[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 54 (Wednesday, March 20, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17099-17102]
[FR Doc No: 2013-06443]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0058]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; BWRC Southwest Showdown 2, Parker, AZ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone within
the Lake Moolvalya region of the navigable waters of the Colorado River
in Parker, Arizona for the Blue Water Resort and Casino Southwest
Showdown. This temporary safety zone is necessary to provide for the
safety of the participants, crew, spectators, participating vessels,
and other vessels and users of the waterway. Persons and vessels are
prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within
this safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or his
designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 9 a.m. on March 22, 2013, until 6
p.m. on March 24, 2013. This rule will be enforced from 9 a.m. until 6
p.m. on March 22, 23, and 24, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2013-0058 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2013-0058 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, 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 FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call or email Petty Officer Bryan Gollogly, Waterways
Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, Coast Guard; telephone
619-278-7656, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have
questions on viewing the docket, call Barbara Hairston, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because it would be impracticable. The Coast
Guard did not receive the necessary information from the event sponsor
until recently and the sponsor is anticipating this event taking place
as scheduled. Because of these time constraints, it is impracticable
that the Coast Guard issue an NPRM. Immediate action is necessary to
ensure the safety of vessels, spectators, participants, and others in
the vicinity of the marine event on the dates and times this rule will
be in effect.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), for the same reasons mentioned above, the
Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective
less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. Delaying
the effective date would be impracticable and contrary to the public
interest, since immediate action is needed to ensure the public's
safety and the Coast Guard was provided with information regarding this
event with insufficient time to delay the effective date.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The Arizona Drag Boat Association is sponsoring the Blue Water
Resort and Casino Southwest Showdown 2, which is held on the Lake
Moolvalya region of the Colorado River in Parker, Arizona. This
temporary safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the
participants, crew, spectators, sponsor vessels, and other vessels and
users of the waterway. This event involves powerboats transiting at
high rate of speed along a 1000 foot straightaway. The size of the
boats varies from 16 to 20 feet in length. Approximately 80 boats will
be participating in this event. The sponsor will provide seven patrol
and rescue boats and three river closure boats to help facilitate the
event and ensure public safety.

C. Discussion of Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone that will be enforced
from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on March 22, 2013, March 23, 2013, and March 24,
2013. This safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the
crews, spectators, participants, and other vessels and users of the
waterway. Persons and vessels will be prohibited from entering into,
transiting through, or anchoring with this safety zone unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated
representative. This temporary safety zone includes the waters of the
Colorado River between Headgate Dam and 0.5 miles north of the Blue
Water Marina in Parker, Arizona. Before the effective period, the Coast
Guard will publish a Local Notice to Mariners (LNM).

D. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on these statutes and executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order.
    We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a
full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. This determination is based
on the size and location of the safety zone. Commercial vessels will
not be hindered by the safety zone. Recreational vessels may transit
through the established safety zone if authorized to do so by the
Captain of the Port or his designated representative.

2. Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which might
be small entities: the owners or operators of vessels intending to
transit or anchor in a portion of the Colorado River from 9 a.m. to 6
p.m. on March 22, 2013 through March 24, 2013.
    This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons.
Although the safety zone would apply to the entire width of the river,
traffic would be allowed to pass through the zone with the permission
of the Coast Guard patrol commander. Before the effective period, the
Coast Guard will publish a Local Notice to Mariners (LNM).

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,

Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INTFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any
one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not affect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

13. Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)-
(g), of the Instruction. This rule involves the establishment of a
safety zone.
    An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security Measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306,
3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T11-486 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-486  Safety zone; BWRC Southwest Showdown 2, Parker, AZ.

    (a) Location. This temporary safety zone includes the waters of the
Colorado River between Headgate Dam and 0.5 miles north of the Blue
Water Marina in Parker, Arizona.
    (b) Enforcement Period. This section is effective from 9 a.m. on
March 22, 2013, until 6 p.m. on March 24, 2013. It will be enforced
from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. each day (March 22, 23 and 24, 2013). Before the
effective period, the Coast Guard will publish a Local Notice to
Mariners (LNM). If the event concludes prior to the scheduled
termination time, the Captain of the Port will cease enforcement of
this safety zone and will announce that fact via Broadcast Notice to
Mariners.
    (c) Definitions. The following definition applies to this section:
designated representative, means any commissioned, warrant, or petty
officer of the Coast Guard on board Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary,
and local, state, and federal law enforcement vessels who have been
authorized to act on the behalf of the Captain of the Port.
    (d) Regulations. (1) Entry into, transit through or anchoring
within this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain
of the Port of San Diego or his designated representative.
    (2) Mariners requesting permission to transit through the safety
zone may request authorization to do so from the Patrol Commander. The
Patrol Commander may be contacted at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of
the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or his designated representative.

    (4) Upon being hailed by U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel by
siren, radio, flashing light or other means, the operator of a vessel
shall proceed as directed.
    (5) The Coast Guard may be assisted by other federal, state, or
local agencies.

    Dated: March 6, 2013.
S.M. Mahoney,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Diego.
[FR Doc. 2013-06443 Filed 3-19-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: January 27, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 17)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 4265-4267]
[DOCID:fr27ja10-3]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-1148; Directorate Identifier 2009-SW-36-AD;
Amendment 39-16185; AD 2010-03-02]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Lifesavings Systems Corp., D-Lok Hook
Assembly

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 the
Lifesavings Systems Corp., D-Lok Hook assembly installed on certain
rescue hoist assemblies. This AD results from a mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) AD issued by the European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member
States of the European Community. The MCAI AD states that rescue hoist
operators have reported surface irregularities and discontinuities on
certain D-Lok Hooks because of an unapproved change in the hook design
and manufacturing process from forged material to cast material that
have different physical properties. The

actions are intended to prevent failure of a hook during rescue hoist
operations, loss of the rescued passenger, and subsequent serious
injury or fatality.

DATES: This AD becomes effective on February 11, 2010.
    We must receive comments on this AD by March 29, 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 your
comments electronically.
     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.
    You may get the service information identified in this AD from
Goodrich Corporation, Sensors and Integrated Systems, 1550 S. Valley
Vista Dr., Diamond Bar, California 91765, telephone 1-909-569-0210, fax
1-909-569-0387; and from Breeze-Eastern Corporation, 700 Liberty
Avenue, Union, NJ 07083-8198, telephone 1-908-686-4000, Ext. 3897 or
3890 or 1-800-929-1919 (toll free United States and Canada only), fax
1-908-688-6495, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Examining the Docket: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet
at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the Docket Operations
office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the economic evaluation, any
comments received, and other information. The street address for the
Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is stated in the
ADDRESSES section of this AD. Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: DOT/FAA Southwest Region, Gary Roach,
ASW-111, Aviation Safety Engineer, Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations
and Guidance Group, 2601 Meacham Blvd, Fort Worth, Texas 76137,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Community, has issued EASA AD No. 2009-0183-E, dated August
14, 2009, which is the latest of 4 MCAI ADs that have been issued, to
correct an unsafe condition for certain helicopters with certain D-Lok
Hook assemblies installed on Goodrich and Breeze-Eastern rescue hoists.
The MCAI AD states that rescue hoist operators have reported surface
irregularities and discontinuities on certain D-Lok Hooks because of an
unapproved change in the hook design and manufacturing process from
forged material to cast material that have different physical
properties. The actions are intended to prevent failure of a hook
during rescue hoist operations, loss of the rescued passenger, and
subsequent serious injury or fatality.
    You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI AD and any
related service information in the AD docket.

Related Service Information

    Goodrich has issued Service Bulletin (SB) 42315-489-01, Revision 1,
dated June 5, 2009, and Breeze-Eastern Corporation has issued SB BLH-
20200-504-25-01, dated June 12, 2009. These SBs were issued following
the discovery of surface irregularities and discontinuities on D-Lok
Hooks assemblies, part number (P/N) 410-A and 410-F, manufactured by
Lifesaving Systems Corp., which are used on Goodrich and Breeze-Eastern
rescue hoist assemblies. The SBs specify inspecting and removing all D-
Lok hooks that have surface irregularities and discontinuities that
exceed specified acceptable limits.
    The actions described in the MCAI AD are intended to correct the
same unsafe condition as that identified in the service information.

FAA's Evaluation and Unsafe Condition Determination

    Agusta S.p.A. Model A109 series and AB139/AW139; Eurocopter Model
AS332, AS350, AS355, SA-365, AS-365, EC 155 series, EC225LP; Eurocopter
Deutschland GmbH Model EC135 and MBB-BK 117; and Sikorsky Aircraft
Corporation S-61, S76, and S92 helicopters, all serial numbers; and
other helicopters may have a rescue hoist assembly installed with a
Lifesaving Systems Corp. D-Lok Hook Assembly with P/N 410-A or 410-F
and lot number 208 or 1108. These hook assemblies were manufactured
using a design and a manufacturing process using cast material instead
of forged material, which was not approved by the FAA. Without FAA
approval, these D-Lok hook assemblies, in addition to creating an
unsafe condition, are not eligible for use in aircraft operating in the
United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the member
countries of the European Community, EASA has notified us of the unsafe
condition described in the MCAI AD. We are issuing this AD because we
evaluated all information provided by EASA and determined the unsafe
condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of
these same type designs.
    This AD requires, within 200 hoist lifts, unless already done,
replacing each affected D-Lok Hook assembly with an airworthy hook
assembly other than D-Lok Hook assembly, P/N 410-A or 410-F, lot number
208 or 1108.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI AD

    The latest MCAI AD requires a visual inspection to determine
whether the affected hook assembly has surface irregularities and
discontinuities that exceed certain manufacturer limits. If it is
within limits, the MCAI AD requires replacing the D-Lok Hook within 30
days from July 11, 2009 or upon reaching 1000 lift cycles since
installation of the affected hook, whichever occurs first. This AD does
not require an inspection and requires replacing each affected D-Lok
Hook within 200 hoist lifts. Also, the MCAI AD is limited to Agusta,
Eurocopter, and Sikorsky helicopters, and this AD applies to all
helicopters with a Lifesavings Systems Corp. D-Lock Hook Assembly, P/N
410-A or 410-F, lot number 208 or 1108, installed.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect about 91 helicopters of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it will take about 1 work-hour per
helicopter to replace each affected D-Lok Hook with an airworthy hook.
The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Required parts will cost
about $3000 per hoist. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of
this AD on U.S. operators will be $280,280, assuming all 91 helicopters
have the D-Lok Hook replaced.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. We find that the risk to the flying public justifies waiving
notice and comment prior to adopting this rule because of reports that
the unapproved D-Lok Hooks have been found to have irregularities and
discontinuities and if used to carry rescued passengers could lead to
loss of the rescued passenger.

Testing shows that the affected hooks could fail at 200 lifts. At least
one operator involved in training exercises exceeds 200 lifts in a
month, which is a short period of time. Therefore, we have 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.

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. However, we invite you to send us any written data, views, or
arguments concerning this AD. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section of this AD. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2009-
1148; Directorate Identifier 2009-SW-36-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 product(s) 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.
    Therefore, I certify 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); 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.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, 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:

2010-03-02 Lifesaving Systems Corp.: Amendment 39-16185. Docket No.
FAA-2009-1148; Directorate Identifier 2009-SW-36-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective on
February 11, 2010.

Other Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all helicopters, which have a rescue
hoist assembly installed that contains a Lifesaving Systems Corp. D-
Lok Hook assembly, part number (P/N) 410-A or 410-F, lot number 208
or 1108. These hooks are installed on but not limited to Goodrich
Rescue Hoist Assembly P/N 42325-16-4, 42325-16-5, 44301-10 series,
44315-10, 44307-480, 44307-481, 44316-12-101, 44316-10-101, 42325-12
series, 42325-14 series, 44311-10 series, 712768-240-D 76370-140-D
and 76378-260-D; and Breeze-Eastern Corporation Rescue Hoist
Assembly, P/N BLH-20200-504 series.

Reason

    (d) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) AD
states that rescue hoist operators have reported surface
irregularities and discontinuities on certain D-Lok Hooks supplied
by Lifesaving Systems because of an unapproved change in the hook
design and manufacturing process from forged material to cast
material that have different physical properties. The actions are
intended to prevent failure of a hook during rescue hoist
operations, loss of the rescued passenger, and subsequent serious
injury or fatality.

Actions and Compliance

    (e) Within 200 hoist lifts, unless already done, replace each
affected D-Lok Hook assembly with an airworthy hook assembly other
than D-Lok Hook assembly, P/N 410-A or 410-F, lot number 208 or
1108.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI AD

    (f) The latest MCAI AD requires a visual inspection to determine
whether the affected hook assembly has surface irregularities and
discontinuities that exceed certain manufacturer limits. If it is
within limits, the MCAI AD requires replacing the D-Lok Hook within
30 days from July 11, 2009, or upon reaching 1000 total lift cycles
since installation of the affected lock, whichever occurs first.
This AD does not require an inspection and requires replacing each
affected D-Lok Hook within 200 lift cycles. Also, the MCAI AD is
limited to Agusta, Eurocopter, and Sikorsky helicopters, and this AD
applies to all helicopters with a Lifesavings Systems Corp. D-Lock
Hook Assembly, P/N 410-A or 410-F, lot number 208 or 1108,
installed.

Other Information

    (g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Safety Management Group, ATTN: DOT/FAA Southwest Region, Gary Roach,
ASW-111, Aviation Safety Engineer, Rotorcraft Directorate,
Regulations and Guidance Group, 2601 Meacham Blvd, Fort Worth, Texas
76137, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

Related Information

    (h) EASA MCAI AD No. 2009-0124, dated June 12, 2009; 2009-0148-
E, dated July 9, 2009; 2009-0179-E, dated August 11, 2009; 2009-
0183-E, dated August 14, 2009; and Goodrich Service Bulletin (SB)
42315-489-01, Revision 1, dated June 5, 2009 and Breeze-Eastern
Corporation SB BLH-20200-504-25-01, dated June 12, 2009, contain
related information.

Joint Aircraft System/Component (JASC) Code

    (i) JASC Code 2520: Passenger Compartment Equipment.

    Dated: Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 20, 2010.
 Mark R. Schilling,
Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-1518 Filed 1-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 154 (Friday, August 11, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37549-37554]
[FR Doc No: 2017-16357]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-9523; Product Identifier 2016-NM-134-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM); reopening
of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2014-12-13, which
applies to all The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -
400, and -500 series airplanes. This action revises the NPRM by
expanding the inspection area. This action also revises the NPRM by no
longer proposing to supersede AD 2014-12-13. We are proposing this AD
to address the unsafe condition on these products. Since these actions
impose an additional burden over that proposed in the NPRM, we are
reopening the comment period to allow the public the chance to comment
on these proposed changes.

DATES: The comment period for the NPRM published in the Federal
Register on January 5, 2017 (82 FR 1254), is reopened.
    We must receive comments on this SNPRM by September 5, 2017.

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: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this SNPRM, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS),
2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740; telephone
562-797-1717; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this
referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch,
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-2016-9523.

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-
9523; 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 SNPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received,
and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (phone:
800-647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available
in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Payman Soltani, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO)
Branch, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-
627-5313; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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-2016-9523;
Product Identifier 2016-NM-134-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this SNPRM. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this SNPRM because
of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On June 6, 2014, we issued AD 2014-12-13, Amendment 39-17874 (79 FR
39300, July 10, 2014) (``AD 2014-12-13''). AD 2014-12-13 requires
actions to address an unsafe condition on all The Boeing Company Model
737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. AD 2014-
12-13 requires repetitive inspections for cracking of the aft support
fitting for the main landing gear (MLG) beam, and the rear spar upper
chord and rear spar web; and repair if necessary.
    We issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD to
supersede AD 2014-12-13 that would apply to all The Boeing Company
Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. The
NPRM published in the Federal Register on January 5, 2017 (82 FR 1254)
(``the NPRM''). The NPRM was prompted by reports of additional cracking
in the inspar upper skin at Wing Buttock Line (WBL) 157 and in the skin
at two holes common to the rear spar in the same area, and by reports
of rear spar web cracks on both wings. Subsequent inspections revealed
that the right rear spar upper chord was almost completely severed and
the left rear spar upper chord was completely severed. The NPRM
proposed to expand the inspection area and add applicable related
investigative and corrective actions.

Actions Since NPRM Was Issued

    Since we issued the NPRM, we have determined it is necessary to
expand the inspection area because the NPRM did not adequately identify
the inspection area. We have also determined that it is necessary for
operators to do the inspections in this proposed AD (in the SNPRM)
before the inspections in AD 2014-12-13 can be terminated. In the NPRM,
we proposed to supersede AD 2014-12-13 and referred to the compliance
times in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1318, Revision 1, dated
July 22, 2016, which would have given operators an additional 4,500
flight cycles to do the next inspection. However, operators must do the
inspections at the compliance times required by AD 2014-12-13 until the
actions required by this proposed AD (in the SNPRM) are done.
Therefore, we are no longer superseding AD 2014-12-13. However, we have
included paragraph (k)(2) in this proposed AD (in the SNPRM) to specify
terminating action for AD 2014-12-13.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1318, Revision 1,
dated July 22, 2016. The service information describes procedures for
repetitive high frequency eddy current (HFEC) open hole inspections for
any cracking in the forward support fitting, the aft support fitting,
the rear spar upper chord, and the rear spar web at the 12 fastener
holes (locations 1-12). The service information also describes
procedures for optional HFEC open hole inspections for any cracking in
the forward support fitting, the aft support fitting, the rear spar
upper chord, and the rear spar web, and HFEC surface inspections for
any cracking in the rear spar upper chord and rear spar upper web, as
applicable. The service information also describes procedures for
related investigative and corrective actions.
    We also reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1328, dated
July 22, 2016. The service information describes procedures for
repetitive eddy current inspections of the left and right wing for any
cracking in the inspar upper skin and at the repair parts if
applicable, and related investigative and corrective actions.
    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.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to comment on the NPRM. The
following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's
response to each comment.

Request To Include Other Inspection Areas

    Boeing requested that the NPRM be revised to include other
inspection areas during the HFEC open hole inspection. Boeing stated
that, as written, the NPRM implies that in some options the upper chord
and web do not need to be inspected during the HFEC open hole
inspection.
    We agree with the commenter's request for the reasons stated above.
We have revised the introductory text to paragraph (h) of this proposed
AD (in the SNPRM) to include an HFEC

inspection of the forward support fitting, the aft support fitting, the
rear spar upper chord, and the rear spar web.

Request To Revise the NPRM or Service Information To Allow Installation
of the Same Type and Size of Fasteners

    All Nippon Airlines (ANA) requested that paragraph (h) of the NPRM
or the service information be revised to allow installation of the same
type and size of fasteners previously removed from the airplane after
the open hole HFEC inspection. ANA stated that for group 7 airplanes,
figures 25 and 26 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1318, May 15,
2013, specify that oversized fasteners are installed at fastener holes
after the open hole HFEC inspection has been accomplished. ANA stated
that, however, for the same group 7 airplanes, figures 29 and 30 of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1318, Revision 1, dated July 22,
2016, specify that standard size fasteners are installed at fastener
holes after the open hole HFEC inspection has been accomplished. ANA
stated that as a result, operators will have to request alternative
methods of compliance (AMOCs) for all airplanes on which the actions in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1318, May 15, 2013, have already
been done because paragraph (h) of the NPRM states to do all applicable
related investigative and corrective actions using Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-57A1318, Revision 1, dated July 22, 2016, which includes
the installation of the standard size fasteners. ANA stated that this
would be a burden for operators, Boeing, and the FAA.
    We agree with the commenter's request to revise this proposed AD.
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1318, Revision 1, dated July 22,
2016, should have called out the correct fastener size to be installed
after the fastener holes have been inspected and oversized as specified
in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1318, May 15, 2013. Group 7 has
two configurations: Configuration 1 is for airplanes without a repair;
Configuration 2 is for airplanes with a repair. We added paragraph
(h)(2) to this proposed AD (in the SNPRM) to state, ``For group 7,
configuration 1 airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-57A1318, Revision 1, dated July 22, 2016: Install the same type and
same size fasteners as those previously removed from the airplane after
accomplishing the open hole HFEC inspection specified in the
introductory text of paragraph (h) of this AD.''

Request for AMOC Approval

    ANA requested that the NPRM be revised to allow approved AMOCs for
AD 2014-12-13. ANA stated that airplanes have AMOCs for AD 2014-12-23
for certain repairs done using certain Boeing 737-300/-400/-500
structural repair manuals or certain Boeing ODA forms. ANA stated that
existing AMOCs should be considered for AMOC approval in the NPRM.
    We agree with the commenter's request for the reasons provided
above. We have redesignated paragraph (l)(4) of the proposed AD (in the
NPRM) as paragraph (l)(5) in this proposed AD (in the SNPRM). We have
added paragraph (l)(4) to this proposed AD (in the SNPRM) to allow
AMOCs approved previously for AD 2014-12-13, Amendment 39-17874 (79 FR
39300, July 10, 2014), as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD.

Effect of Winglets on Accomplishment of the Proposed Actions

    Aviation Partners Boeing stated that accomplishing the supplemental
type certificate (STC) ST01219SE does not affect the actions specified
in the NPRM.
    We concur. We have redesignated paragraph (c) of the proposed AD
(in the NPRM) as paragraph (c)(1) in this proposed AD and added
paragraph (c)(2) to this proposed AD to state that ``Installation of
Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) ST01219SE does not affect the
ability to accomplish the actions required by this AD. Therefore, for
airplanes on which STC ST01219SE is installed, a ``change in product''
alternative method of compliance (AMOC) approval request is not
necessary to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.''

Request To Clarify the NPRM for Historical Accuracy

    Boeing requested that the NPRM be revised to clarify the content
for historical accuracy. Boeing stated that in the ``Actions Since AD
2014-12-13 and 2015-21-08 Were Issued'' paragraph of the preamble of
the NPRM, the first paragraph described that a 2.375-inch long crack in
the inspar upper skin was discovered since the issuance of AD 2014-12-
13 and AD 2015-21-08. Boeing stated, however, the discovery of the
crack led to the issuance of AD 2015-21-08 and not AD 2014-12-13.
Boeing stated that the AD will become a reference for prior events, and
therefore, historical accuracy is essential.
    We agree with the commenter to clarify the historical accuracy of
this SNPRM. While the paragraph, ``Actions Since AD 2014-12-13 and
2015-21-08 Were Issued,'' is not carried over in the SNPRM, we
acknowledge that the discovery of a 2.375-inch long crack in the inspar
upper skin led to the issuance of AD 2015-21-08. We have not changed
this SNPRM regarding this issue.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this SNPRM because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.
Certain changes described above expand the scope of the NPRM. As a
result, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen the comment
period to provide additional opportunity for the public to comment on
this SNPRM.

Proposed Requirements of This SNPRM

    This SNPRM would require accomplishing the actions specified in the
service information described previously, except as discussed under
``Differences Between this Proposed AD and the Service Information.''
For information on the procedures and compliance times, see this
service information at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9523.
    The phrase ``related investigative actions'' is used in this SNPRM.
Related investigative actions are follow-on actions that (1) are
related to the primary action, and (2) further investigate the nature
of any condition found. Related investigative actions in an AD could
include, for example, inspections.
    The phrase ``corrective actions'' is used in this SNPRM. Corrective
actions correct or address any condition found. Corrective actions in
an AD could include, for example, repairs.

Differences Between This SNPRM and the Service Information

    Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1318, Revision 1, dated July
22, 2016; and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1328, dated July 22,
2016; specify to contact the manufacturer for certain instructions, but
this proposed AD would require accomplishment of repair methods,
modification deviations, and alteration deviations in one of the
following ways:
     In accordance with 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) whom
we have authorized to make those findings.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 471 airplanes of U.S. registry. We
estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                    Labor cost         Parts cost      Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HFEC open hole inspections......  82 work-hours x $85              $0   $6,970 per           $3,282,870 per
                                   per hour = $6,970                     inspection cycle.    inspection cycle.
                                   per inspection
                                   cycle.
Eddy current inspection.........  14 work-hours x $85              $0   $1,190 per           $560,490 per
                                   per hour = $1,190                     inspection cycle.    inspection cycle.
                                   per inspection
                                   cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                      Estimated Costs for Optional Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Action                          Labor cost             Parts cost         Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection.............................  Up to 41 work-hours x $85               $0   Up to $1,641,435 per
                                          per hour = $3,485 per                        inspection cycle.
                                          inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that will enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this SNPRM.

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.
    This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated
by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as
authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order,
issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and
Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the
Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable
to transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight
Division.

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

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):

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2016-9523; Product Identifier
2016-NM-134-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by September 5,
2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD affects AD 2014-12-13, Amendment 39-17874 (79 FR 39300,
July 10, 2014), and AD 2015-21-08, Amendment 39-18301 (80 FR 65921,
October 28, 2015).

(c) Applicability

    (1) This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 737-100, -
200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, certificated in
any category.
    (2) Installation of Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
ST01219SE does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions
required by this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01219SE
is installed, a ``change in product'' alternative method of
compliance (AMOC) approval request is not necessary to comply with
the requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of additional cracking in the
inspar upper skin at Wing Buttock Line (WBL) 157 and in the skin at
two holes common to the rear spar in the same area, and rear spar
web cracks were also noted on both wings. Subsequent inspections
revealed that the right rear spar upper chord was almost completely
severed and the left rear spar upper chord was completely severed.
We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking of the forward
and aft support fittings for the main landing

gear (MLG) beam, and the rear spar upper chord and rear spar web in
the area of rear spar station (RSS) 224.14, which could grow and
result in a fuel leak and possible fire.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions for Group 1 Airplanes (MLG Support Fittings and
Rear Spar)

    For airplanes identified as Group 1 in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-57A1318, Revision 1, dated July 22, 2016: At the
applicable time specified in table 1 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1318,
Revision 1, dated July 22, 2016, except as required by paragraph
(j)(3) of this AD, do applicable inspections and corrective actions
using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (l) of this AD.

(h) Required Actions for Groups 2-7 Airplanes (MLG Support Fittings and
Rear Spar)

    For airplanes identified as Groups 2-7 in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 737-57A1318, Revision 1, dated July 22, 2016: At the
applicable time specified in table 2 through table 9 of paragraph
1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1318,
Revision 1, dated July 22, 2016, except as required by paragraph
(j)(3) of this AD, do high frequency eddy current (HFEC) open hole
inspections for any cracking in the forward support fitting, the aft
support fitting, the rear spar upper chord, and the rear spar web at
the 12 fastener holes (locations 1-12); or HFEC open hole
inspections for any cracking in the forward support fitting, the aft
support fitting, the rear spar upper chord, and the rear spar web,
and an HFEC surface inspection for any cracking in the rear spar
upper chord and rear spar upper web; as applicable; and do all
applicable related investigative and corrective actions; in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-57A1318, Revision 1, dated July 22, 2016,
except as provided by paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD, and
except as required by paragraph (j)(1) of this AD. Do all applicable
related investigative and corrective actions before further flight.
Thereafter, repeat the HFEC inspection at the applicable time
specified in table 2 through table 9 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1318,
Revision 1, dated July 22, 2016.
    (1) Options provided in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
57A1318, Revision 1, dated July 22, 2016, for accomplishing the
inspection are acceptable for the corresponding requirements in the
introductory text of paragraph (h) of this AD, provided that the
inspections are done at the applicable times in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1318,
Revision 1, dated July 22, 2016.
    (2) For Group 7, Configuration 1 airplanes identified in Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1318, Revision 1, dated July 22, 2016:
Install the same type and same size fasteners as those previously
removed from the airplane after accomplishing the open hole HFEC
inspection specified in the introductory text of paragraph (h) of
this AD.

(i) Eddy Current Inspection (Inspar Upper Skin)

    For airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-
57A1328, dated July 22, 2016: At the applicable time specified in
table 1 and table 2 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1328, dated July 22, 2016, except as
required by paragraph (j)(2) of this AD, do an eddy current
inspection of the left and right wings for any cracking in the
inspar upper skin, and at the repair parts if installed, and do all
applicable related investigative and corrective actions, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 737-57A1328, dated July 22, 2016, except as
required by paragraph (j)(1) of this AD. Do all related
investigative and corrective actions before further flight.
Thereafter, repeat the eddy current inspection at the applicable
time specified in table 1 and table 2 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1328, dated
July 22, 2016.

(j) Exceptions to the Service Information

    (1) If any cracking is found during any inspection required by
this AD, and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1318, Revision 1,
dated July 22, 2016; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1328,
dated July 22, 2016; specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate
action: Before further flight, repair using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this
AD.
    (2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1328, dated July
22, 2016, specifies a compliance time ``after the Original Issue
date of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance within
the specified compliance time after the effective date of this AD.
    (3) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-57A1318, Revision 1,
dated July 22, 2016, specifies a compliance time ``after the
Revision 1 date of this service bulletin, whichever occurs later,''
this AD requires compliance within the specified compliance time
after the effective date of this AD.

(k) Terminating Action

    (1) Accomplishing the initial inspections and applicable related
investigative and corrective actions required by paragraphs (g),
(h), and (i) of this AD, as applicable, terminates all requirements
of AD 2015-21-08.
    (2) Accomplishing the initial inspections and applicable related
investigative and corrective actions required by paragraphs (g) and
(h) of this AD, as applicable, terminates all requirements of AD
2014-12-13.

(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO)
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 manager of the certification office,
send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph
(m)(1) of this AD. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) 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.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the
Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, to make those findings. To be
approved, the repair method, modification deviation, or alteration
deviation must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the
approval must specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) AMOCs approved previously for AD 2014-12-13, Amendment 39-
17874 (79 FR 39300, July 10, 2014), are approved as AMOCs for the
corresponding provisions of paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD.
    (5) Except as required by paragraph (j)(1) of this AD: For
service information that contains steps that are labeled as Required
for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs (l)(5)(i) and
(l)(5)(ii) of this AD apply.
    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step
and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply
with the AD. If a step or sub-step is labeled ``RC Exempt,'' then
the RC requirement is removed from that step or sub-step. An AMOC is
required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and
identified figures.
    (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted
methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection
program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC
steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done
as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition.

(m) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Payman Soltani,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch,
3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-627-
5313; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You
may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Staff, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 26, 2017.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-16357 Filed 8-10-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: February 26, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 37)]
[Notices]
[Page 8379]
[DOCID:fr26fe07-86]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of FERC Staff Attendance at Southwest Power Pool
Independent Coordinator of Transmission (ICT) Stakeholders Policy
Committee Meeting

February 13, 2007.

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission hereby gives notice that
members of its staff may attend the meetings noted below. Their
attendance is part of the Commission's ongoing outreach efforts.
    ICT Stakeholders Policy Committee Meeting: February 20, 2007 (9
a.m.-3 p.m. CST), Hyatt DFW, International Parkway, P.O. Box 619014,
DFW Airport, Texas, 75261,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The discussions may address matters at issue in the following
proceedings:

Docket No. EL01-88.....................  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER05-1065...................  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER03-171....................  Entergy Mississippi, Inc.
Docket No. EL02-107....................  Duke Energy Hinds, LLC, Duke
                                          Energy Hot Spring, LLC, Duke
                                          Energy Southaven, LLC, Duke
                                          Energy North America, LLC v.
                                          Entergy Services, Inc.,
                                          Entergy Operating Companies.
Docket No. ER02-405....................  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. EL02-88.....................  Wrightsville Power Facility,
                                          L.L.C v. Entergy Arkansas,
                                          Inc.
Docket Nos. EL03-3, ER02-1472..........  Entergy Gulf States, Inc.
Docket Nos. EL03-4, ER02-1151..........  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket Nos. EL03-5, ER02-1609..........  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. EL03-3......................  Entergy Operating Companies.
Docket No. ER02-1472...................  Entergy Operating Companies.
Docket No. ER07-406....................  Entergy Operating Companies.
Docket No. ER07-398....................  Entergy Operating Companies.
Docket No. ER07-399....................  Entergy Operating Companies.
Docket No. ER07-259....................  Cleco Energy LLC.
Docket No. EL03-4......................  Entergy Operating Companies.
Docket No. ER02-1069...................  Entergy Operating Companies.
Docket No. EL03-13.....................  Entergy Operating Companies.
Docket No. ER02-2243...................  Entergy Operating Companies.
Docket No. EL05-15.....................  Arkansas Electric Cooperative
                                          Corporation v. Entergy
                                          Arkansas, Inc.
Docket No. EL06-76.....................  Arkansas Public Service
                                          Commission v. Entergy
                                          Services, Inc., et al.
Docket No. ER03-583....................  Entergy Services, Inc. and EWO
                                          Marketing, L.P.
Docket Nos. ER03-681, ER03-682.........  Entergy Services, Inc. and
                                          Entergy Power, Inc.
Docket No. ER03-744....................  Entergy Services, Inc. and
                                          Entergy Louisiana, Inc.
Docket No. EL04-20.....................  Carville Energy LLC v. Entergy
                                          Services, Inc.
Docket No. EL04-49.....................  Quachita Power LLC v. Entergy
                                          Services, Inc.
Docket No. EL04-99.....................  Mississippi Delta Entergy
                                          Agency, et al. v. Entergy
                                          Services, Inc.
Docket No. EL05-1......................  Union Power Partners v. Entergy
                                          Services, Inc.
Docket No. EL05-21.....................  Tenaska Frontier Partners v.
                                          Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER06-1555-000...............  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket Nos. ER03-1272, EL05-22.........  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. EL07-25.....................  Entergy Services, Inc.
Docket No. ER05-1358...................  KGen Hinds LLC.
Docket No. ER05-1394...................  KGen Hot Spring LLC.
Docket No. ER05-1419...................  Hot Spring Power Company, LP.

    These meetings are open to the public.
    For more information, contact John Rogers, Office of Energy Markets
and Reliability, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at<PHONE_NUMBER>
or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-3186 Filed 2-23-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 3, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 39559]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16397]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

 [File No. 500-1]

In The Matter of China Medical Technologies, Inc.; Order of
Suspension of Trading

June 29, 2012.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
China Medical Technologies, Inc. (``China Medical'') because of
questions regarding the accuracy and adequacy of disclosures by China
Medical concerning, among other things: (1) The status of the company's
officers and directors, (2) the accuracy of the company's financial
statements filed with the Commission, and (3) the current financial
condition of the company. China Medical's securities are quoted on OTC
Link operated by OTC Markets Group Inc. under the ticker symbol
``CMEDY.''
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of the above-quoted company.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the
above-quoted company is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT, on
June 29, 2012 through 11:59 p.m. EDT, on July 13, 2012.

    By the Commission.

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-16397 Filed 6-29-12; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 71 (Wednesday, April 13, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20732-20733]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8849]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-64240; File No. SR-BX-2011-019]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Extend
the Pilot Period of Amendments to the Clearly Erroneous Rule

April 7, 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 March 31, 2011, NASDAQ OMX BX, Inc. (``Exchange''), filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule
change as described in Items I and II 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 the
Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to extend the pilot period of recent
amendments to Rule 11890, concerning clearly erroneous transactions, so
that the pilot will now expire on the earlier of August 11, 2011 or the
date on which a limit up/limit down mechanism to address extraordinary
market volatility, if adopted, applies.
    The text of the proposed rule change is below. Proposed new
language is italicized; proposed deletions are in brackets.
* * * * *
11890. Clearly Erroneous Transactions
    The provisions of paragraphs (C), (c)(1), (b)(i), and (b)(ii) of
this Rule, as amended on September 10, 2010, shall be in effect during
a pilot period set to end on the earlier of August 11, 2011 or the date
on which a limit up/limit down mechanism to address extraordinary
market volatility, if adopted, applies [April 11, 2011]. If the pilot
is not either extended or approved permanent by the earlier of August
11, 2011 or the date on which a limit up/limit down mechanism to
address extraordinary market volatility, if adopted, applies [April 11,
2011], the prior versions of paragraphs (C), (c)(1), and (b) shall be
in effect.
    (a)-(f) No change.
* * * * *

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 Exchange 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. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    On September 10, 2010, the Commission approved, for a pilot period
to end December 10, 2010, a proposed rule change submitted by the
Exchange, together with related rule changes of the BATS Exchange,
Inc., Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated, Chicago Stock
Exchange, Inc., EDGA Exchange, Inc., EDGX Exchange, Inc., International
Securities Exchange LLC, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, New York Stock
Exchange LLC, NYSE Amex LLC, NYSE Arca, Inc., and National Stock
Exchange, Inc., to amend certain of their respective rules to set forth
clearer standards and curtail discretion with respect to breaking
erroneous trades.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62886 (September 10,
2010), 75 FR 56613 (September 16, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The changes were adopted to address concerns that the lack of clear
guidelines for dealing with clearly erroneous transactions may have
added to the confusion and uncertainty faced by investors on May 6,
2010. On December 7, 2010, the Exchange filed an immediately effective
filing to extend the existing pilot program for four months, so that
the pilot would expire on April 11, 2011.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63490; (December 9,
2010), 75 FR 78299 (December 15, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the pilot program has been successful in
providing greater transparency and certainty to the process of breaking
erroneous trades. The Exchange also believes that a four month
extension of the pilot is warranted so that it may continue to monitor
the effects of the pilot on the markets and investors, and consider
appropriate adjustments, as necessary. The Exchange notes, however,
that the Exchanges are developing a ``limit up/limit down'' mechanism
to reduce the negative impacts of sudden, unanticipated price movements
in securities traded on the Exchanges. Under such a mechanism, trades
in a security outside a price band would not be allowed, thus
eliminating clearly erroneous transactions from occurring altogether.
As such, the proposed extension may be shorter in duration should the
Exchange adopt a limit up/limit down mechanism to address extraordinary
market volatility. Accordingly, the Exchange is filing to further
extend the pilot program until the earlier of August 11, 2011 or the
date on which a limit up/limit down mechanism to address extraordinary
market volatility, if adopted, applies.
2. Statutory Basis
    The statutory basis for the proposed rule change is Section 6(b)(5)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\5\ which requires
the rules of an exchange to promote just and equitable principles of
trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market and a national market system and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest. The proposed rule change also is
designed to support the principles of Section 11A(a)(1) \6\ of the Act
in that it seeks to assure fair competition among brokers and dealers
and among exchange markets. The Exchange believes that the proposed
rule meets these requirements in that it promotes transparency and
uniformity across markets concerning decisions to break erroneous
trades.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \7\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\8\ The Exchange has asked the Commission to
waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal may become
operative immediately upon filing. The Commission believes that waiving
the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest because such waiver will allow the
pilot program to continue uninterrupted and help ensure uniformity
among the national securities exchanges and FINRA with respect to the
treatment of clearly erroneous transactions.\9\ Accordingly, the
Commission waives the 30-day operative delay requirement and designates
the proposed rule change as operative upon filing with the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to
the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed
rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed
rule change, at least five business days prior to the filing of the
proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission. The Commission notes that the Exchange has satisfied
this requirement.
    \9\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the
Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the 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-BX-2011-019 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-BX-2011-019. 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 such 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 publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2011-019 and should be
submitted on or before May 4, 2011.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cathy H. Ahn,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-8849 Filed 4-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P