[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 143 (Friday, July 25, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43530-43531]
[FR Doc No: 2014-17532]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2014-0039]

Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping Requirements Agency Information
Collection Activity Under OMB Review

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that the Information
Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below is being forwarded to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. A Federal
Register Notice with a 60-day comment period was published on April 21,
2014 (76 FR 7897-7898).

DATES: Comments must be submitted no later than August 25, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Laurie Flaherty, Coordinator,
National 911 Program, U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of
Emergency Medical Services, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., NTI-140, W44-322,
Washington, DC 20590,<PHONE_NUMBER> or via email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

    Title: National 9-1-1 Profile Database as part of the National 9-1-
1 Program.
    OMB Control Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>-007.
    Type of Request: Renewal of information collection Requirement.
    Abstract: NHTSA is proposing to continue to collect and aggregate
information from state level reporting entities that can be used to
measure the progress of 9-1-1 authorities across the country in
enhancing their existing operations and migrating to more advanced--
Internet-Protocol-enabled emergency networks.
    The data will be maintained in a ``National 9-1-1 Profile
Database.'' One of the objectives of the National 9-1-1 Program is to
develop, collect, and disseminate information concerning practices,
procedures, and technology used in the implementation of E9-1-1
services and to support 9-1-1 Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs)
and related state and local public safety agencies for 9-1-1 deployment
and operations. The National 9-1-1 profile database can be used to
follow the progress of 9-1-1 authorities in enhancing their existing
systems and implementing next-generation networks for more advanced
systems.
    The goal of the data collection process is to support a national 9-
1-1 profile that will be used to help accurately measure and depict the
current status and planned capabilities of 9-1-1 systems across the
United States. Evaluations, based upon the data collected, will help
draw attention to key roadblocks and solutions in the deployment
process and to target possible future activities and resources
consistent with the goals of the program. The information in aggregated
form will be available to state and local stakeholders in the public
safety community.
    Affected Public: Under this proposed effort, NHTSA would
specifically

request reporting entities to voluntarily collect and annually report
the data described above utilizing the described Web-based data
collection tool. Reporting entities are state level 9-1-1 program
officials, and the data reported will reflect state-level aggregated
data. Where a state statute has not established a state-level 9-1-1
program, the authorized entity is the state E9-1-1 Coordinator
designated under 47 U.S.C. 942(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    The total number of respondents is identified at fifty-six (56),
including the fifty states and the six U.S. Territories of Guam, U.S.
Minor Outlying Islands, American Samoa, Mariana Islands, U.S. Virgin
Islands, and Puerto Rico.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: The maximum number of respondents
is 56.
    Estimated Number of Responses: NHTSA estimates 40-45 responses
annually.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: NHTSA estimates that the time
required to annually report the data described utilizing the Web-based
tool will be three hours (2 hours of preparation, 1 hour of entry to
Web site) per reporting entity, for a total of 168 hours for all
entities.
    The respondents would not incur any reporting costs from the
information collection beyond the time it takes to gather the
information, prepare it for reporting and then populate the Web-based
data collection tool. The respondents also would not incur any
recordkeeping burden or recordkeeping costs from the information
collection.
    Send comments within 30 days, to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140. Telephone: 1-800-647-5527.
    Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Department, including whether the information will have practical
utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimate of the burden of the
proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility
and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize
the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including
the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology. A comment to OMB is most effective if OMB
receives it within 30 days of publication.
    Frequency of Collection: Data will be collected annually.

ADDRESSES: Send comments regarding the burden estimate, including
suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Office of Management and
Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for the Office of the Secretary of
Transportation, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503.
    Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Department, including whether the information will have practical
utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimate of the burden of the
proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility
and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize
the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including
the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.

    Authority:  The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35, as amended; and 49 CFR 1:48.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 22, 2014.
Jeffrey P. Michael,
Associate Administrator, Research and Program Development.
[FR Doc. 2014-17532 Filed 7-24-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 215 (Wednesday, November 8, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77139-77140]
[FR Doc No: 2023-24716]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. 2023-1340]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Pilots
Convicted of Alcohol or Drug-Related Motor Vehicle Offenses or Subject
to State Motor Vehicle Administrative Procedure

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information
collection. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period
soliciting comments on the following collection of information was
published on June 8, 2023. The collection involves receiving and
maintaining correspondence required to be sent to the FAA from pilots
who have been involved in a drug- or alcohol-related motor vehicle
action. The information to be collected will be used to and/or is
necessary because the FAA must identify airmen with multiple drug- or
alcohol-related motor vehicle actions and verify traffic conviction
information in order to support the FAA's Aviation Safety, Office of
Aerospace Medicine, Aerospace Medical Certification Division, for their
requirements to evaluate the qualifications of that airman to hold a
medical certificate.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by December 8, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of
this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular
information collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--
Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Marks by email at:
[email protected]; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0543.
    Title: Pilots Convicted of Alcohol or Drug-Related Motor Vehicle
Offenses or Subject to State Motor Vehicle Administrative Procedure.
    Form Numbers: FAA Form 1600-85 has been created since the 60 day
FRN has been published.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period soliciting comments on the following collection of information
was published on June 8, 2023 (88 FR 37596). After a study and audit
conducted from the late 1970's through the 1980's by the Department of
Transportation, Office of the Inspector General, (DOT/OIG), the DOT/OIG
recommended the FAA find a way to track alcohol abusers and those
dependent on the substance that may pose a threat to the National
Airspace (NAS). Through a Congressional act issued in November of 1990,
the FAA established a Driving Under the Influence (DUI) and Driving
While Intoxicated (DWI) Investigations Branch. The final rule for this
program is found in Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)--Part 61
Sec.  61.15.
    This regulation calls for pilots certificated by the FAA to send
information regarding Driving Under the Influence (or similar charges)
of alcohol and/or drugs to the FAA within 60 days from either an
administrative action against their driver's license and/or criminal
conviction. Part of the regulation also calls for the FAA to seek
certificate action should an airman be involved in multiple, separate
drug/alcohol related motor vehicle incidents within a three-year
period. Information sent by the airmen is used to confirm or refute any
violations of these regulations, as well as by the Civil Aerospace
Medical Institute (CAMI) for medical qualification purposes. Collection
by CAMI is covered under a separate OMB control number 2120-0034.
    An airman is required to provide a written report, with the
following information: name, address, date of birth, airman certificate
number, the type of violation which resulted in the

conviction or administrative action, the state which holds the records
or action, and a statement of whether the motor vehicle action resulted
from the same incident or arose out of the same factual circumstances
related to a previously reported motor vehicle action. A privacy act
statement and a new FAA form number 1600-85 was created and added to
the online submission portal.
    Respondents: 480 FAA airmen with drug and alcohol related motor
vehicle actions provide approximately 599 reports per year over the
last three years.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 30 minutes.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 30 minutes per report and 299.5
hours for all reports annually.

    Issued in Oklahoma City, OK, on November 3, 2023.
Christopher Marks,
Security Specialist, Security & Hazardous Materials Safety/Enforcement
Standards & Policy Division, AXE-900.
[FR Doc. 2023-24716 Filed 11-7-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: April 29, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 82)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 22514-22516]
[DOCID:fr29ap10-6]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0381; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-146-AD;
Amendment 39-16268; AD 2010-09-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Model 747-200B
Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Model 747-200B series airplanes. This AD requires repetitive
inspections for cracking of the fuselage skin lap joints at stringer 6
on the left and right sides from station (STA) 340 to STA 400, a one-
time general visual inspection to determine if certain fasteners are
installed and to determine if service repair manual (SRM) repairs or
repair doublers are installed, and corrective actions if necessary.
Doing an optional modification of the stringer 6 lap joints terminates
the repetitive inspections for the modified area. This AD results from
reviews done by Boeing, which show that airplanes that were modified by
Boeing to the stretched upper deck (SUD) configuration require
inspection for cracking of the stringer 6 lap joint upper-fastener row
earlier than previously expected. We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct cracking of the stringer 6 lap joints where certain external
doublers were not installed, which could result in rapid decompression
and loss of structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective May 14, 2010.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of May 14, 2010.
    We must receive comments on this AD by June 28, 2010.

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:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     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.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box
3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com.

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 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: Ivan Li, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe
Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    Review by Boeing has determined that airplanes that were modified
by Boeing to the stretched upper deck (SUD) configuration require
inspecting the stringer 6 lap joint upper fastener row for cracking at
an earlier time than expected. Previously, no inspections of this area
were recommended prior to accomplishment of Boeing Service Bulletin
747-53-2272, Zone 1 modification, which involves installing external
doublers. If the external doublers have not been installed on the
stringer 6 lap joints, cracks could develop in the lap joints. Skin
cracks could join together and result in rapid decompression and loss
of structural integrity of the airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2809, dated June
18, 2009. This service bulletin specifies that, for airplanes with
external doublers installed in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin
747-53-2272, no further work is necessary.
    For the other affected airplanes, Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-53A2809, dated June 18, 2009, describes procedures for repetitive
external detailed and high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspections to
detect cracking of the left and right side stringer 6 lap joints, doing
a one-time general visual inspection to determine whether certain
fasteners exist in the upper-fastener row of the lap joints and to
determine whether any service repair manual (SRM) repairs or repair
doublers are installed, and corrective actions if necessary. Corrective
actions include repairing any cracks that are found, and contacting
Boeing for repair instructions if certain fasteners, or if any SRM
repairs or repair doublers other than those installed per Boeing
Service Bulletin 747-53-2272,
    Zone 1 modification, are found in the inspection area.
    Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2809, dated June 18, 2009,
also specifies that the optional accomplishment of a modification would
eliminate the need to do the repetitive inspections, repair cracks, or
contact Boeing for instructions if certain fasteners are found. This
modification involves removing the upper row of fasteners at the
stringer 6 lap joints from STA 340 to STA 400 doing open-hole HFEC
inspections to detect skin cracks; and doing corrective actions if
necessary (e.g., trimming out any cracks found during any inspection),
and installing external doublers as specified in the Zone 1
modification of Boeing Service Bulletin 747-53-2272.
    The compliance time for the initial inspections is 10,000 flight
cycles after the airplane was modified to the SUD configuration, or
within 50 flight cycles after the date on Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-53A2809, whichever occurs later. The repetitive interval is 3,000
flight cycles. The compliance time for the corrective actions is before
further flight.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

    No Model 747-200B series airplanes affected by this AD are on the
U.S. Register. We are issuing this AD because the unsafe condition
described previously is likely to exist or develop on other products of
the same type design that could be registered in the United States in
the future. This AD requires repetitive inspections of the left and
right side stringer 6 lap joints from STA 340 to STA 400.
    Since no U.S. Model 747-200B series airplanes are affected by this
AD, notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD
are unnecessary.

Differences Between the AD and the Service Information

    Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2809, dated June 18, 2009,
specifies to contact the manufacturer for instructions on how to repair
certain conditions, but this AD would require repairing those
conditions in one of the following ways:
     Using a method that we approve; or
     Using data that meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and that have been approved by the Boeing Commercial
Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been
authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not provide you with notice and an opportunity to
provide your comments before it becomes effective. However, we invite
you to send any written data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send
your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include
``Docket No. FAA-2010-0381; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-146-AD'' at
the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the
overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this
AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may
amend this 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 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

    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 DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), and
    (3) 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.
    You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2010-09-03 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-16268. Docket No. FAA-
2010-0381; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-146-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective May 14, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 747-200B series
airplanes, certificated in any category, identified as Group 1,
Configuration 2, in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2809, dated
June 18, 2009.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53:
Fuselage.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from reviews done by Boeing, which show that
airplanes modified to the stretched upper deck (SUD) configuration
by Boeing require inspection for cracking of the upper-fastener row
of the left and right side stringer 6 lap joints earlier than
expected. The Federal Aviation Administration is issuing this AD to
detect and correct cracking of the stringer 6 lap joints where
certain external doublers were not installed, which could result in
rapid decompression and loss of structural integrity of the
airplane.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Inspections

    (g) Except as required by paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD: At
the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2809, dated June 18, 2009, do
the inspections specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this
AD, and applicable corrective actions, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2809, dated June 18, 2009. Do all applicable corrective actions
before further flight. Repeat the inspections specified in paragraph
(g)(1) of this AD thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight
cycles, except as provided by paragraph (j) of this AD.
    (1) Inspect the left and right side stringer 6 lap joints from
station (STA) 340 to STA 400. The inspections include external
detailed and high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspections for
cracks in the skin in areas that have not been modified or repaired
as specified in paragraph 3.B., Part 2 or Part 3, respectively, of
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-53A2809, dated June 18, 2009.
    (2) Do a one-time general visual inspection of the lap joints to
determine if certain fasteners are installed and to determine if
structural repair manual (SRM) repairs or repair doublers are
installed.

    Note 1: For airplanes on which external doublers have been
installed on both side of the airplanes in accordance with Boeing
Service Bulletin 747-53-2272, Zone 1 modification, no further work
is necessary.

Exceptions to Service Bulletin

    (h) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2809, dated June
18, 2009, specifies a compliance time after the date on that service
bulletin, this AD requires compliance within the specified
compliance time after the effective date of this AD.
    (i) For any condition in which Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-53A2809, dated June 18, 2009, specifies to contact Boeing for
appropriate action: those actions must be approved using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph
(k) of this AD.

Optional Terminating Action

    (j) Accomplishing the modification, including the open-hole HFEC
inspections to detect skin cracks, and applicable corrective
actions, specified in paragraph 3.B., Part 2, of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2809, dated
June 18, 2009, terminates the repetitive inspections and repair
requirements specified in paragraph (g) of this AD for the side of
the airplane on which the modification is done.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (k)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to
ATTN: Ivan Li, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA,
Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Or, e-mail information
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO to make
those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must
meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (l) You must use Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2809,
dated June 18, 2009, to do the actions required by this AD, unless
the AD specifies otherwise. If you accomplish the optional
terminating actions specified by this AD, you must use Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-53A2809, dated June 18, 2009, as applicable, to
perform those actions, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone
206-544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the 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<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 9, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service..
[FR Doc. 2010-9091 Filed 4-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 72 (Thursday, April 14, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20990-20992]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8936]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0267]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Survey on Consumers'
Emotional and Cognitive Reactions to Food Recalls

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Fax written comments on the collection of information by May 16,
2011.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer,
FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or e-mailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>All
comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-new and
``Survey on Consumers' Emotional and Cognitive Reactions to Food
Recalls.'' Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the
heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denver Presley, Office of Information
Management, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr., PI50-400B,
Rockville, MD 20850,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

Survey on Consumers' Emotional and Cognitive Reactions to Food
Recalls--21 U.S.C. 393(d)(2)(C) (OMB Control Number 0910-NEW)

I. Background

    The proposed ``Survey on Consumers' Emotional and Cognitive
Reactions to Food Recalls'' will be conducted under a cooperative
agreement between the Joint Institute for Food Safety and Applied
Nutrition (JIFSAN) and the Center for Risk Communication Research at
the University of Maryland. JIFSAN was established in 1996 and is a
public and private partnership between FDA and the University of
Maryland. The Center for Risk Communication Research will design and
administer the study.
    The proposed study will assess consumers' emotional and cognitive
recollection of certain food recalls and gauge how these recollections
affect their current perceptions about food recalls and their
inclination to adhere to future recommended food recall behaviors.
Existing data show that many consumers do not take appropriate
protective actions during a foodborne illness outbreak or food recall
(Refs. 1 and 2). For example, 41 percent of U.S. consumers say they
have never looked for any recalled product in their home (Ref. 2).
Conversely, some consumers overreact to the announcement of a foodborne
illness outbreak or food recall. In response to the 2006 fresh, bagged
spinach recall which followed a

multistate outbreak of Escherichia coli O157: H7 infections (Ref. 3),
18 percent of consumers said they stopped buying other bagged, fresh
produce because of the spinach recall (Ref. 1).
    Research shows that emotion plays a large role in decisionmaking,
and that individuals may not be conscious of its effects on their
behavior (Ref. 4). For example, when people are angry they are likely
to place blame, take action, and want justice to be served (Ref. 5). If
a particular food recall engenders widespread anger and the anger is
coupled with behavior that is less than desirable from a food safety or
nutritional standpoint, it is possible that anger will be the lens
through which future food recall situations are viewed, thus resulting
in similar undesirable behaviors. Findings from this study will help
FDA understand the emotional response to food recalls. This will help
FDA to design more effective consumer food recall messages during and
after a recall.
    FDA conducts research and educational and public information
programs relating to food safety under its broad statutory authority,
set forth in section 903(b)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 393(b)(2)), to protect the public health
by ensuring that foods are ``safe, wholesome, sanitary, and properly
labeled,'' and in section 903(d)(2)(C), to conduct research relating to
foods, drugs, cosmetics, and devices in carrying out the FD&C Act.
    FDA plans to survey U.S. consumers using a web-based panel of U.S.
households to collect information on consumers' cognitive and emotional
reaction to food recalls. The survey will query consumers on their
recollection of food recalls within the past 5 years; attitude toward
recalled foods; knowledge about particular food recalls; behavior
during the food recall; and assessment and appraisals of
susceptibility, severity, satisfaction, and self-efficacy.
    The data will be collected using an online survey. A pool of 10,000
consumers from a Web-based consumer panel will be screened for
eligibility based on age (18+ years) and familiarity with recent food
recalls. One thousand of eligible consumers will be randomly selected
to participate in the survey. The results of the survey will not be
used to generate population estimates.
    The estimated total hour burden of the collection of information is
354 hours (table 1 of this document). To help design and refine the
questionnaire, the Center for Risk Communication Research will conduct
cognitive interviews by screening 25 adult consumers in order to obtain
8 respondents for the cognitive interviews. Each screening is expected
to take 5 minutes (0.083 hours) and each cognitive interview is
expected to take 1 hour. The total for cognitive interview activities
is 10 hours (2 hours + 8 hours). Subsequently, we will conduct pretests
of the study questionnaire before it is administered. We expect that
100 invitations, each taking 2 minutes (0.033 hours), will need to be
sent to adult members of the online consumer panel to have 40 of them
complete a 10 minute (0.167 hours) pretest. The total for the pretest
activities is 10 hours (3 hours + 7 hours). We estimate sending 10,000
survey screeners, each taking 1 minute (0.017 hours), to adult members
of the online consumer panel to have 1,000 of them complete a 10 minute
(0.167 hours) survey. The total for the survey activities is 337 hours
(170 hours + 167 hours).
    The burden estimate for this study published in the Federal
Register of June 18, 2010 (75 FR 34745), has increased from 234 hours
to 357 hours. The increase in burden hours represents the addition of
cognitive interviews to the study design and correction of a math
error.
    In the Federal Register of June 18, 2010 (75 FR 34745), FDA
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information. FDA received two letters containing multiple
comments in response to the notice. One letter contained comments
outside the scope of the four collection of information topics on which
the notice solicits comments and, thus, will not be addressed here.
    (Comment) One comment suggested that the survey should include
consumers whose pets were sickened or had died because of mycotoxins in
pet food that resulted in the 2004 pet food recall.
    (Response) FDA agrees that consumers who were affected by the 2004
pet food recall should be included as survey respondents. These
consumers will be included if they are members of the online consumer
panel from which the survey sample will be drawn and they are randomly
selected from the panel. FDA does not believe that the affected
population should be target-sampled because the study focuses on human
food recalls rather than pet food recalls.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                 Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Annual
             Portion of study                  Number of     frequency per   Total annual    Hours per    Total
                                              respondents      response        responses      response    hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cognitive interview screener..............              25               1              25         5/60        2
Cognitive interview.......................               8               1               8         1/60        8
Pretest screener..........................             100               1             100         2/60        3
Pretest...................................              40               1              40        10/60        7
Screener..................................          10,000               1          10,000         1/60      170
Survey....................................           1,000               1           1,000        10/60      167
                                           ---------------------------------------------------------------------
     Total................................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ...........      357
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

II. References

    The following references have been placed on display in the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES) and may be seen by
interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
    1. Cuite, C., Condry, S., Nucci, M., and Hallman, W., ``Public
Response to the Contaminated Spinach Recall of 2006,'' Publication
number RR-0107-013. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers, the State
University of New Jersey, Food Policy Institute, 2007.
    2. Hallman, W., Cuite, C., and Hooker, N., ``Consumer Responses to
Food Recalls: 2009 National Survey Report,'' Publication number RR-
0109-018. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers, the

State University of New Jersey, Food Policy Institute, 2009.
    3. Acheson, D., ``Outbreak of Escherichia coli 0157 Infections
Associated with Fresh Spinach--United States, August-September 2006,''
2007. Available at http://first.fda.gov/cafdas/documents/Acheson_Spinach_Outbreak_2006_FDA_pres.ppt.
    4. Han, S., Lerner, J.S., and Keltner, D., ``Feelings and Consumer
Decision Making: The Appraisal-Tendency Framework,'' Journal of
Consumer Psychology, 17(3), 158-168, 2007.
    5. Lazurus, R.S., Emotion and Adaptation. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1991.

    Dated: April 8, 2011.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-8936 Filed 4-13-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 25 (Thursday, February 6, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 7189]
[FR Doc No: 2014-02608]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9906-31-Region-2]

Proposed CERCLA Settlements Relating to the Sherwin-Williams Site
in Gibbsboro, Camden County, New Jersey

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of proposed administrative settlement and opportunity
for public comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In accordance with Section 122(i) of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as
amended (``CERCLA''), notice is hereby given by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (``EPA''), Region 2, of a proposed Administrative
Settlement Agreement for Recovery of Past Response Costs
(``Agreement'') pursuant to Section 122(h)(1) of CERCLA with the
Sherwin-Williams Company (``Settling Party''). The Settling Party is a
potentially responsible party, pursuant to Section 107(a) of CERCLA,
and thus is potentially liable for response costs incurred at or in
connection with the Sherwin-Williams Site (``Site''), located in
Gibbsboro, Camden County, New Jersey. Under the Agreement, the Settling
Party agrees to pay a total of $104,000.00 to EPA for past response
costs. EPA will consider all comments received and may modify or
withdraw its consent to the Agreement if comments received disclose
facts or considerations that indicate that the proposed Agreement is
inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. EPA's response to any comments
received will be available for public inspection at EPA Region 2
offices, 290 Broadway, New York, New York 10007-1866.

DATES: Comments must be provided by March 10, 2014.

ADDRESSES: The Agreement is available for public inspection at EPA
Region 2 offices at 290 Broadway, New York, New York 10007-1866.
Comments should reference the Sherwin-Williams Site, located in
Gibbsboro, Camden County, New Jersey, Index Nos. CERCLA-02-2014-2002.
To request a copy of the Agreements, please contact the EPA employee
identified below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl Howard, Assistant Regional
Counsel, New Jersey Superfund Branch, Office of Regional Counsel, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 290 Broadway--17th Floor, New York,
New York 10007-1866. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: January 15, 2014.
Walter E. Mugdan,
Director, Emergency and Remedial Response Division.
[FR Doc. 2014-02608 Filed 2-5-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 132 (Thursday, July 10, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39421-39424]
[FR Doc No: 2014-16102]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-72544; File No. SR-ICEEU-2014-10]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited; Notice
of Filing of Proposed Rule Change to CDS Policies Relating to EMIR

July 3, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on June 30, 2014, ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear Europe'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change described in Items I, II and III below, which
Items have been prepared primarily by ICE Clear Europe. The Commission
is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The principal purpose of the proposed change is to amend certain of
the ICE Clear Europe credit default swaps (CDS) risk policies (``Risk
Policy Amendments'') in order to facilitate compliance with
requirements under the European Market Infrastructure Regulation
(including regulations thereunder, ``EMIR'') \3\ that will apply to ICE
Clear Europe as an authorized central counterparty.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and
of the Council of 4 July 2012 on OTC derivatives, central
counterparties and trade repositories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, ICE Clear Europe included
statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule
change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule
change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places
specified in Item IV below. ICE Clear Europe has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant
aspects of these statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    ICE Clear Europe submitted proposed amendments to its risk policies
relating to the CDS business to facilitate compliance with requirements
under EMIR, which will apply to ICE Clear Europe as an authorized
central counterparty. ICE Clear Europe will be required to be in
compliance with EMIR as of the time it receives authorization from the
European Securities and Markets Authority. The relevant policies being
modified are (i) the CDS Risk Policy (``Risk Policy''); (ii) the Risk
Model Description (``Model Description''); (iii) the CDS Clearing Back-
Testing Framework (``Back-Testing Framework''); (iv) the CDS Clearing
Stress-Testing Framework (``Stress-Testing Framework''); and (v) the
CDS Default Management Framework (``Default Management Framework'').
    The changes to the Risk Policy amend the calculation of CDS initial
margin requirements to comply with margin requirements under EMIR
Article 41 and Article 24 of the implementing Regulatory Technical
Standards.\4\ As revised, the initial margin methodology is designed to
provide portfolio risk coverage against at least 5-day market
realizations that would occur with probability 99.5% (previously
99.0%). In other words, the estimated requirements provide risk
protection equivalent to, at least, a 5-day 99.5% Value-at-Risk
measure. In addition, in order to address requirements under EMIR
related to procyclicality (Article 28 of the Regulatory Technical
Standards) changes were made to the maximum scale used for the initial
margin approach by adding a volatility scale that assigns a 25% weight
to stressed period observations during the lookback period from April
2007 to the present (consistent with Article 28(b) of the Regulatory
Technical Standards). The revised initial margin requirement, including
certain portfolio benefit assumptions, is expected to result in more
conservative initial margin requirements than under the previous
approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No. 153/2013 of 19
December 2012 Supplementing Regulation (EU) No. 648/2012 of the
European Parliament and of the Council with regard to Regulatory
Technical Standards on Requirements for Central Counterparties (the
``Regulatory Technical Standards'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similar amendments to those described above were also made to the
Model Description. Under the revised Model Description, the overall
initial margin methodology, post portfolio benefits and other risk
components (e.g. jump-to-default and wrong way risk), are intended to
provide portfolio risk coverage against at least 5-day market
realizations that would occur with probability 99.5% or higher.
Conforming changes with respect to the 99.5% confidence interval were
also made in the Model Description. The revised Model Description also
reflects the use of stressed observations described above to limit
procyclicality. The Model Description has also been revised to include
the clearing house's Monte Carlo Approach for Risk Management (``MC''),
which has previously been applied to Western European sovereign CDS and
is proposed to be extended to all CDS.
    The CDS MC approach aims to model the spread risk component of
initial margin by combining individual risk factors (``RFs''), i.e.,
single name or index family of instruments, into a copula. Marginal
distributions for individual RFs are joined together under a Student-t
copula. In this way, the model preserves historical behavior of RFS and
their dependencies. The value-at risk (VaR) for the profit and loss
distribution can be estimated by sampling from this copula.
    The MC method offers a number of advantages over the existing
scenario-based spread response method (the ``Decomp SR''). The
dependence structure of RFs is encoded into the copula, as opposed to
the long-short offsets algorithm used to determine portfolio benefits
under the Decomp SR. The copula can also capture tail dependence, such
that various extreme scenarios can be easily simulated.
    The scenario-based approach of the spread risk component with its
portfolio benefit assumptions is generally expected to result in a more
conservative requirement when compared to the MC VaR approach for the
same coverage level. In order to ensure compliance with the 99.5
confidence interval requirement for OTC derivatives under EMIR, the
final spread response charge will be determined as the more
conservative of the Decomp SR and the MC VaR calculated at a 99.5%
confidence interval.
    The CDS pricing model, used by ICE Clear Europe since the inception
of clearing, has also been attached to the Risk Model Description as an
annex for completeness.
    With respect to the Back-Testing Framework, changes were made to
implement the 99.5% confidence interval. The historical volatility
calculation uses data from at the minimum the most recent year (or, if
shorter, the period in which the relevant contract has been cleared).
In addition, per the amendments, on at least a monthly basis, the CDS
Risk Department will report the CDS back testing results and analysis
to the CDS Risk Committee in order to seek their review and, if needed,
their recommendations of the CDS margin model. In addition, CDS back
testing results and analyses are made available to all CDS Clearing
Members and clients (where known to ICE Clear Europe) for their own
portfolios. Disclosed information is aggregated in a form that does not
breach confidentiality. The policy also provides a framework for
monitoring

and remediating breaches that arise during back-testing, based on the
so-called ``Basel Traffic Light System'', depending on the number and
magnitude of the exceedances. The Back-Testing Framework is reviewed
and approved by the CDS Risk Committee and ICE Clear Europe Board at
least annually.
    The Stress-Testing Framework is amended to provide further detail
as to its use of daily stress testing, which allows ICE Clear Europe to
discover any potential weaknesses in the risk methodologies as well as
to exercise short-term measures if the tests reveal that any
counterparties are inadequately collateralized. A detailed analysis of
the stress testing and sensitivity testing results is performed by the
CDS Risk Department at least on a monthly basis, or more frequently in
stressed market conditions, to ensure the adequacy of the existing
stress test scenarios and framework. The Stress-Testing Framework
amendments would also add pure historical scenarios, as required under
EMIR. Pure historical scenarios are applied at the single name level,
using the same date across all instruments. Single-name specific stress
scenarios are based on the same 5-day period when the on-the-run
indices had the greatest observed related spread increases or
decreases. The guaranty fund stress scenario has also been clarified,
and is designed to account for: (i) The occurrence of credit events for
two clearing members and three reference entities on which the
defaulted clearing members sold protection, (ii) adverse contracting or
widening credit spread scenarios, (iii) adverse widening of Index-
single name ``basis'', and (iv) adverse changes of the default-free
discount terms structure. CDS stress testing results and analyses are
made available to all CDS Clearing Members and clients (where known to
ICE Clear Europe) for their own portfolios. Disclosed information is
aggregated in a form that does not breach confidentiality. The CDS
Stress Testing framework is reviewed and approved by the CDS Risk
Committee and ICE Clear Europe Board at least annually.
    Minor improvements have been made to the Default Management
Framework. First, ICE Clear Europe will conduct a quarterly (rather
than annual) review of its Default Management Framework. Also, ICE
Clear Europe will perform a mock clearing member default test at least
annually.
    ICE Clear Europe believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act \5\ and the
regulations thereunder applicable to it, including the standards under
Rule 17Ad-22.\6\ Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \7\ requires, among
other things, that the rules of a clearing agency be designed to
promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of securities
transactions and, to the extent applicable, derivative agreements,
contracts, and transactions. The proposed rule change, which is
intended to ensure compliance by the clearing house with the margin and
risk management requirements of EMIR, principally enhance relevant risk
policies and impose more conservative initial margin requirements. As a
result, ICE Clear Europe believes that the proposed rule change will
contribute to the safeguarding of funds and securities associated with
derivative transactions that are in the custody or control of the
clearing house, as well as more generally facilitate the prompt and
accurate settlement of such transactions, within the meaning of Section
17(A)(b)(3)(F).\8\ ICE Clear Europe further believes that the proposed
rule change will enhance the stability of the clearing system, by
reducing the risk to market participants of a default by a clearing
member or other customer. In addition, the proposed change to the Risk
Policy Amendments is consistent with the relevant requirements of Rule
17Ad-22.\9\ In particular, the amendments to the Risk Policy and Model
Description will enhance the financial resources available to the
clearing house by imposing more conservative initial margin
requirements for CDS, as required by EMIR and consistent with the
requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(b)(2-3).\10\ The changes in the Default
Management Policy are intended to improve on default management
procedures and therefore are consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(d)(11).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.
    \6\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22.
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(b)(2-3).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(d)(11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the reasons noted above, ICE Clear Europe believes that the
proposed Risk Policy Amendments are consistent with the requirements of
Section 17A of the Act and regulations thereunder applicable to it.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    ICE Clear Europe does not believe the Risk Policy Amendments would
have any impact, or impose any burden, on competition not necessary or
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Although the
Risk Policy Amendments may increase the costs of clearing CDS for
clearing members and their customers, as a result of more conservative
initial margin requirements, this change is required in order to comply
with Article 41 of EMIR and implementing regulations. In addition, ICE
Clear Europe believes that the revisions to the model strengthen its
risk management capability and financial resources, and are therefore
appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Because these
changes will apply to all clearing members that clear CDS, ICE Clear
Europe does not believe the amendments will adversely affect
competition among clearing members. Furthermore, since the EMIR
requirements will apply to European clearing houses generally, ICE
Clear Europe does not anticipate that the changes will adversely affect
the ability of market participants to clear CDS transactions generally,
reduce access to clearing generally, or limit market participants'
choices for clearing derivatives. As a result, ICE Clear Europe
believes that any impact on competition is appropriate in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    Written comments relating to the proposed change to the rules have
not been solicited or received. ICE Clear Europe will notify the
Commission of any written comments received by ICE Clear Europe.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove the proposed rule change or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.

Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml) or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-ICEEU-2014-10 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1060.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICEEU-2014-10. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filings will also be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of ICE Clear Europe
and on ICE Clear Europe's Web site at https://www.theice.com/notices/Notices.shtml?regulatoryFilings.
    All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission
does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICEEU-2014-10
and should be submitted on or before July 31, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-16102 Filed 7-9-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 151 (Friday, August 5, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47626-47627]
[FR Doc No: 2011-19853]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-64997; File No. SR-NYSE-2011-37]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Amending the Fees Charged for the Floor Member Continuing Education
Program for Qualified Floor Members Pursuant to NYSE Rule 103A, From a
Fixed Flat Fee of $80 Per Training Module to a Fixed Flat Fee of $150
Per Qualified Member Per Bi-Annual Session for a Total Cost Per Member
Per Year of $300

August 1, 2011.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that, on July 21, 2011, New York Stock Exchange LLC (the ``Exchange''
or ``NYSE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend, effective immediately, the fees
charged for the Floor Member Continuing Education Program for qualified
Floor members pursuant to NYSE Rule 103A, from a fixed flat fee of $80
per training module to a fixed flat fee of $150 per qualified member
per bi-annual session for a total cost per member per year of $300. The
text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange, at
http://www.nyse.com, at the Commission's Public Reference Room, and at
the Commission's Web site at http://www.sec.gov.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant parts of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    As required by NYSE Rule 103A, the Exchange provides Floor members
with mandatory continuing education program, known as the Floor Member
Continuing Education Program (``FMCE Program''). Since June 14, 2010,
the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (``FINRA'') has been
developing and administering the FMCE Program on the Exchange's behalf
pursuant to a regulatory services agreement.
    The Exchange proposes to amend, effective immediately, the fees
charged for the FMCE Program. Currently, members pay a fee of $80 per
training module. Because the number of modules that the Exchange
administers per year can vary (ranging from four to six modules per
year), Floor members are currently faced with a level of uncertainty of
the amount of fees that they may be charged in connection with the FMCE
program. In addition, because modules can be issued throughout the
year, Floor members face additional uncertainty as to when such fees
will be charged.
    To eliminate this uncertainty, the Exchange proposes to delete the
per module fee and instead charge a flat $150 fee per session per
member per year, with two sessions a year amounting to a total of $300
total charges per year for the FMCE Program. Consistent with Rule 103A
and current practice, each session will include two to three modules of
education programming, for a total of four to six modules per year.
Accordingly, this proposed fee change will not impact the quantity or
quality of educational training that will be issued to Floor members.
Rather, the same level of

training will be provided via the same delivery method, except with
more certainty both as to when the FMCE Program will be delivered and
the total cost.
    In the past, the Exchange has sought to assess the FMCE Program fee
to recoup development and delivery costs, crediting revenues exceeding
a year's actual development and delivery costs to the succeeding year's
budgeted costs. Now that FINRA develops and administers the FMCE
Program on the Exchange's behalf, the FINRA costs are subsumed in the
larger fee paid to FINRA for the provision of regulatory services. The
Exchange continues to incur costs related to configuration, maintenance
and hosting associated with FMCE delivery and billing. In balancing the
costs to the Exchange, the Exchange also weighs the increasing burden
on Floor members to absorb those costs. At the time the fee was last
assessed in 2009, the number of qualified members subject to the FMCE
Program requirement was 524. That number is now 467. In view of these
declining membership numbers, the Exchange believes that the full costs
associated with the FMCE Program should not be shifted to the Floor
members. The Exchange believes that the proposed $300 annual fee
strikes the appropriate balance between recouping certain costs
associated with the FMCE Program from Floor members, without burdening
a shrinking population with the full costs.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\3\ in general, and Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\4\ in
particular, in that it is designed to provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its
members and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) \5\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-
4 \6\ thereunder, because it establishes a due, fee, or other charge
imposed by the NYSE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \6\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2011-37 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2011-37. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2011-37 and should be
submitted on or before August 26, 2011.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-19853 Filed 8-4-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 5, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43481-43483]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15357]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-7422; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-079-AD;
Amendment 39-18579; AD 2016-13-14]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Bombardier, Inc. Model DHC-8-400 series airplanes. This AD requires an
inspection to determine if certain left and right main landing gear
(MLG) retract actuator rod ends are installed and repetitive liquid
penetrant inspections (LPIs) of affected left and right MLG retract
actuator rod ends, and corrective actions if necessary. This AD also
provides optional terminating action for the inspections. This AD was
prompted by a report of cracked MLG retract actuator rod ends. We are
issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue cracking of the left and
right MLG retract actuator rod ends, which could lead to left or right
MLG collapse.

DATES: This AD becomes effective July 20, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of July 20,
2016.
    We must receive comments on this AD by August 19, 2016.

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:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     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 final rule, contact
Bombardier, Inc., Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt Boulevard,
Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 416-
375-4539; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
7422.

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-2016-
7422; or in person at the Docket Operations office 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:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aziz Ahmed, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury,
NY 11590; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian AD CF-2016-16, dated May 20,
2016 (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 has been a single reported case of a cracked MLG retract
actuator rod end in service. A supplier disclosure letter and
subsequent Bombardier analysis indicate that the MLG retract
actuator rod end P/N [part number] P3A2750 and P3A2750-1 may develop
fatigue cracking. This condition, if not corrected, could lead to
left hand (LH) or right hand (RH) MLG collapse.
    This [Canadian] AD mandates the inspection [to determine if
certain left and right main landing gear MLG retract actuator rod
ends are installed, repetitive LPIs of affected left and right MLG
retract actuator rod ends, and corrective actions if necessary], and
replacement of the LH and RH MLG retract actuator rod ends P/N
P3A2750 and P3A2750-1 [which is terminating action for the
repetitive LPIs].

    Corrective actions includes replacing cracked MLG retract actuator
rod ends. You may examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
7422.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier, Inc. has issued Service Bulletin 84-32-142, dated May
4, 2016. The service information describes procedures for an inspection
to determine if certain left and right MLG retract actuator rod ends
are installed, repetitive LPIs of the left and right MLG retract
actuator rod ends, and replacement of left and right MLG

retract actuator rod ends. This service information is reasonably
available because the interested parties have access to it through
their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This 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 issuing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined the unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies
waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because
fatigue cracking of the left and right MLG retract actuator rod ends
could lead to left or right MLG collapse. Therefore, we determined that
notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are
impracticable and that good cause exists for making this amendment
effective in fewer than 30 days.

Interim Action

    We consider this AD interim action. We are currently considering
requiring the replacement of affected left and right MLG retract
actuator rod ends with P/N P3A6460, which will constitute terminating
action for the inspections required by this AD. However, the planned
compliance time for the replacement would allow enough time to provide
notice and opportunity for prior public comment on the merits of the
replacement.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2016-7422; Directorate
Identifier 2016-NM-079-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this 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 AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 52 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We also estimate that it will take about 1 work-hour per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of
this AD on U.S. operators to be $4,420, or $85 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions will
take about 3 work-hours and require parts costing $2,019, for a cost of
$2,274 per product. We have no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these actions.
    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

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
    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.

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

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2016-13-14 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-18579. Docket No. FAA-
2016-7422; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-079-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective July 20, 2016.

(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 4325 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32, Landing
gear.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of cracked main landing gear
(MLG) retract actuator rod ends. We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct fatigue cracking of the left and right MLG retract
actuator rod ends, which could lead to left or right MLG collapse.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Part Number Inspection

    Within 100 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD,
inspect the left and right MLG retract actuator rod ends to
determine if part number (P/N) P3A2750 or P3A2750-1 is installed. A
review of airplane maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of this
inspection if the part number can be conclusively determined from
that review.

(h) Repetitive Liquid Penetrant Inspections (LPIs)

    For each left or right MLG retract actuator rod end having P/N
P3A2750 or P3A2750-1: At the applicable time specified in paragraph
(h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD, do an LPI to detect cracks of the MLG
retract actuator rod end, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-32-142, dated May 4,
2016, except as required by paragraph (k) of this AD. Thereafter,
repeat the LPI at intervals not to exceed 600 flight cycles.
    (1) If the MLG retract actuator rod end has accumulated more
than 6,000 flight cycles as of the effective date of this AD:
Inspect within 100 flight cycles after the effective date of this
AD.
    (2) If the MLG retract actuator rod end has accumulated 6,000
flight cycles or fewer as of the effective date of this AD: Inspect
within 600 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD.

(i) Corrective Action

    If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (h) of this AD, before further flight replace the cracked
MLG retract actuator rod end, P/N P3A2750 or P3A2750-1, with a MLG
retract actuator rod end, P/N P3A6460 in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-32-
142, dated May 4, 2016, except as required by paragraph (k) of this
AD.

(j) Optional Replacement

    Replacement of the left and right side MLG retract actuator rod
ends, P/N P3A2750 or P3A2750-1, with left and right MLG retract
actuator rod ends, P/N P3A6460, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-32-
142, dated May 4, 2016, except as required by paragraph (k) of this
AD, constitutes terminating action for the actions required by
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD for that airplane.

(k) Exception to Paragraphs (h), (i), and (j) of This AD

    If it is not possible to complete all the instructions in
Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-32-142, dated May 4, 2016 because of
the configuration of the airplane: Before further flight, repair
using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO, ANE-170, FAA;
or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or Bombardier, Inc.'s
TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO).

(l) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a
left or right MLG retract actuator rod end, P/N P3A2750 or P3A2750-
1, on any airplane.

(m) 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<PHONE_NUMBER>. 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: 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, New York ACO, ANE-170, FAA; or Transport
Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design
Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO, the approval
must include the DAO-authorized signature.

(n) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI)
Canadian AD CF-2016-16, dated May 20, 2016, for related information.
You may examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2016-7422.

(o) 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 84-32-142, dated May 4, 2016.
    (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:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 22, 2016.
Dorr M. Anderson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-15357 Filed 7-1-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P