70438 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

VI—DESCRIPTION OF SCORECARD MEASURES

Scorecard measures 1 Description 

*******

(2) Top 20 Counterparty Exposure/

Tier 1 Capital and Reserves.

Sum of the 20 largest total exposure amounts to counterparties divided by Tier 1 capital and reserves. The 

total exposure amount is equal to the sum of the institution’s exposure amounts to one counterparty (or 

borrower) for derivatives, securities financing transactions (SFTs), and cleared transactions, and its 

gross lending exposure (including all unfunded commitments) to that counterparty (or borrower). A 

counterparty includes an entity’s own affiliates. Exposures to entities that are affiliates of each other are 

treated as exposures to one counterparty (or borrower). Counterparty exposure excludes all counterparty 

exposure to the U.S. government and departments or agencies of the U.S. government that is unconditionally guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the United States. The exposure amount for derivatives, 

including OTC derivatives, cleared transactions that are derivative contracts, and netting sets of derivative contracts, must be calculated using the methodology set forth in 12 CFR 324.34(a), but without any 

reduction for collateral other than cash collateral that is all or part of variation margin and that satisfies 

the requirements of 12 CFR 324.10(c)(4)(ii)(C)(1)–(7). The exposure amount associated with SFTs, including cleared transactions that are SFTs, must be calculated using the standardized approach set 

forth in 12 CFR 324.37(b) or (c). For both derivatives and SFT exposures, the exposure amount to central counterparties must also include the default fund contribution.2

(3) Largest Counterparty Exposure/

Tier 1 Capital and Reserves.

The largest total exposure amount to one counterparty divided by Tier 1 capital and reserves. The total exposure amount is equal to the sum of the institution’s exposure amounts to one counterparty (or borrower) for derivatives, SFTs, and cleared transactions, and its gross lending exposure (including all unfunded commitments) to that counterparty (or borrower). A counterparty includes an entity’s own affiliates. Exposures to entities that are affiliates of each other are treated as exposures to one counterparty 

(or borrower). Counterparty exposure excludes all counterparty exposure to the U.S. government and 

departments or agencies of the U.S. government that is unconditionally guaranteed by the full faith and 

credit of the United States. The exposure amount for derivatives, including OTC derivatives, cleared 

transactions that are derivative contracts, and netting sets of derivative contracts, must be calculated 

using the methodology set forth in 12 CFR 324.34(a), but without any reduction for collateral other than 

cash collateral that is all or part of variation margin and that satisfies the requirements of 12 CFR 

324.10(c)(4)(ii)(C)(1)–(7). The exposure amount associated with SFTs, including cleared transactions 

that are SFTs, must be calculated using the standardized approach set forth in 12 CFR 324.37(b) or (c). 

For both derivatives and SFT exposures, the exposure amount to central counterparties must also include the default fund contribution.2

* * * * * * * 

1The FDIC retains the flexibility, as part of the risk-based assessment system, without the necessity of additional notice-and-comment rulemaking, to update the minimum and maximum cutoff values for all measures used in the scorecard (except for the Top 20 counterparty exposure 

to Tier 1 capital and reserves ratio and the largest counterparty exposure to Tier 1 capital and reserves ratio). The FDIC may update the minimum and maximum cutoff values for the higher-risk assets to Tier 1 capital and reserves ratio in order to maintain an approximately similar distribution of higher-risk assets to Tier 1 capital and reserves ratio scores as reported prior to April 1, 2013, or to avoid changing the overall 

amount of assessment revenue collected. 76 FR 10672, 10700 (February 25, 2011). The FDIC will review changes in the distribution of the higher-risk assets to Tier 1 capital and reserves ratio scores and the resulting effect on total assessments and risk differentiation between banks 

when determining changes to the cutoffs. The FDIC may update the cutoff values for the higher-risk assets to Tier 1 capital and reserves ratio 

more frequently than annually. The FDIC will provide banks with a minimum one quarter advance notice of changes in the cutoff values for the 

higher-risk assets to Tier 1 capital and reserves ratio with their quarterly deposit insurance invoice. 2SFTs include repurchase agreements, reverse repurchase agreements, security lending and borrowing, and margin lending transactions, 

where the value of the transactions depends on market valuations and the transactions are often subject to margin agreements. The default fund 

contribution is the funds contributed or commitments made by a clearing member to a central counterparty’s mutualized loss sharing arrangement. The other terms used in this description are as defined in 12 CFR part 324, subparts A and D, unless defined otherwise in 12 CFR part 

327. 

