19892 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 71 / Tuesday, April 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April 

6, 2015. 

Pat Mullen, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–08586 Filed 4–13–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–0824; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NM–191–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede 

Airworthiness Directive (AD) 98–20–27, 

for all Airbus Model A300 B4–600, B4– 

600R, and F4–600R series airplanes, and 

Model A300 C4–605R Variant F 

airplanes (collectively called Model 

A300–600 series airplanes). AD 98–20– 

27 currently requires repetitive 

inspections to detect fatigue cracking of 

the wing top skin at the front spar joint; 

and a follow-on eddy current inspection 

and repair, if necessary. Since we issued 

AD 98–20–27, we have received reports 

of cracking of the wing top skin in an 

area not required for inspection by AD 

98–20–27. This proposed AD would 

reduce the inspection compliance time 

and intervals, and extend the inspection 

area of the wing top skin at the front 

spar joint. We are proposing this AD to 

detect and correct fatigue cracking of the 

wing top skin at the front spar joint, 

which could result in reduced structural 

integrity of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by May 29, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

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

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Airbus SAS, 

Airworthiness Office—EAW, 1 Rond 

Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac 

Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 

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

account.airworth-eas@airbus.com; 

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

may 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 by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2015– 

0824; 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 Operations 

office (telephone 800–647–5527) is in 

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan 

Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; telephone 425–227–2125; 

fax 425–227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2015–0824; Directorate Identifier 

2013–NM–191–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 

On September 16, 1998, we issued AD 

98–20–27, Amendment 39–10793 (63 

FR 50981, September 24, 1998). AD 98– 

20–27 requires actions intended to 

address an unsafe condition on all 

Airbus Model A300 B4–600, B4–600R, 

and F4–600R series airplanes, and 

Model A300 C4–605R Variant F 

airplanes (collectively called Model 

A300–600 series airplanes). 

Since we issued AD 98–20–27, 

Amendment 39–10793 (63 FR 50981, 

September 24, 1998): The European 

Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which 

is the Technical Agent for the Member 

States of the European Union, has 

issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 

2013–0232R1, dated October 2, 2013 

(referred to after this as the Mandatory 

Continuing Airworthiness Information, 

or ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe 

condition. The MCAI states: 

During full-scale fatigue testing conducted 

in the early 1990’s, cracks were found on the 

top skin of the wing between Ribs 1 and 7, 

starting at the front spar fastener holes. 

This condition, if not detected and 

corrected, could adversely affect the 

structural integrity of the wing. 

Consequently, Airbus issued Service 

Bulletin (SB) A300–57–6045 and DGAC 

[Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation Civile] 

France issued AD 97–374–238 [http://

ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/19973740tb_

superseded.pdf/AD_F-1997-374-238_2] for 

A300–600 aeroplanes and AD 1999–008–020 

[http://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/19980080tb_

superseded.pdf/AD_F-1999-008-020_2] for 

A300–600ST aeroplanes to require repetitive 

detailed inspections of the wing top skin and, 

in case of findings, an Eddy Current (EC) 

inspection, and, depending on the size of the 

cracks, repair. 

After those [DGAC] ADs were issued, 

further cracks to the wing top skin were 

reported by operators, within an area not 

covered by the existing [DGAC] ADs. To 

address this potential unsafe condition, 

Airbus revised SB A300–57–6045 to extend 

the area to be inspected. 

In addition, a fleet survey and updated 

Fatigue and Damage Tolerance analyses were 

performed in order to substantiate the second 

A300–600 Extended Service Goal (ESG2) 

exercise. The results of these analyses have 

determined that the inspection thresholds 

and intervals must be reduced to allow 

timely detection of these cracks and the 

accomplishment of applicable corrective 

action(s). 

As the ESG2 exercise is only applicable to 

A300–600 aeroplanes, A300–600ST 

aeroplanes are now addressed through new 

Airbus SB A300–57–9026. 

For the reasons described above, this 

[EASA] AD retains the requirements of DGAC 

France AD 97–374–238(B) [http://

ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/19973740tb_

superseded.pdf/AD_F-1997-374-238_2] 

[which corresponds to FAA AD 98–20–27, 

Amendment 39–10793 (63 FR 50981, 

September 24, 1998)] and [DGAC] AD 1999– 

008–020(B) [http://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/

19980080tb_superseded.pdf/AD_F-1999-008- 

020_2], which are superseded, but requires 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 71 / Tuesday, April 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 19893 

those actions, for A300–600 aeroplanes only, 

within reduced thresholds and intervals. 

* * * * * 

You may examine the MCAI in the 

AD docket on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2015– 

0824. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

Airbus has issued Service Bulletin 

A300–57–6045, Revision 10, dated 

November 13, 2013. The service 

information describes inspection 

procedures for fatigue cracking of the 

wing top skin at the front spar joint 

between ribs 1 and 7. The actions 

described in this service information are 

intended to correct the unsafe condition 

identified in the MCAI. This service 

information is reasonably available; see 

ADDRESSES for ways to access this 

service information. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This Proposed AD 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of another 

country, and is approved for operation 

in the United States. Pursuant to our 

bilateral agreement with the State of 

Design Authority, we have been notified 

of the unsafe condition described in the 

MCAI and service information 

referenced above. We are proposing this 

AD because we evaluated all pertinent 

information and determined an unsafe 

condition exists and is likely to exist or 

develop on other products of the same 

type design. 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the MCAI or Service Information 

Unlike the procedures described in 

the MCAI and Airbus Service Bulletin 

A300–57–6045, Revision 10, dated 

November 13, 2013, this proposed AD 

would not permit further flight if cracks 

are detected in the wing top skin at the 

front spar joint. We have determined 

that, because of the safety implications 

and consequences associated with that 

cracking, any cracked wing top skin at 

the front spar joint must be repaired 

before further flight. This difference has 

been coordinated with the EASA. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 130 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

The actions that are required by AD 

98–20–27, Amendment 39–10793 (63 

FR 50981, September 24, 1998), and 

retained in this proposed AD take about 

2 work-hours per product, at an average 

labor rate of $85 per work-hour. Based 

on these figures, the estimated cost of 

the actions that are required by AD 98– 

20–27 is $170 per product. 

We also estimate that it would take 

about 2 work-hours per product to 

comply with the basic requirements of 

this proposed AD. The average labor 

rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on 

these figures, we estimate the cost of 

this proposed AD on U.S. operators to 

be $22,100, or $170 per product. 

We have received no definitive data 

that would enable us to provide cost 

estimates for the on-condition actions 

specified in this proposed AD. 

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. The FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 

98–20–27, Amendment 39–10793 (63 

FR 50981, September 24, 1998), and 

adding the following new AD: 

Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2015–0824; 

Directorate Identifier 2013–NM–191–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by May 29, 

2015. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD replaces AD 98–20–27, 

Amendment 39–10793 (63 FR 50981, 

September 24, 1998). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to the Airbus airplanes 

identified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4) 

of this AD, certificated in any category, all 

manufacturer serial numbers. 

(1) Airbus Model A300 B4–601, B4–603, 

B4–620, and B4–622 airplanes. 

(2) Airbus Model A300 B4–605R and B4– 

622R airplanes. 

(3) Airbus Model A300 F4–605R and F4– 

622R airplanes. 

(4) Airbus Model A300 C4–605R Variant F 

airplanes. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 57, Wings. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by reports of 

cracking of wing top skin in an area not 

required for inspection by AD 98–20–27, 

Amendment 39–10793 (63 FR 50981, 

September 24, 1998). We are issuing this AD 

to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the 

wing top skin at the front spar joint, which 

could result in reduced structural integrity of 

the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Retained Repetitive Inspections, With 

Revised Service Information 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (a) of AD 98–20–27, Amendment 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
19894 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 71 / Tuesday, April 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

39–10793 (63 FR 50981, September 24, 1998), 

with revised service information. Prior to the 

accumulation of 22,000 total flight cycles, or 

within 2,000 flight cycles after October 29, 

1998 (the effective date of AD 98–20–27), 

whichever occurs later: Perform a detailed 

visual inspection to detect fatigue cracking of 

the wing top skin at the front spar joint, in 

accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin 

A300–57–6045, Revision 1, dated August 3, 

1994, including Appendix 1, Revision 1, 

dated August 3, 1994; Airbus Service 

Bulletin A300–57–6045, Revision 02, dated 

April 21, 1998, including Appendix 1, 

Revision 02, dated April 21, 1998; or Airbus 

Service Bulletin A300–57–6045, Revision 10, 

dated November 13, 2013. Repeat the 

detailed visual inspection thereafter at 

intervals not to exceed 8,000 flight cycles. 

(h) Retained Inspection and Repair, With 

Revised Service Information 

This paragraph restates the requirements of 

paragraph (b) of AD 98–20–27, Amendment 

39–10793 (63 FR 50981, September 24, 1998), 

with revised service information. If any 

cracking is suspected or detected during any 

inspection required by paragraph (g) of this 

AD: Prior to further flight, perform an eddy 

current inspection to confirm the findings of 

the visual inspection, in accordance with 

Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–6045, 

Revision 01, dated August 3, 1994, including 

Appendix 1, Revision 01, dated August 3, 

1994; Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–6045, 

Revision 02, dated April 21, 1998, including 

Appendix 1, Revision 02, dated April 21, 

1998; or Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57– 

6045, Revision 10, dated November 13, 2013. 

If any cracking is detected during any eddy 

current inspection, prior to further flight, 

repair using a method approved by the 

Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, 

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate; or the 

Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation Civile (or its 

delegated agent). 

(i) New Requirement of This AD: Initial 

Inspection 

At the applicable time specified in 

paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD: Do a 

detailed inspection of the wing top skin 

between ribs one and seven for cracking, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A300– 

57–6045, Revision 10, dated November 13, 

2013. Accomplishment of the initial 

inspection required by this paragraph 

terminates the requirements of paragraph (g) 

of this AD. 

(1) For Model A300 B4–601, B4–603, B4– 

620, and B4–622 airplanes, Model A300 B4– 

605R and B4–622R airplanes, and Model 

A300 C4–605R Variant F airplanes: At the 

later of the times specified in paragraphs 

(i)(1)(i) and (i)(1)(ii) of this AD. 

(i) Before the accumulation of 17,100 total 

flight cycles or 38,400 total flight hours, 

whichever occurs first. 

(ii) Within 1,000 flight cycles or 2,200 

flight hours, whichever occurs first after the 

effective date of this AD. 

(2) For Model A300 F4–605R and F4–622R 

airplanes: At the later of the times specified 

in paragraphs (i)(2)(i) and (i)(2)(ii) of this AD. 

(i) Before the accumulation of 22,000 total 

flight cycles or 49,500 total flight hours, 

whichever occurs first. 

(ii) Within 1,300 flight cycles or 2,800 

flight hours, whichever occurs first after the 

effective date of this AD. 

(j) New Requirement of This AD: Repetitive 

Inspections 

Repeat the inspection required by 

paragraph (i) of this AD thereafter at the 

applicable time and intervals specified in 

paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of this AD. 

(1) For Model A300 B4–601, B4–603, B4– 

620, and B4–622 airplanes, Model A300 B4– 

605R and B4–622R airplanes, and Model 

A300 C4–605R Variant F airplanes: At the 

applicable time specified in paragraph 

(j)(1)(i) or (j)(1)(ii) of this AD. 

(i) For airplanes that have an average flight 

time (AFT) that is equal to or more than one 

and one-half hours: At intervals not to exceed 

5,100 flight cycles or 11,000 flight hours, 

whichever occurs first. 

(ii) For airplanes that have an AFT that is 

less than one and one-half hours: At intervals 

not to exceed 5,500 flight cycles or 8,300 

flight hours, whichever occurs first. 

(2) For Model A300 F4–605R and F4–622R 

airplanes: At the applicable time specified in 

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

(i) For airplanes that have an AFT that is 

equal to or more than one and one-half hours: 

At intervals not to exceed 6,500 flight cycles 

or 14,100 flight hours, whichever occurs first. 

(ii) For airplanes that have an AFT that is 

less than one and one-half hours: At intervals 

not to exceed 7,000 flight cycles or 10,600 

flight hours, whichever occurs first. 

(k) New Requirement of This AD: Repair of 

Cracking 

(1) If any crack in the top skin in the area 

forward of the front spar attachment is found 

during any inspection required by paragraph 

(i) of this AD: Before further flight, repair 

using a method approved by the Manager, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or 

Airbus’s EASA DOA. 

(2) If any crack or sign of a crack is found 

in the top skin at or aft of the spar attachment 

during any inspection required by paragraph 

(i) of this AD: Before further flight, do an 

eddy current inspection of the cracks or of 

the signs of cracking to confirm the findings 

of the detailed inspection, in accordance 

with the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–6045, 

Revision 10, dated November 13, 2013. If 

there are any cracks at or aft of the spar 

attachment, before further flight, repair using 

a method approved by the Manager, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA; EASA; or 

Airbus’s EASA DOA. 

(l) No Terminating Action 

Accomplishment of any repair required by 

paragraph (k) this AD does not constitute 

terminating action for the repetitive 

inspections required by paragraph (j) of this 

AD. 

(m) No Reporting Required 

Although Airbus Service Bulletin A300– 

57–6045, Revision 10, dated November 13, 

2013, specifies to submit certain information 

to the manufacturer, this AD does not 

include that requirement. 

(n) Credit for Previous Actions 

This paragraph provides credit for actions 

required by paragraphs (i), (j) and (k) of this 

AD, if those actions were performed before 

the effective date of this AD using the Airbus 

service bulletins specified in paragraphs 

(n)(1) through (n)(10) of this AD, which are 

not incorporated by reference in this AD. 

(1) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–6045, 

dated March 18, 1993. 

(2) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–6045, 

Revision 01, dated August 3, 1994. 

(3) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–6045, 

Revision 02, dated April 21, 1998. 

(4) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–6045, 

Revision 03, dated October 25, 1999. 

(5) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–6045, 

Revision 04, dated January 13, 2002. 

(6) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–6045, 

Revision 05, dated June 13, 2003. 

(7) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–6045, 

Revision 06, dated January 13, 2005. 

(8) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–6045, 

Revision 07, dated August 14, 2008. 

(9) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57–6045, 

Revision 08, dated June 6, 2011. 

(10) Airbus Service Bulletin A300–57– 

6045, Revision 09, dated May 21, 2013. 

(o) Other FAA AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, International 

Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve 

AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the 

procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In 

accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your 

request to your principal inspector or local 

Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: 

Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; 

telephone 425–227–2125; fax 425–227–1149. 

Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-116- 

AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. 

(i) 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. 

(ii) AMOCs approved previously for AD 

98–20–27, Amendment 39–10793 (63 FR 

50981, September 24, 1998), are approved as 

AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of 

this AD. 

(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: As of the 

effective date of this AD, 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, International Branch, ANM– 

116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or 

EASA; or Airbus’s EASA DOA. If approved 

by the DOA, the approval must include the 

DOA-authorized signature. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 71 / Tuesday, April 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 19895 

(p) Related Information 

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2013–0232R1, dated 

October 2, 2013, for related information. This 

MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by 

searching for and locating Docket No. FAA– 

2015–0824. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Airbus SAS, Airworthiness 

Office—EAW, 1 Rond Point Maurice 

Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; 

telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 

93 44 51; email account.airworth-eas@

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

You may 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 March 

27, 2015. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–08071 Filed 4–13–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade 

Bureau 

27 CFR Part 9 

[Docket No. TTB–2015–0007; Notice No. 

151] 

RIN 1513–AC17 

Proposed Establishment of the 

Lamorinda Viticultural Area 

AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax 

and Trade Bureau (TTB) proposes to 

establish the approximately 29,369-acre 

‘‘Lamorinda’’ viticultural area in Contra 

Costa County, California. The proposed 

viticultural area lies entirely within the 

larger San Francisco Bay viticultural 

area and the multicounty Central Coast 

viticultural area. TTB designates 

viticultural areas to allow vintners to 

better describe the origin of their wines 

and to allow consumers to better 

identify wines they may purchase. TTB 

invites comments on this proposed 

addition to its regulations. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

June 15, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Please send your comments 

on this notice to one of the following 

addresses: 

• Internet: http://www.regulations.gov 

(via the online comment form for this 

notice as posted within Docket No. 

TTB–2015–0007 at Regulations.gov, the 

Federal e-rulemaking portal); 

• U.S. Mail: Director, Regulations and 

Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco 

Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street 

NW., Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; or 

• Hand delivery/courier in lieu of 

mail: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street NW., Suite 

200–E, Washington, DC 20005. 

See the PUBLIC PARTICIPATION section 

of this notice for specific instructions 

and requirements for submitting 

comments, and for information on how 

to request a public hearing or view or 

obtain copies of the petition and 

supporting materials. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Karen A. Thornton, Regulations and 

Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco 

Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G St. NW., 

Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; phone 

202–453–1039, ext. 175. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background on Viticultural Areas 

TTB Authority 

Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol 

Administration Act (FAA Act), 27 

U.S.C. 205(e), authorizes the Secretary 

of the Treasury to prescribe regulations 

for the labeling of wine, distilled spirits, 

and malt beverages. The FAA Act 

provides that these regulations should, 

among other things, prohibit consumer 

deception and the use of misleading 

statements on labels, and ensure that 

labels provide the consumer with 

adequate information as to the identity 

and quality of the product. The Alcohol 

and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 

(TTB) administers the FAA Act 

pursuant to section 1111(d) of the 

Homeland Security Act of 2002, 

codified at 6 U.S.C. 531(d). The 

Secretary has delegated various 

authorities through Treasury 

Department Order 120–01 (Revised), 

dated December 10, 2013, to the TTB 

Administrator to perform the functions 

and duties in the administration and 

enforcement of this law. 

Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 

part 4) authorizes TTB to establish 

definitive viticultural areas and regulate 

the use of their names as appellations of 

origin on wine labels and in wine 

advertisements. Part 9 of the TTB 

regulations (27 CFR part 9) sets forth 

standards for the preparation and 

submission of petitions for the 

establishment or modification of 

American viticultural areas (AVAs) and 

lists the approved AVAs. 

Definition 

Section 4.25(e)(1)(i) of the TTB 

regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(1)(i)) defines 

a viticultural area for American wine as 

a delimited grape-growing region having 

distinguishing features, as described in 

part 9 of the regulations, and a name 

and a delineated boundary, as 

established in part 9 of the regulations. 

These designations allow vintners and 

consumers to attribute a given quality, 

reputation, or other characteristic of a 

wine made from grapes grown in an area 

to the wine’s geographic origin. The 

establishment of AVAs allows vintners 

to describe more accurately the origin of 

their wines to consumers and helps 

consumers to identify wines they may 

purchase. Establishment of an AVA is 

neither an approval nor an endorsement 

by TTB of the wine produced in that 

area. 

Requirements 

Section 4.25(e)(2) of the TTB 

regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(2)) outlines 

the procedure for proposing an AVA 

and provides that any interested party 

may petition TTB to establish a grapegrowing region as an AVA. Section 9.12 

of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 9.12) 

prescribes the standards for petitions for 

the establishment or modification of 

AVAs. Petitions to establish an AVA 

must include the following: 

• Evidence that the area within the 

proposed AVA boundary is nationally 

or locally known by the AVA name 

specified in the petition; 

• An explanation of the basis for 

defining the boundary of the proposed 

AVA; 

• A narrative description of the 

features of the proposed AVA affecting 

viticulture, such as climate, geology, 

soils, physical features, and elevation, 

that make the proposed AVA distinctive 

and distinguish it from adjacent areas 

outside the proposed AVA boundary; 

• The appropriate United States 

Geological Survey (USGS) map(s) 

showing the location of the proposed 

AVA, with the boundary of the 

proposed AVA clearly drawn thereon; 

and 

• A detailed narrative description of 

the proposed AVA boundary based on 

USGS map markings. 

Lamorinda Petition 

TTB received a petition from Patrick 

L. Shabram, on behalf of the Lamorinda 

Wine Growers Association, proposing 

the establishment of the ‘‘Lamorinda’’ 

AVA. The proposed Lamorinda AVA is 

located in Contra Costa County, 

California, and contains the cities of 

Lafayette, Moraga, and Orinda. The 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS