### 52593 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules

(ii) Operational costs. Costs incurred for the operation of an IS shall be identified and assigned by the State agency to funding sources in accordance with the approved cost allocation plan required by § 277.9 (administrative cost principles).

(iii) Service agreement costs. States that operate a central data processing facility shall use their approved central service cost allocation plan required by OMB Circular A–87 (2 CFR part 225) to identify and assign costs incurred under service agreements with the State agency. The State agency shall then distribute these costs to funding sources in accordance with paragraphs (j)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section.

(3) Capital expenditures. The State agency shall charge the costs of IT equipment having unit acquisition costs or total aggregate costs, at the time of acquisition, of more than $25,000 by means of depreciation or use allowance, unless a waiver is specifically granted by FNS. If the equipment acquisition is part of an APD that is subject to the prior approval requirements of paragraph (c)(2) of this section, the State agency may submit the waiver request as part of the APD.

(4) Claiming costs. Prior to claiming funding under this section the State agency shall have complied with the requirements for obtaining approval and prior approval of paragraph (c) of this

section.

(5) Budget authority. FNS approval of requests for funding shall provide notification to the State agency of the budget authority and dollar limitations under which such funding may be claimed. FNS shall provide this amount as a total authorization for such funding which may not be exceeded unless amended by FNS. FNS’s determination
of the amount of this authorization shall be based on the budget submitted by the State agency. Activities not included in the approved budget, as well as continuation of approved activities beyond scheduled deadlines in the approved plan, shall require FNS approval of an As Needed APD Update as prescribed in paragraphs (c)(3)(i)(D) and (d)(4) of this section, including an amended State budget. Requests to amend the budget authorization approved by FNS shall be submitted to FNS prior to claiming such expenses.

(k) Access to the system and records. Access to the system in all aspects, including but not limited to design, development, and operation, including work performed by any source, and including cost records of contractors and subcontractors, shall be made available by the State agency to FNS or its authorized representatives at intervals as are deemed necessary by FNS, in order to determine whether the conditions for approval are being met and to determine the efficiency, economy and effectiveness of the system. Failure to provide full access to all parts of the system may result in suspension and/or termination of SNAP funds for the costs of the system and its operation.

(l) Ownership rights—(1) Software.

— (i) The State or local government shall include a clause in all procurement instruments which provides that the State or local government shall have all ownership rights in any software or
modifications thereof and associated documentation designed, developed or
installed with FFP under this section.

(ii) FNS reserves a royalty-free, nonexclusive, and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use
and to authorize others to use for Federal Government purposes, such software, modifications, and
documentation.

(iii) Proprietary operating/vendor software packages which meet the definition of COTS at paragraph 277.18(b) shall not be subject to the ownership provisions in paragraphs (l)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section. FFP is not available for development costs for proprietary application software developed specifically for SNAP.

(2) Information Systems equipment. The policies and procedures governing title, use and disposition of property purchased with FFP, which appear at § 277.13 (property) are applicable to IS equipment.

(m) Information system security requirements and review process—(1) Information system security requirements. State and local agencies are responsible for the security of all IS projects under development, and operational systems involved in the
administration of SNAP. State and local agencies shall determine appropriate IS security requirements based on recognized industry standards or compliance with standards governing security of Federal information systems and information processing.

(2) Information security program. State agencies shall implement and maintain a comprehensive IS Security Program for IS and installations
involved in the administration of the SNAP. IS Security Programs shall include the following components:

(i) Determination and implementation of appropriate security requirements as prescribed in paragraph (m)(1) of this

section.

(ii) Establishment of a security plan and, as appropriate, policies and procedures to address the following areas of IS security:

(A) Physical security of IS resources; (B) Equipment security to protect equipment from theft and unauthorized

use;

(C) Software and data security; (D) Telecommunications security; (E) Personnel security; (F) Contingency plans to meet criticalprocessing needs in the event of shortor long-term interruption of service;

(G) Emergency preparedness; and (H) Designation of an Agency IS Security Manager.

(iii) Periodic risk analyses. State agencies shall establish and maintain a program for conducting periodic risk analyses to ensure that appropriate, cost-effective safeguards are incorporated into new and existing systems. In addition, risk analyses shall be performed whenever significant system changes occur.

(3) IS security reviews. State agencies shall review the security of IS involved
in the administration of SNAP on a biennial basis. At a minimum, the
reviews shall include an evaluation of physical and data security, operating procedures, and personnel practices. State agencies shall maintain reports of their biennial IS security reviews, together with pertinent supporting documentation, for Federal review upon request.

(4) Applicability. The security requirements of this section apply to all IS systems used by State and local governments to administer SNAP.

Dated: August 10, 2011. Audrey Rowe,

Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service.

[FR Doc. 2011–20796 Filed 8–22–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3410–30–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2011–0596; Directorate Identifier 2008–SW–37–AD]** 

**RIN 2120–AA64**

**Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter**
**Canada Ltd. Model BO 105 LS A–3 Helicopters** 

**AGENCY :**  Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

**ACTION :**  Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

**SUMMARY :**  This document proposes superseding an existing airworthiness directive (AD) for Eurocopter Canada


### 52594 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Ltd. Model BO 105 LS A–3 helicopters. That AD currently requires establishing
a life limit for certain tension-torsion (TT) straps. This action would require reducing the ‘‘number of flights’’ life limit and providing a time-in-service (TIS) life limit for those TT straps. This proposal is prompted by a recalculation by the manufacturer and subsequent changes to the service information
related to the retirement time of the TT strap initially adopted as a result of an
accident in which a main rotor blade (blade) separated from a Eurocopter Deutschland GMBH (ECD) Model MBB– BK 117 helicopter due to fatigue failure of a TT strap. The same part-numbered TT strap is used on Model BO 105 LS A–3 helicopters. The actions specified by the proposed AD are intended to prevent fatigue failure of a TT strap, loss of a blade, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

**DATES :**  Comments must be received on or before October 24, 2011.

**ADDRESSES :**  Use one of the following
addresses to submit comments on this proposed AD:

• 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 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

You may get the service information identified in this proposed AD from American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75053– 4005, telephone (972) 641–3460, fax (972) 641–3527, or at http:// www.eurocopter.com

.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Sharon Miles, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations and Policy Group, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137, telephone (817) 222–5122, fax (817) 222–5961.

**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 caption

**ADDRESSES** . Include the ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2011–0596; Directorate Identifier 2008–SW–37–AD’’ at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the 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 with FAA personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Using the search function of the docket web site, you can find and read the comments to any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent or signed the comment. You may review the DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78).

Examining the Docket

You may examine the docket that contains the proposed AD, any comments, and other information 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 Docket Operations office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is located in Room W12–140 on the ground floor of the West Building at the street address
stated in the **ADDRESSES** section.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

Discussion

On September 5, 2000, we issued superseding AD 2000–18–13, Amendment 39–11899 (65 FR 55452, September 14, 2000), to establish a life limit for TT strap, part number (P/N) 2604067 (Bendix) or P/N J17322–1 (Lord), of 120 months or 40,000 flights,
whichever occurs first. That action was prompted by an accident in July 1999 in which a blade separated from a Eurocopter Deutschland GMBH (ECD) Model MBB–BK 117 helicopter due to fatigue failure of a TT strap. The same part-numbered TT strap is also used on the Eurocopter Canada Ltd. Model BO 105 LS A–3 helicopters. The requirements of that AD are intended to prevent failure of a TT strap, loss of a blade, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

Since issuing that AD, the
manufacturer has recalculated theretirement time, provided a time-inservice (TIS) limit, and issued revised
service information related to the life limit of the TT strap.

Transport Canada, which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Canadian AD No. CF–2008– 17R1, dated May 26, 2008, to correct an unsafe condition for the Eurocopter Canada Ltd. (formerly MBB Canada Ltd.) Model BO 105–LS–A3 helicopters. Transport Canada advises that ‘‘the tension-torsion strap (TTS) failure on a MBB BK 117 helicopter in July 1999,
initiated a TTS service life
recalculation. This recalculation changed the retirement time in Chapter
4 of Maintenance Manual. As a result of this change, the TTS in service are to be replaced or inspected as a precautionary measure, pending already accumulated
service hours and the calendar time
since their last installation.’’

Since the issuance of the Transport Canada AD, the type certificate for this helicopter model has been transferred to the Federal Republic of Germany. The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Federal Republic of Germany, has adopted Transport Canada AD No. CF–2008–17R1, dated May 26, 2008, and requires compliance with that AD.

Related Service Information

Eurocopter Canada Limited issued
Alert Service Bulletin No. ASB–BO 105 LS–10–10, Revision 1, dated January 8, 2008 (ASB). The ASB describes procedures for determining the total
accumulated installation time and factoring the number of flights on each TT strap. The ASB also describes and contains a graph for determining the revised life limit, and provides various compliance intervals, inspection provisions, and replacement criteria for the TT strap. The previously described ASB specifies procedures for determining the total accumulated installation time and number of flights on TT strap, P/N 2604067 (Bendix) or P/N J17322–1 (Lord). The ASB also describes establishing a revised life limit for the TT strap of 120 months, 25,000 flights, or 3,800 hours, whichever occurs first. Transport
Canada classified this alert service bulletin as mandatory and issued AD No. CF–2008–17R1, dated May 26, 2008,
to ensure the continued airworthiness of these helicopters. EASA, the Technical Agent for the current type certificate holder, the Federal Republic of Germany, has adopted and requires compliance with Transport Canada AD No. CF–2008–17R1, dated May 26, 2008.

FAA’s Evaluation and Unsafe Condition

Determination

This helicopter has been approved by the aviation authority of the Federal Republic of Germany and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with


### 52595 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules

the Federal Republic of Germany, EASA, their technical representative,
has notified us of the unsafe condition described in the Transport Canada AD, which has been adopted by EASA. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all information provided by EASA and Transport Canada and
determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other helicopters of the same type design. This proposed AD would require establishing a revised life limit for TT strap, P/N 2604067 (Bendix) or P/N J17322–1 (Lord), of 120 months,25,000 flights, or 3,800 hours time-inservice (TIS), whichever occurs first.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Transport Canada AD

Our AD differs from the Transport
Canada AD as follows:

• The Transport Canada AD uses the terms ‘‘air time hours’’ and ‘‘flight hours’’ to describe compliance times, and this proposed AD uses the term
‘‘hours time-in-service’’.

• The Transport Canada AD requires inspections for tension-torsion straps
that have an accumulated installation time of 10 or more years, and our AD does not require these inspections.

• The Transport Canada AD requires verifying and establishing a new service life for the tension-torsion straps within the next 25 hours TIS, and this AD requires this to be done before further flight.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 13 helicopters of U.S. registry and the proposed actions would take about 15 work hours per helicopter to accomplish at an average labor rate of $85 per work hour. Required parts would cost about $13,867 per helicopter. Based on these figures, we estimate the total cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $196,846 to replace all the affected TT straps in the entire fleet.

Regulatory Findings

We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. Additionally, 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 that the 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 to the extent that it justifies making a regulatory distinction; 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.

We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD. See the AD docket to
examine the economic evaluation.

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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, 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. Section 39.13 is amended by removing Amendment 39–11899 (65 FR 55452; September 14, 2000), and adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

EUROCOPTER CANADA LTD.: Docket No. FAA–2011–0596; Directorate Identifier 2008–SW–37–AD. Supersedes AD 2000– 18–13; Amendment 39–11899; Docket

No. 99–SW–68–AD. Applicability: Model BO 105 LS A–3 helicopters, with tension-torsion (TT) strap, part number (P/N) 2604067 (Bendix) or J17322–1 (Lord), installed, certificated in any category.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished previously.

To prevent fatigue failure of a TT strap, loss of a main rotor blade, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter accomplish the following:

(a) Before further flight: (1) Create a component log card or equivalent record for each TT strap.

(2) Review the history of each helicopter and TT strap. Determine the age since initial installation on any helicopter (age) and the number of flights on each affected TT strap. Enter the age, hours time-in-service (TIS), and the number of flights for each TT strap on the component log card or equivalent record. When the number of flights is unknown, multiply the number of hours TIS by 5 to determine the number of flights. If a TT strap has been previously used at any
time on Model BO–105LS A–3 ‘SUPER LIFTER’’, BO–105 CB–5, BO–105 CBS–5, BO–105 DBS–5, or any MBB–BK 117 series helicopter, multiply the total number of flights accumulated on those other models by
a factor of 1.6 and then add that result to the number of flights accumulated on the helicopters affected by this AD.

(3) Remove any TT strap from service if the total hours TIS or number of flights and age
cannot be determined.

(b) Remove any TT strap, P/N 2604067 (Bendix) or P/N J17322–1 (Lord), that has
been in service for 120 months since initial installation on any helicopter, or has accumulated 25,000 flights (a flight is a takeoff and a landing), or has been in service for 3,800 hours TIS.

(c) This AD revises the Airworthiness
Limitations Section of the maintenance manual by establishing a revised life limit for the TT strap, P/N 2604067 (Bendix) or P/N J17322–1 (Lord), of 120 months, 25,000 flights, or 3,800 hours TIS, whichever occurs
first.

Note 1: Eurocopter Canada Limited Alert Service Bulletin No. ASB–BO 105 LS–10–10, Revision 1, dated January 8, 2008, which is not incorporated by reference, contains additional information about the subject of
this AD.

(d) To request a different method of compliance or a different compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19. Contact the Manager, Safety Management Group, FAA, ATTN: Sharon Miles, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations and Policy Group, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137, telephone (817) 222–5122, fax (817) 222–5961, for information about previously approved alternative methods of compliance.

(e) The Joint Aircraft System/Component (JASC) Code is 6200: Main Rotor System.

Note 2: The subject of this AD is addressed in Transport Canada (Canada) AD No. CF– 2008–17R1, dated May 26, 2008. The European Aviation Safety Agency, which is the Technical Agent for the current type certificate holder, the Federal Republic of


### 52596 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Germany, has adopted and requires compliance with the Transport Canada AD.

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on June 3,

2011. Kim Smith, Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 2011–21472 Filed 8–22–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 71**

**Proposed Establishment of Class C Airspace for Long Beach, CA; Public**  **Meetings**

**AGENCY :**  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

**ACTION :**  Notice of meetings.

**SUMMARY :**  This notice announces two fact-finding informal airspace meetings to solicit information from airspace users and others, concerning a proposal to establish Class C airspace at Long Beach, CA. The purpose of these meetings is to provide interested parties an opportunity to present views, recommendations, and comments on the proposal. All comments received during these meetings will be considered prior to any issuance of a notice of proposed rulemaking.

**DATES :**  The informal airspace meetings will be held on October 25 and 26, 2011. Meetings will run from 6 p.m. until 9 p.m. Comments must be received on or before December 12, 2011.

**ADDRESSES :**  The meetings will be held at the Holiday Inn Long Beach Airport, 2640 N. Lakewood Blvd., Long Beach, CA 90815, 562–597–4401.

Comments: Send comments on the proposal, in triplicate, to: John Warner, Operations Support Group, AJV–W2, Western Service Area, Air Traffic Organization, Federal Aviation Administration, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA 98057.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Pat Anderson (838) 537–5847 or Rick Pfahler, (858) 537–5830, FAA Support Managers, Southern California TRACON, 9175 Kearny Villa Road, San Diego, CA 92126:

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 
Meeting Procedures

(a) Doors open 30 minutes prior to the beginning of each meeting. The meetings will be informal in nature and will be conducted by one or more representatives of the FAA Western Service Area. A representative from the FAA will present a briefing on the proposed establishment of Class C airspace at Long Beach, CA. Each participant will be given an opportunity

to deliver comments or make a presentation, although a time limit may be imposed. Only comments concerning the proposal to establish Long Beach Class C airspace will be accepted.

(b) The meetings will be open to all persons on a space-available basis.

There will be no admission fee or other charge to attend and participate.

(c) Any person wishing to make a presentation to the FAA panel will be asked to sign in and estimate the

amount of time needed for such presentation. This will permit the panel to allocate an appropriate amount of time for each presenter. These meetings will not be adjourned until everyone on the list has had an opportunity to address the panel.

(d) Position papers or other handout material relating to the substance of these meetings will be accepted. Participants wishing to submit handout material should present an original and two copies (3 copies total) to the presiding officer. There should be additional copies of each handout

available for other attendees.

(e) These meetings will not be formally recorded. However, a summary of comments made at the meetings will

be filed in the docket.

Agenda for the Meetings

—Sign-in.
—Presentation of meeting procedures.
—FAA briefing on the proposed

establishment of the Class C Airspace

Area.
—Solicitation of public comments.
—Closing comments.

Issued in Washington, DC, on August 16,

2011. Gary A. Norek,
Acting Manager, Airspace, Regulations and ATC Procedures Group.

[FR Doc. 2011–21424 Filed 8–22–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION** 

**16 CFR Parts 239, 700, 701, 702 and**

**703**

**Request for Comment Concerning Interpretations of the Magnuson-Moss**  **Warranty Act; Rule Governing**
**Disclosure of Written Consumer Product Warranty Terms and**  **Conditions; Rule Governing Pre-Sale Availability of Written Warranty Terms;**  **Rule Governing Informal Dispute Settlement Procedures; and Guides for**  **the Advertising of Warranties and**
**Guarantees**

**AGENCY :**  Federal Trade Commission.

**ACTION :**  Request for public comment.

**SUMMARY :**  As part of its systematic
review of all Federal Trade Commission (‘‘AFTC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) rules and guides, the FTC seeks public comment on a set of warranty-related Interpretations, Rules and Guides: its Interpretations of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (‘‘Interpretations’’ or ‘‘Rule 700’’); its Rule Governing
Disclosure of Written Consumer Product Warranty Terms and Conditions (‘‘Rule 701’’); its Rule Governing Pre-Sale Availability of Written Warranty Terms (‘‘Rule 702’’); its Rule Governing Informal Dispute Settlement Procedures (‘‘Rule 703’’); and its Guides for the Advertising of Warranties and Guarantees (‘‘Guides’’). The Commission requests public comment on the overall costs, benefits, necessity and regulatory and economic impact of these Interpretations, Rules and Guides.

**DATES :**  Written comments must be received on or before October 24, 2011.

**ADDRESSES :**  Interested parties may file a comment online or on paper by following the instructions in the Request for Comment portion of the

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION** section below. Write ‘‘Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act Rule Review, 16 CFR Part 700, P114406,’’ on your comment, and file your comment online at https:// ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ warrantyrulesanprm by following the
instructions on the Web-based form. If you prefer to file your comment on paper, mail or deliver your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Room H–113 (Annex G), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Svetlana S. Gans, Attorney, Division of Marketing Practices, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission, H–286, 600 Pennsylvania