* * * * * 

By order of the Board of Directors. 

Dated at Washington, DC, this 18th day of 

November, 2014. 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. 

Robert E. Feldman, 

Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27941 Filed 11–25–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6714–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0191; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NM–256–AD; Amendment 

39–18030; AD 2014–23–14] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, 

Inc. Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

Bombardier, Inc. Model DHC–8–400 

series airplanes. This AD was prompted 

by reports of swing arm assemblies of 

engine fuel feed ejector pumps 

detaching from the outlet port of the 

engine fuel feed ejector pump and 

partially blocking the engine fuel feed 

line. This AD requires installing a 

restrictor into the engine fuel feed line. 

We are issuing this AD to prevent 

blocked engine fuel flow and possible 

engine flameout. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

December 31, 2014. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 70439 

of a certain publication listed in this AD 

as of December 31, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http://www.

regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=

FAA-2014-0191 or in person at the 

Docket Management Facility, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC. 

For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., QSeries Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt 

Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, 

Canada; telephone 416–375–4000; fax 

416–375–4539; email thd.qseries@

aero.bombardier.com; Internet http://

www.bombardier.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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Morton Lee, Propulsion Engineer, 

Propulsion & Services Branch, ANE– 

173, FAA, New York Aircraft 

Certification Office, 1600 Stewart 

Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 

11590; telephone 516–228–7355; fax 

516–794–5531. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 by adding an AD that would 

apply to certain Bombardier, Inc. Model 

DHC–8–400 series airplanes. The NPRM 

published in the Federal Register on 

April 9, 2014 (79 FR 19546). 

Transport Canada Civil Aviation 

(TCCA), which is the aviation authority 

for Canada, has issued Canadian 

Airworthiness Directive CF–2013–35, 

dated November 15, 2013 (referred to 

after this as the Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information, or ‘‘the 

MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition 

for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model 

DHC–8–400 series airplanes. The MCAI 

states: 

There have been incidents of the ‘‘ENG 

FUEL PRESS’’ caution light illuminating inflight. An investigation revealed the engine 

fuel feed ejector pump swing arm assembly 

became detached from the outlet port of the 

engine fuel feed ejector pump and partially 

blocked the engine fuel feed line. If the failed 

swing arm assembly migrates along the fuel 

line downstream of the Fuel Tank AUX 

Pump junction, it could block the engine fuel 

flow and the affected engine may experience 

a flameout condition. 

Bombardier issued Service Bulletin (SB) 

84–28–16 to introduce a restrictor into the 

engine fuel feed line that is designed to 

contain a detached ejector pump swing arm 

assembly. 

This [Canadian] AD mandates the 

installation of a restrictor into the engine fuel 

feed line to prevent possible engine flameout. 

You may examine the MCAI in the 

AD docket on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;

D=FAA-2014-0191-0002. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. The 

following presents the comments 

received on the NPRM (79 FR 19546, 

April 9, 2014) and the FAA’s response 

to each comment. 

Request To Require Compliance With 

Relevant Instructions in Service 

Information 

Horizon Air asked that we revise the 

NPRM (79 FR 19546, April 9, 2014) to 

specify only those instructions required 

to correct the unsafe condition. Horizon 

Air explained that paragraph (g) of the 

NPRM is more restrictive than necessary 

to ensure safety of flight, and that the 

Accomplishment Instructions of 

Bombardier Service Bulletin 84–28–16, 

Revision B, dated June 17, 2013, should 

not be mandated in its entirety. Horizon 

Air stated that the job set-up and closeout sections of the Accomplishment 

Instructions do not directly correct the 

unsafe condition; incorporating those 

sections as a requirement of the AD 

restricts an operator’s ability to perform 

other maintenance, in conjunction with 

incorporation of the instructions in the 

service information. 

We agree to refer only to the 

procedures that address the identified 

unsafe condition. We have revised 

paragraph (g) of this AD to refer 

paragraph 3.B., ‘‘Procedure,’’ of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of 

Bombardier Service Bulletin 84–28–16, 

Revision B, dated June 17, 2013. 

Request To Remove Repair Approval 

Language 

Horizon Air asked that we remove the 

‘‘Airworthy Product’’ language in 

paragraph (i)(2) of the NPRM (79 FR 

19546, April 9, 2014), which states, in 

part, ‘‘For a repair method to be 

approved, the repair approval must 

specifically refer to this AD.’’ Horizon 

Air stated that this sentence should not 

be included in the final rule, or at the 

very least it should be modified, 

because it will place an unnecessary 

regulatory burden on operators with 

airplanes built in Canada. Horizon Air 

added that Transport Canada Civil 

Aviation is the State holding design 

authority for Bombardier Model DHC– 

8–400 series airplanes; the NPRM 

simply restates the requirements of the 

TCCA AD. Horizon Air noted that any 

repairs created by Bombardier would 

have to be in compliance with the 

TCAA AD, and the repair would 

specifically refer to the TCCA AD. 

Horizon Air also stated that the bilateral 

agreement between Canada and the 

United States accepts documents 

approved by TCAA as meeting the 

requirements for FAA approval. Horizon 

Air does not see the need for referencing 

the U.S. AD number when the repair is 

approved by TCCA and refers to the 

Canadian AD; therefore, the repair 

meets the approval requirements from 

the State holding the Design Authority. 

Horizon Air concluded that if this 

requirement is retained, it would force 

operators to go back to the manufacturer 

and request a revision to the repair 

method to add the U.S. AD number, 

even if the repair method is referenced 

in the TCCA AD. 

We concur with the commenter’s 

request to remove the requirement to 

refer to this AD in repair approvals. 

Since late 2006, we have included the 

paragraph titled ‘‘Airworthy Product’’ in 

all MCAI ADs in which the FAA 

develops an AD based on a foreign 

authority’s AD. The MCAI or referenced 

service information in an FAA AD often 

directs the owner/operator to contact 

the manufacturer for corrective actions, 

such as a repair. Briefly, the Airworthy 

Product paragraph allowed owners/

operators to use corrective actions 

provided by the manufacturer if those 

actions were FAA-approved. In 

addition, the paragraph stated that any 

actions approved by the State of Design 

Authority (or its delegated agent) are 

considered to be FAA-approved. 

In the NPRM (79 FR 19546, April 9, 

2014), we proposed to prevent the use 

of repairs that were not specifically 

developed to correct the unsafe 

condition, by requiring that the repair 

approval provided by the State of 

Design Authority or its delegated agent 

specifically refer to this FAA AD. This 

change was intended to clarify the 

method of compliance and to provide 

operators with better visibility of repairs 

that are specifically developed and 

approved to correct the unsafe 

condition. In addition, we proposed to 

change the phrase ‘‘its delegated agent’’ 

to include a design approval holder 

(DAH) with State of Design Authority 

design organization approval (DOA), as 

applicable, to refer to a DAH authorized 

to approve required repairs for the 

proposed AD. 

In addition to Horizon Air’s 

comments to the NPRM (79 FR 19546, 

April 9, 2014) about these proposed 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

70440 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

changes, a comment was provided for 

an NPRM having Directorate Identifier 

2012–NM–101–AD (78 FR 78285, 

December 26, 2013). The commenter 

stated the following: ‘‘The proposed 

wording, being specific to repairs, 

eliminates the interpretation that Airbus 

messages are acceptable for approving 

minor deviations (corrective actions) 

needed during accomplishment of an 

AD mandated Airbus service bulletin.’’ 

This comment has made the FAA 

aware that some operators have 

misunderstood or misinterpreted the 

Airworthy Product paragraph to allow 

the owner/operator to use messages 

provided by the manufacturer as 

approval of deviations during the 

accomplishment of an AD-mandated 

action. The Airworthy Product 

paragraph does not approve messages or 

other information provided by the 

manufacturer for deviations to the 

requirements of the AD-mandated 

actions. The Airworthy Product 

paragraph only addresses the 

requirement to contact the manufacturer 

for corrective actions for the identified 

unsafe condition and does not cover 

deviations from other AD requirements. 

However, deviations to AD-required 

actions are addressed in 14 CFR 39.17, 

and anyone may request the approval 

for an alternative method of compliance 

to the AD-required actions using the 

procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

To address this misunderstanding and 

misinterpretation of the Airworthy 

Product paragraph, we have changed the 

paragraph and retitled it ‘‘Contacting the 

Manufacturer.’’ This paragraph now 

clarifies that for any requirement in this 

AD to obtain corrective actions from a 

manufacturer, the actions must be 

accomplished using a method approved 

by the FAA, TCCA, or Bombardier, 

Inc.’s TCCA Design Approval 

Organization (DAO). 

The Contacting the Manufacturer 

paragraph also clarifies that, if approved 

by the DAO, the approval must include 

the DAO-authorized signature. The DAO 

signature indicates that the data and 

information contained in the document 

are TCCA-approved, which is also FAAapproved. Messages and other 

information provided by the 

manufacturer that does not contain the 

DAO-authorized signature approval are 

not TCCA-approved, unless TCCA 

directly approves the manufacturer’s 

message or other information. 

This clarification does not remove 

flexibility previously afforded by the 

Airworthy Product paragraph. 

Consistent with long-standing FAA 

policy, such flexibility was never 

intended for required actions. This is 

also consistent with the 

recommendation of the Airworthiness 

Directive Implementation Aviation 

Rulemaking Committee to increase 

flexibility in complying with ADs by 

identifying those actions in 

manufacturers’ service instructions that 

are ‘‘Required for Compliance’’ with 

ADs. We continue to work with 

manufacturers to implement this 

recommendation. But once we 

determine that an action is required, any 

deviation from the requirement must be 

approved as an alternative method of 

compliance. 

Other commenters to the NPRM 

having Directorate Identifier 2012–NM– 

101–AD (78 FR 78285, December 26, 

2013) pointed out that in many cases the 

foreign manufacturer’s service bulletin 

and the foreign authority’s MCAI might 

have been issued some time before the 

FAA AD. Therefore, the DOA might 

have provided U.S. operators with an 

approved repair, developed with full 

awareness of the unsafe condition, 

before the FAA AD is issued. Under 

these circumstances, to comply with the 

FAA AD, the operator would be 

required to go back to the 

manufacturer’s DOA and obtain a new 

approval document, adding time and 

expense to the compliance process with 

no safety benefit. 

Based on these comments, we 

removed the requirement that the DAHprovided repair specifically refer to this 

AD. Before adopting such a 

requirement, the FAA will coordinate 

with affected DAHs and verify they are 

prepared to implement means to ensure 

that their repair approvals consider the 

unsafe condition addressed in this AD. 

Any such requirements will be adopted 

through the normal AD rulemaking 

process, including notice-and-comment 

procedures, when appropriate. 

We also have decided not to include 

a generic reference to either the 

‘‘delegated agent’’ or ‘‘DAH with State of 

Design Authority design organization 

approval,’’ but instead we have 

provided the specific delegation 

approval granted by the State of Design 

Authority for the DAH throughout this 

AD. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the relevant data, 

considered the comments received, and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting this AD 

with the changes described previously 

and minor editorial changes. We have 

determined that these changes: 

• Are consistent with the intent that 

was proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 

19546, April 9, 2014) for correcting the 

unsafe condition; and 

• Do not add any additional burden 

upon the public than was already 

proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 19546, 

April 9, 2014). 

We also determined that these 

changes will not increase the economic 

burden on any operator or increase the 

scope of this AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD affects 81 

airplanes of U.S. registry. We estimate 

the following costs to comply with this 

AD. 

We also estimate that it takes about 12 

work-hours per product to comply with 

the basic requirements of this AD. The 

average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. 

Required parts cost about $0 per 

product. Based on these figures, we 

estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. 

operators to be $82,620, or $1,020 per 

product. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this AD will not 

have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD will 

not have a substantial direct effect on 

the States, on the relationship between 

the national government and the States, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that this AD: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

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

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 

3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in 

Alaska; and 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 70441 

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. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://www.regulations.

gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2014-0191; 

or in person at the Docket Management 

Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. The AD docket contains this 

AD, the regulatory evaluation, any 

comments received, and other 

information. The street address for the 

Docket Operations office (telephone 

800–647–5527) is in the ADDRESSES

section. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as 

follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 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. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

2014–23–14 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 

39–18030. Docket No. FAA–2014–0191; 

Directorate Identifier 2013–NM–256–AD. 

(a) Effective Date 

This AD becomes effective December 31, 

2014. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. Model 

DHC–8–400, –401, and –402 airplanes; 

certificated in any category; serial numbers 

4001, and 4003 through 4417 inclusive, with 

installed engine fuel feed ejector pump 

having part number (P/N) 2960008–102. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 28, Fuel. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by reports of swing 

arm assemblies of engine fuel feed ejector 

pumps detaching from the outlet port of the 

engine fuel feed ejector pump and partially 

blocking the engine fuel feed line. We are 

issuing this AD to prevent blocked engine 

fuel flow and possible engine flameout. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Installation 

Within 6,000 flight hours or 36 months, 

whichever occurs first, after the effective date 

of this AD, install a restrictor into the engine 

fuel feed line, in accordance with paragraph 

3.B., ‘‘Procedure,’’ of the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 

84–28–16, Revision B, dated June 17, 2013. 

(h) Credit for Previous Actions 

This paragraph provides credit for actions 

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

actions were performed before the effective 

date of this AD using Bombardier Service 

Bulletin 84–28–16, dated July 16, 2012; or 

Bombardier Service Bulletin 84–28–16, 

Revision A, dated May 23, 2013; which are 

not incorporated by reference in this AD. 

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, New York ACO, 

ANE–170, 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 ACO, send it to ATTN: Program 

Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, 

FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart Avenue, 

Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 

516–228–7300; fax 516–794–5531. 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) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any 

requirement in this AD to obtain corrective 

actions from a manufacturer, the action must 

be accomplished using a method approved 

by the Manager, New York ACO, ANE–170, 

Engine and Propeller Directorate, FAA; or 

TCCA; or Bombardier, Inc.’s TCCA Design 

Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by 

the DAO, the approval must include the 

DAO-authorized signature. 

(j) Related Information 

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian 

Airworthiness Directive CF–2013–35, dated 

November 15, 2013, for related information. 

This MCAI may be found in the AD docket 

on the Internet at http://www.regulations.

gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2014-0191- 

0002. 

(2) Service information identified in this 

AD that is not incorporated by reference is 

available at the addresses specified in 

paragraphs (k)(3) and (k)(4) of this AD. 

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

(IBR) of the service information listed in this 

paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. 

(2) You must use this service information 

as applicable to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 84–28–16, 

Revision B, dated June 17, 2013. 

(ii) Reserved. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., Q-Series 

Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt Boulevard, 

Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; 

telephone 416–375–4000; fax 416–375–4539; 

email thd.qseries@aero.bombardier.com; 

Internet http://www.bombardier.com. 

(4) 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. 

(5) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

202–741–6030, or go to: http://

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

November 6, 2014. 

Jeffrey E. Duven 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27357 Filed 11–25–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0170; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NM–169–AD; Amendment 

39–18027; AD 2014–23–11] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are superseding 

Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2005–13– 

05, which applied to certain Boeing 

Model 747–400F series airplanes. AD 

2005–13–05 required inspections for 

cracking of the web, upper chord, and 

upper chord strap of the upper deck 

floor beams, and repair of any cracking. 

AD 2005–13–05 also required a 

preventive modification of the upper 

deck floor beams, and repetitive 

inspections for cracking after 

accomplishing the modification. This 

new AD retains these actions and 

requires a second modification, 

repetitive inspections for cracking, and 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES