Do the onetime specific inspection specified in 

paragraph (i) of this AD within 3 months 

after the effective date of this AD. 

(i) Bogie beams having between 4.5 and 8 

years since first flight on an airplane or since 

first flight on an airplane since overhaul. 

(ii) Bogie beams on which the first 

inspection was done before 4 years and 3 

months since first flight of the MLG bogie 

beam, or since the bogie beam’s first flight 

after the bogie beam’s last overhaul. 

(4) For bogie beams having the 

configurations specified in both paragraphs 

(i)(4)(i) and (i)(4)(ii) of this AD: Do the onetime specific inspection specified in 

paragraph (i) of this AD within 1 month after 

the effective date of this AD. 

(i) Bogie beams having between 8 and 10 

years since first flight on an airplane, or since 

first flight on an airplane since overhaul. 

(ii) Bogie beams on which the first 

inspection was done before 3 years and 9 

months since first flight of the MLG bogie 

beam, or since the bogie beam’s first flight 

after the bogie beam’s last overhaul, and the 

bogie beam has accumulated more than 8 

years as of the effective date of this AD. 

(5) After accomplishment of the one-time 

specific inspection specified in paragraph (i) 

of this AD, repeat the actions specified in 

paragraph (g) of this AD at the times 

specified in paragraph (g) of this AD. 

(j) Corrective Actions 

(1) If, during any inspection required by 

paragraph (g) or (i) of this AD, no damage or 

corrosion is found, before further flight, 

apply the protective treatments to the bogie 

beam, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of MessierDowty Service Bulletin A33/34–32–272, 

Revision 1, including Appendices A, B, C, 

and D, dated September 22, 2008. 

(2) If, during any inspection required by 

paragraph (g) or (i) of this AD, damage or 

corrosion is found, before further flight, 

repair and apply the protective treatments to 

the bogie beam, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of MessierDowty Service Bulletin A33/34–32–272, 

Revision 1, including Appendices A, B, C, 

and D, dated September 22, 2008. 

(k) Inspection and Corrective Actions for All 

Airplanes 

For all airplanes: Before the accumulation 

of 252 months on a MLG bogie beam, or 

within 90 days after the effective date of this 

AD, whichever occurs later, do the actions 

specified in paragraphs (k)(1) and (k)(2) of 

this AD concurrently and in sequence. 

(1) Do a detailed inspection for damage and 

corrosion of the internal bores of the LH and 

RH MLG bogie beam, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Mandatory Service Bulletin A330–32–3237; 

or A340–32–4279; both Revision 01, both 

dated October 14, 2011, as applicable. If any 

damage or corrosion is found, before further 

flight, repair, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Mandatory Service Bulletin A330–32–3237; 

or A340–32–4279; both Revision 01, both 

dated October 14, 2011, as applicable. 

(2) Modify and re-identify, as applicable, 

the LH and RH MLG bogie beams, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Mandatory Service 

Bulletin A330–32–3237; or A340–32–4279; 

both Revision 01, both dated October 14, 

2011, as applicable. 

(3) The inspection requirements of 

paragraph (k)(1) of this AD, and the 

modification requirements only of paragraph 

(k)(2) of this AD do not apply to any MLG 

bogie beam with a serial number is listed in 

Appendix A of Messier-Dowty Service 

Bulletin A33/34–32–283; or A33/34–32–284; 

both Revision 1, both dated July 10, 2012, as 

applicable. 

(l) Optional Terminating Action 

Modification of both MLG bogie beams 

done in accordance with paragraph (k) of this 

AD, or as specified in paragraphs (n)(1) and 

(n)(2) of this AD, terminates the repetitive 

inspections required by paragraph (g) of this 

AD for that modified MLG bogie beam. 

(m) Optional Methods of Compliance 

(1) Inspections for corrosion and damage to 

the protective treatment of both bogie beams, 

and repairs, done in accordance with 

Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin A33/34–32– 

278, including appendices A and B, Revision 

1, dated August 24, 2011, are acceptable 

methods of compliance with the 

requirements of paragraph (k)(1) of this AD. 

(2) Modification of both MLG bogie beams, 

done in accordance with Messier-Dowty 

Service Bulletins A33/34–32–283; and A33/ 

34–32–284; both including Appendix A, both 

Revision 1, both dated July 10, 2012, as 

applicable, is an acceptable method of 

compliance with the requirements of 

paragraph (k)(2) of this AD. 

(n) Parts Installation Limitations 

(1) After modification of an airplane as 

required by paragraph (k) of this AD, or as 

specified in paragraphs (m)(1) and (m)(2) of 

this AD, do not install a MLG bogie beam 

unless it is in compliance with the 

requirements of paragraph (n)(1)(i), (n)(1)(ii), 

or (n)(1)(iii) of this AD. 

(i) That MLG bogie beam has been 

modified and re-identified in accordance 

with the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Airbus Mandatory Service Bulletin A330–32– 

3237; or A340–32–4279; both Revision 01, 

both dated October 14, 2011, as applicable. 

(ii) That MLG bogie beam has been 

inspected and corrected in accordance with 

the Accomplishment Instructions of MessierVerDate Mar<15>2010 16:16 Mar 04, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM 05MRP1

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 43 / Wednesday, March 5, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12419 

Dowty Service Bulletin A33/34–32–278 

Revision 1, dated August 24, 2011; and 

modified in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of MessierDowty Service Bulletin A33/34–32–283; or 

A33/34–32–284; both Revision 1, both dated 

July 10, 2012. 

(iii) That MLG bogie beam has a serial 

number listed in Appendix A of Messier 

Dowty Service Bulletin A33/34–32–283 or 

A33/34–32–284, both Revision 1, both dated 

July 10, 2012. 

(2) As of the effective date of this AD, 

except as specified in paragraph (n)(1) of this 

AD, installation of a MLG bogie beam on an 

airplane is allowed, provided that following 

the installation it is inspected and corrected 

in accordance with the requirements of this 

AD. 

(o) Reporting Requirement 

(1) Submit a report of the findings (both 

positive and negative) of each inspection 

required by paragraph (g) or (k) of this AD, 

as applicable, to Airbus, Customer Service 

Directorate, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 

31707 Blagnac Cedex, France, using the 

applicable reporting sheet in Airbus Service 

Bulletin A330–32–3237; or A340–32–4279; 

both dated January 18, 2011, at the applicable 

time specified in paragraph (o)(1)(i) or 

(o)(1)(ii) of this AD. 

(i) If the inspection was done on or after 

the effective date of this AD: Submit the 

report within 90 days after the inspection. 

(ii) If the inspection was done before the 

effective date of this AD: Submit the report 

within 90 days after the effective date of this 

AD. 

(2) Submit a report of the findings (both 

positive and negative) of the inspection 

required by paragraph (i) of this AD to 

Airbus, Customer Service Directorate, 1 Rond 

Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac 

Cedex, France, using the applicable reporting 

sheet in Airbus Service Bulletin A330–32– 

3237; or A340–32–4279; both dated January 

18, 2011, at the applicable time specified in 

paragraph (o)(2)(i) or (o)(2)(ii) of this AD. 

(i) If the inspection was done on or after 

the effective date of this AD: Submit the 

report within 30 days after the inspection. 

(ii) If the inspection was done before the 

effective date of this AD: Submit the report 

within 30 days after the effective date of this 

AD. 

(p) Credit for Previous Actions 

(1) This paragraph provides credit for the 

corresponding inspections and corrective 

actions done on a LH or RH MLG bogie beam 

required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those 

actions were performed before the effective 

date of this AD using Airbus Mandatory 

Service Bulletin A330–32–3225, dated 

November 21, 2007; or Revision 01, dated 

October 30, 2008; provided these inspections 

and corrective actions were accomplished 

between 54 months and 72 months since first 

flight of the affected MLG bogie beam on an 

airplane, or since its first flight after its last 

overhaul, as applicable. Airbus Mandatory 

Service Bulletin A330–32–3225, dated 

November 21, 2007 is not incorporated by 

reference in this AD. Airbus Mandatory 

Service Bulletin A330–32–3225, Revision 01, 

dated October 30, 2008 was incorporated by 

reference in AD 2009–15–07, Amendment 

39–15980 (74 FR 37523, July 29, 2009). 

(2) This paragraph provides credit for the 

corresponding inspections and corrective 

actions done on a LH or RH MLG bogie beam 

required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those 

actions were performed before the effective 

date of this AD using Airbus Mandatory 

Service Bulletin A340–32–4268, dated 

November 21, 2007; Revision 01, dated 

October 30, 2008; or Revision 02, dated 

October 26, 2012, provided these inspections 

and corrective actions were accomplished 

between 54 months and 72 months since first 

flight of the affected MLG bogie beam on an 

airplane, or since its first flight after its last 

overhaul, as applicable. Airbus Mandatory 

Service Bulletin A340–32–4268, dated 

November 21, 2007; and Revision 02, dated 

October 26, 2012; are not incorporated by 

reference in this AD. Airbus Mandatory 

Service Bulletin A340–32–4268, Revision 01, 

dated October 30, 2008, was incorporated by 

reference in AD 2009–15–17, Amendment 

39–15980 (74 FR 37523, July 29, 2009). 

(3) This paragraph provides credit for the 

corresponding actions required by paragraph 

(h) of this AD, if those actions were 

performed before the effective date of this AD 

using Messier Dowty Service Bulletin A33/

34–32–271, dated September 13, 2007, which 

is not incorporated by reference in this AD. 

(4) This paragraph provides credit for the 

corresponding actions required by 

paragraphs (h) and (j) of this AD, if those 

actions were performed before the effective 

date of this AD using Messier-Dowty Service 

Bulletin A33/34–32–272, including 

Appendices A, B, C, and D, dated November 

16, 2007, which is not incorporated by 

reference in this AD. 

(5) This paragraph provides credit for the 

corresponding actions required by 

paragraphs (k), (n)(1)(i), and (o) of this AD, 

if those actions were performed before the 

effective date of this AD using Airbus 

Mandatory Service Bulletin A330–32–3237, 

dated January 18, 2011, which is not 

incorporated by reference in this AD. 

(6) This paragraph provides credit for the 

corresponding actions required by 

paragraphs (k), (n)(1)(i), and (o) of this AD, 

if those actions were performed before the 

effective date of this AD using Airbus 

Mandatory Service Bulletin A340–32–4279, 

dated January 18, 2011, which is not 

incorporated by reference in this AD. 

(7) This paragraph provides credit for the 

corresponding actions required by 

paragraphs (k)(3), (m)(2), (n)(1)(ii), and 

(n)(1)(iii) of this AD, if those actions were 

performed before the effective date of this AD 

using Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin A33/

34–32–283, including Appendix A, dated 

May 11, 2010, which is not incorporated by 

reference in this AD. 

(8) This paragraph provides credit for the 

corresponding actions required by 

paragraphs (k)(3), (m)(2), (n)(1)(ii), and 

(n)(1)(iii) of this AD, if those actions were 

performed before the effective date of this AD 

using Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin A33/

34–32–284, including Appendix A, dated 

May 11, 2010, which is not incorporated by 

reference in this AD. 

(9) This paragraph provides credit for the 

corresponding actions required by 

paragraphs (m)(1) and (n)(1)(ii) of this AD, if 

those actions were performed before the 

effective date of this AD using Messier-Dowty 

Service Bulletin A33/34–32–278, including 

Appendices A and B, dated February 17, 

2010, which is not incorporated by reference 

in this AD. 

(q) Other FAA AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, International 

Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, FAA, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your 

request to your principal inspector or local 

Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: 

Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; 

telephone 425–227–1138; 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, use these actions if they are 

FAA-approved. Corrective actions are 

considered FAA-approved if they were 

approved by the State of Design Authority (or 

its delegated agent, or by the Design 

Approval Holder with a State of Design 

Authority’s design organization approval). 

For a repair method to be approved, the 

repair approval must specifically refer to this 

AD. You are required to ensure the product 

is airworthy before it is returned to service. 

(3) Reporting Requirements: A federal 

agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a 

person is not required to respond to, nor 

shall a person be subject to a penalty for 

failure to comply with a collection of 

information subject to the requirements of 

the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that 

collection of information displays a current 

valid OMB Control Number. The OMB 

Control Number for this information 

collection is 2120–0056. Public reporting for 

this collection of information is estimated to 

be approximately 5 minutes per response, 

including the time for reviewing instructions, 

completing and reviewing the collection of 

information. All responses to this collection 

of information are mandatory. Comments 

concerning the accuracy of this burden and 

suggestions for reducing the burden should 

be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence 

Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn: 

Information Collection Clearance Officer, 

AES–200. 

(r) Related Information 

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
12420 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 43 / Wednesday, March 5, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

Airworthiness Directive 2013–0267, dated 

November 6, 2013, for related information. 

You may examine the MCAI in the AD 

docket on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov/

#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2013&-0828-0001. 

(2) 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 airworthiness.A330- 

A340@airbus.com; Internet http://

www.airbus.com. For Messier-Dowty service 

information identified in this AD, contact 

Messier-Dowty: Messier Services Americas, 

Customer Support Center, 45360 Severn 

Way, Sterling, VA 20166–8910; telephone 

703–450–8233; fax 703–404–1621; Internet 

https://techpubs.services/messier-dowty.com. 

You may view this service information at the 

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 

19, 2014. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–04892 Filed 3–4–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0127; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NM–237–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for all The 

Boeing Company Model 767 airplanes. 

This proposed AD was prompted by 

reports of latently failed fuel shutoff 

valves discovered during fuel filter 

replacement. This proposed AD would 

require revising the maintenance or 

inspection program to include new 

airworthiness limitations. We are 

proposing this AD to detect and correct 

latent failures of the fuel shutoff valve 

to the engine, which could result in the 

inability to shut off fuel to the engine 

and, in case of certain engine fires, an 

uncontrollable fire that could lead to 

wing failure. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by April 21, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

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

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 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: Deliver to Mail 

address above 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://

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Management Facility between 9 

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

Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD 

docket contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rebel Nichols, Aerospace Engineer, 

Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; phone: (425) 917–6509; 

fax: (425) 917–6590; email: 

rebel.nichols@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposal. Send your comments to 

an address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 

2014–0127; Directorate Identifier 2013– 

NM–237–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 because of 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 

We have received reports of latently 

failed fuel shutoff valves discovered 

during fuel filter replacement. 

Deficiencies in the valve actuator design 

have resulted in latent failures of the 

fuel shutoff valve to the engine. This 

condition, if not detected and corrected, 

could result in latent failures of the fuel 

shutoff valve to the engine, which could 

result in the inability to shut off fuel to 

the engine and, in case of certain engine 

fires, an uncontrollable fire that could 

lead to wing failure. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this AD because we 

evaluated all the relevant information 

and determined the unsafe condition 

described previously is likely to exist or 

develop in other products of the same 

type design. 

Proposed AD Requirements 

This proposed AD would require 

revising the maintenance or inspection 

program to include new airworthiness 

limitations. The airworthiness 

limitations would allow an operator to 

perform the operational check as either 

a maintenance action or a flightcrew 

action. The flightcrew or maintenance 

crew would monitor the engine spar 

valve lights for a few seconds 

immediately after moving the engine 

fuel condition levers. Flightcrews can 

perform this operational check while 

starting the engine or while shutting 

down the engine. Maintenance crews 

can do this operational check as a 

separate action that does not require 

actual starting of the engine. 

This proposed AD would require 

revisions to certain operator 

maintenance documents to include 

these new inspections. Compliance with 

these inspections is required by section 

91.403(c) of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (14 CFR 91.403(c)). For 

airplanes that have been previously 

modified, altered, or repaired in the 

areas addressed by these inspections, an 

operator might not be able to 

accomplish the inspections described in 

the revisions. In this situation, to 

comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the 

operator must request approval of an 

alternative method of compliance 

(AMOC) in accordance with the 

provisions of paragraph (i) of this 

proposed AD. The request should 

include a description of changes to the 

proposed inspections that will ensure 

the continued operational safety of the 

airplane. 

Interim Action 

We consider this proposed AD 

interim action. The manufacturer is 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS