[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 104 (Friday, May 29, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32308-32315]
[FR Doc No: 2020-11340]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0049; Product Identifier 2017-CE-031-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Textron Aviation Inc. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

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

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is revising an earlier proposal for certain Textron
Aviation Inc. (Textron) Model 172N, 172P, 172Q, 172RG, F172N, F172P,
FR172K, R172K, 182E, 182F, 182G, 182H, 182J, 182K, 182L, 182M, 182N,
182P, 182Q, 182R, T182, F182P, F182Q, F182RG, R182, TR182, 206, P206/
TP206, U206/TU206, 207/T207, 210-5 (205), 210-5A (205A), 210B, 210C,
210D, 210E, 210F, and T210F airplanes. This action revises the

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) by modifying the estimated costs
of the proposed AD, the repetitive inspection intervals, and the credit
allowed for previous actions; clarifying the inspection instructions
for airplanes with the service kit installed; correcting the contact
information for obtaining the service information; and adding a
reporting requirement to collect the inspection results. The FAA is
proposing this airworthiness directive (AD) to address the unsafe
condition on these products. Since these actions would impose an
additional burden over those in the NPRM based on comments from
commenters, the FAA is reopening the comment period to allow the public
the chance to comment on these changes.

DATES: The comment period for the NPRM published in the Federal
Register on February 1, 2018 (83 FR 4605), is reopened.
    The FAA must receive comments on this SNPRM by July 13, 2020.

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 https://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 SNPRM, contact Textron
Aviation Inc., Textron Aviation Customer Service, One Cessna Blvd.,
Wichita, Kansas 67215; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet: https://support.cessna.com. You may
review this referenced service information at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 901 Locust, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0049; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this SNPRM, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for Docket Operations is listed above. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bobbie Kroetch, Aerospace Engineer,
Wichita ACO Branch, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Wichita, Kansas 67209;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or f9ae909a91908d98d4bab6aab99f9898d79e968f.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2018-0049;
Product Identifier 2017-CE-031-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this SNPRM. The FAA will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
SNPRM because of those comments.
    The FAA will post all comments, without change, to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide.
The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this SNPRM.

Discussion

    The FAA issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that
would apply to certain Textron (type certificate previously held by
Cessna Aircraft Company) Model 172N, 172P, 172Q, 172RG, F172N, F172P,
FR172K, R172K, 182E, 182F, 182G, 182H, 182J, 182K, 182L, 182M, 182N,
182P, 182Q, 182R, T182, F182P, F182Q, F182RG, R182, TR182, 206, P206/
TP206, U206/TU206, 207/T207, 210-5 (205), 210-5A (205A), 210B, 210C,
210D, 210E, 210F, and T210F airplanes. The NPRM published in the
Federal Register on February 1, 2018 (83 FR 4605). The NPRM was
prompted by a report from an operator of one of the affected Textron
airplanes that cracks were found in the lower area of the forward cabin
doorpost bulkhead. The NPRM proposed to require repetitively inspecting
the lower area of the forward cabin doorposts at the strut attach
fitting for cracks and repairing any cracks found by modifying the area
with the applicable service kit.

Comments

    The FAA 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 Withdraw the NPRM

    Matt Gunsch stated that cracking at the location identified in the
NPRM was not observed while performing annual inspections on hundreds
of Cessna airplanes as a mechanic with an Inspection Authorization. The
commenter explained that these inspections were on airplanes from the
Model 172A to the newest restart airplane, with some flown as little as
25 hours a year to others that were flown l,000 hours a year, all with
no evidence of cracking at this location. The FAA infers the commenter
would like to see the NPRM withdrawn.
    The FAA disagrees. The FAA's investigation revealed more than four
dozen similar cracks on Textron Model 100- and 200-series airplanes.
The FAA has not changed this proposed AD based on this comment.

Requests To Change the Repetitive Inspection Compliance Intervals

    Mark Stephenson, Ronald Welch, the Aircraft Owners and Pilots
Association (AOPA), Kermit Bunde, Matt Gunsch, Howard Nelson, and an
anonymous commenter requested the FAA change the compliance time for
the repetitive inspection intervals to hours TIS only and remove the
12-month calendar time inspection requirement. Neal Bachman suggested
the compliance time be based on take off and landing cycles. Most of
these commenters stated the cracking identified in the proposed AD was
attributed to metal fatigue, which is driven by usage, not calendar
time. Several commenters noted that an annual repetitive inspection
adds an unnecessary burden for operators of low-use airplanes that may
accumulate less than 1,000 hours TIS per year. The anonymous commenter
stated that a repetitive inspection every 12 months was unjustified and
unsupported because the FAA did not include in the AD docket crack-
propagation math models or show raw data indicating the number of
airplanes with cracks, their associated TIS, or the crack lengths.
    Craig Morton requested the FAA change the multiple compliance time
interval from ``whichever occurs first'' to ``whichever occurs later.''
    David Scott requested that the FAA increase the repetitive interval
depending on airplane configuration.
    The FAA partially agrees. The FAA did not provide the data
requested by

the anonymous commenter because the raw data relied upon by the FAA in
its risk analysis did not include crack lengths. The FAA agrees to
revise the calendar time requirement because a repetitive inspection
annually does not account for low use airplanes. The FAA has adjusted
the proposed repetitive inspection interval from 12 months or 1,000
hours TIS to 36 calendar months or 1,000 hours TIS. The FAA has
determined this extended compliance time adequately addresses the
identified unsafe condition. In addition, this compliance time
corresponds with the manufacturer's guidance, for certain airplanes,
that is published in supplemental inspection documents (SIDs) and is
supported by the fleet history. The FAA disagrees with providing an
allowance for takeoff and landing cycles because there is insufficient
data to support inspection intervals based on this aspect of an
airplane's usage. Also, FAA regulations do not require all operators to
maintain records of landing and takeoff cycles. The FAA also disagrees
with the requests to base the inspection solely on flight hours and to
increase the inspection interval. In developing appropriate compliance
times for this proposed AD, the FAA considered the urgency associated
with the subject unsafe condition, the manufacturer's recommended
compliance times, the availability of parts, and the practical aspect
of accomplishing the required inspection and any on-condition actions.
In light of these factors, the FAA determined the proposed compliance
times are appropriate and address the identified unsafe condition.

Request To Decrease the Initial Inspection Compliance Time

    An anonymous commenter suggested the FAA require the initial
inspection before 4,000 hours TIS. The commenter stated that cracking
might occur in airplanes before the 4,000 hours TIS identified in the
proposed AD.
    The FAA partially agrees. The FAA agrees that unverified reports
indicate cracking may occur before an airplane accumulates 4,000 hours
TIS. However, the FAA disagrees with reducing the compliance time for
the initial inspection at this time because the data available from the
manufacturer and from the FAA service difficulty reporting system does
not contain sufficient information to justify it. The FAA has added a
reporting requirement to the proposed AD to help the FAA collect more
data to determine if the cracking is occurring at an earlier period.
The FAA will analyze the reporting results and may take further
rulemaking action.

Requests To Clarify the Repetitive Inspection Instructions

    Two commenters requested the FAA clarify the repetitive inspection
instructions for airplanes that have a service kit installed. Adam
Ondrajka noted it is more difficult to do the inspection after
installation of the service kit because it covers some of the area
susceptible to cracking. Hageland Aviation Services, Inc. (Hageland
Aviation) requested the proposed AD be revised to include verbiage that
allows the inspection to be performed with the service kit remaining in
place, and inspecting for any cracking that has propagated past the
boundaries of the kit. This commenter also stated that the term ``to
the fullest extent'' in the repetitive inspection instructions for
airplanes with a service kit installed is unclear and could be
interpreted to require removal of the kit to complete the inspection.
    The FAA agrees. The FAA has changed the proposed inspection
language to clarify the service kit should not be removed during the
inspections and to inspect for cracks extending beyond the modified
parts.

Requests Regarding the Service Kits

    AOPA requested the FAA allow the installation of the service kit to
terminate the repetitive inspection requirements of the proposed AD.
AOPA and Adam Ondrajka noted that installation of the kit is
terminating action in Cessna Mandatory Service Bulletins SEB 93-5R1 and
SEB 95-19, and the FAA did not provide justification or reasoning in
the NPRM for continuing the repetitive inspections after installation
of the kit.
    Neal Bachman requested the FAA encourage the installation of the
service kit preemptively to prevent future cracking, and stated that if
ongoing inspections are required after the service kit is installed
then the kit is inadequate.
    The FAA partially agrees. Owners may voluntarily install the
service kit, as neither the NPRM nor this SNPRM would prohibit the
installation of the service kit prior to observed cracking. The
structure added by the service kit reinforces the critical area on
which cracking has been found. However, the manufacturer did not
provide sufficient evidence that installation of the service kits
corrects the unsafe condition and therefore warrants discontinuing the
inspections. In addition, the FAA has received unconfirmed reports of
cracking extending beyond the repair doubler that is installed as part
of the kit. At this time, sufficient information is not available to
determine the cause of the continued cracking. Therefore, the FAA has
added a reporting requirement to this SNPRM to evaluate the crack
development.

Comment Regarding Variable Time Limit for Kit Installation

    Mark Stephenson requested the FAA change the compliance time for
installing the service kit after crack detection to a variable
compliance time based on the size, number, or severity of the
identified cracking. The commenter noted that the proposed AD specifies
installing the service kit before further flight if cracks are found,
while at the same time specifying a 1,000-hour repeat inspection of the
area if no cracks are found. The commenter stated that therefore the
FAA is accepting that flight with cracks is acceptable for periods
approaching 1,000 hours and concluded the logic for the requirement to
incorporate the service kit before further flight is flawed.
    The FAA disagrees. There is insufficient data on crack growth rate
to support flight with known cracks without installation of the service
kit. Therefore, this proposed AD would not allow variable compliance
times based on the size, number, or severity of the identified
cracking. The installation of the service kit reinforces the cracked
area. The FAA has not changed this SNPRM based on this comment.

Concern for Parts Availability

    Urban Moore, Hageland Aviation, Bruce Thomas, and Paul Gryko
expressed concern that the proposed AD may ground airplanes after
cracks are identified because of the unavailability of parts. The
commenters indicated that waiting times for some of the service kits
were several months.
    The FAA recognizes the demand for the service kits following the
issuance of the proposed AD is likely to increase. However, the FAA has
determined that the proposed actions and compliance times are necessary
to address the identified unsafe condition. The FAA has not changed
this proposed AD based on this comment. However, operators may request
approval of an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) to extend the
compliance times under the provisions of paragraph (m) of this proposed
AD. The operator must justify in the request that an extension of the
compliance time will provide an adequate level of safety.

Request for Specific Part Numbers

    Urban Moore noted that Textron would not provide the specific part
numbers for each item included in the service kits.
    The FAA disagrees. The applicable service kits identify the part
numbers required for the kit installation. The FAA will post in the AD
docket all service documents incorporated by reference when the FAA
issues the final rule. Until then, and as specified in the ADDRESSES
section of the NPRM and this SNPRM, interested parties may contact
Textron for a copy of the service information identified in this SNPRM.
A party may also view the service information in person at the FAA's
offices in Kansas City, Missouri.

Request To Include the Possibility of Extended Cracks

    Textron suggested the FAA change the language in the proposed AD to
reflect that cracks could extend beyond the doublers installed in
accordance with the service kits, if an operator installed a service
kit before the AD was released.
    The FAA agrees. The FAA has added language to paragraphs (g) and
(h)(2) of this proposed AD to address potential cracking on airplanes
with the service kits installed.

Request To Make Service Information Available

    Matt Gunsch commented about the difficulty obtaining the service
bulletins that are the basis of the proposed AD and requested the FAA
include the referenced service documents in the AD Docket.
    The FAA partially agrees. The FAA will post in the AD docket all
service documents incorporated by reference when the FAA issues the
final rule. Until then, and as specified in the ADDRESSES section of
the NPRM and this SNPRM, interested parties may contact Textron for a
copy of the service information identified in this SNPRM. A party may
also view the service information in person at the FAA's offices in
Kansas City, Missouri.

Request To Update Service Information

    Textron requested the FAA update references to the service bulletin
and service kit information in the proposed AD to reflect the latest
revision levels.
    The FAA agrees. The FAA has updated the service information in this
proposed AD accordingly.

Request To Provide Credit for Airplanes With SK206-42 or SK206-42A
Installed

    Textron requested the FAA clarify the credit in paragraph (k)(3) of
the proposed AD for Model 207 and T207 airplanes that have installed a
service kit in accordance with Cessna Single Engine Service Bulletin
SEB 93-5, dated March 26, 1993. Specifically, Textron asked whether
owners/operators are expected to remove the kit and install a new kit.
    The FAA agrees to clarify the credit for Model 207 and T207
airplanes. The FAA has revised paragraph (k)(3) of the NPRM and
redesignated it as paragraph (k)(2)(i) in this SNPRM. As now proposed,
paragraph (k)(2)(i) specifies that the reinforcement detailed in Cessna
Single Engine Service Kit SK207-19A, dated May 29, 2019, must be done
to receive credit for previous installations. As specified in Cessna
Single Engine Service Kit SK207-19A, dated May 29, 2019, the
reinforcement can be done on airplanes with a previously installed
SK206-42() kit.

Request To Allow Credit for Previous Actions

    Hageland Aviation, Jason Vink, Stephen Greenwood, Adam Ondrajka,
AOPA, Textron, and an anonymous commenter requested the FAA allow
credit for initial inspections and service kit installations in
accordance with Cessna Service Bulletins SEB 93-5, SEB 93-5 Revision l,
and SEB 95-19. Hageland Aviation stated that failing to give credit
could affect intrastate aviation within the state of Alaska. Adam
Ondrajka stated that paragraphs (k)(1)(v) and (k)(3) of the proposed AD
include contradictory language for previous repairs completed on Model
207 and T207 airplanes. Textron and an anonymous commenter requested
credit for inspections that have been previously completed.
    The FAA partially agrees. Paragraph (f), ``Compliance,'' of both
the NPRM and this SNPRM states compliance is required ``unless already
done,'' which allows credit for any AD action completed before the
effective date of the AD.
    The FAA has revised paragraphs (k)(1) and (2) of this SNPRM to
provide credit for most airplane models that have installed the service
kit using Cessna Single Engine Service Bulletin SEB 93-5, dated March
26, 1993; or Cessna Single Engine Service Bulletin SEB 93-5, Revision
1, dated September 8, 1995. The FAA has also revised paragraph (k)(3)
(redesignated as paragraph (k)(2)(i) in this SNPRM) to allow credit for
Model 207, T207, 207A, and T207A airplanes that have installed the
service kit if additional reinforcement has also been done.
    The FAA disagrees that the language in paragraphs (k)(1)(v) and
(k)(3) of the NPRM is contradictory. Paragraph (k)(1)(v) of the NPRM
applies only to the inspection, while paragraph (k)(3) of the NPRM
applies to the repair. Similarly, paragraph (k)(1) of this SNPRM
applies only to the inspection, while paragraph (k)(2) of this SNPRM
applies to the repair.
    The FAA acknowledges Hageland Aviation's comment that intrastate
aviation within the state of Alaska will be affected if credit is not
given. The FAA has revised paragraph (k) of this SNPRM to provide
credit for most airplane models that have installed the service kit.
Additionally, paragraph (f), ``Compliance,'' of both the NPRM and the
SNPRM states compliance is required ``unless already done,'' which
allows credit for any AD action completed before the effective date of
the AD. Therefore, the FAA is giving credit for previous actions.

Requests To Change the Costs of Compliance

    AOPA, Urban Moore, Duane Taylor, Ely Cyrus, Hageland Aviation,
Stephen Greenwood, Neal Bachman, Howard Nelson, an anonymous commenter,
Paul Gryko, and Richard James requested the FAA update the costs of the
service kits. These commenters stated the estimated costs in the NPRM
for the installation of the service kits did not represent the current
costs of the kits. The commenters also expressed concern that Textron
was increasing the prices of the service kits.
    The FAA agrees. The FAA has revised the estimated cost of the
service kits to account for the known costs.
    Urban Moore requested the FAA increase the number of labor hours
estimated to complete the repair.
    The FAA agrees. The FAA has increased the estimated work-hours to
install the service kits from 24 work-hours to 36 work-hours.
    An anonymous commenter stated the labor rate of $85 per work-hour
is out of date.
    The FAA disagrees. The FAA Office of Aviation Policy and Plans
provides the labor rate of $85 per work-hour to use when estimating the
labor costs of complying with AD requirements.
    An anonymous commenter stated the estimated cost in the NPRM should
be doubled to account for the cost to repair the doorposts for both
wing struts.
    The FAA disagrees. The estimated costs in both the NPRM and this

SNPRM already account for repairs on both sides of the airplane.

Request To Correct the Language in the Cost of Compliance for Affected
Products

    An anonymous commenter noted an error in the estimated costs and
stated that the Cost of Compliance section incorrectly refers to 2,928
engines instead of the correct number of airplanes.
    The FAA disagrees. The Cost of Compliance section in the NPRM
estimates that the proposed AD would affect 14,653 airplanes of U.S.
registry; it does not refer to the number of affected engines. The FAA
has not changed this proposed AD based on this comment.

Request To Change the Manufacturer Contact Information

    Textron requested the FAA change the internet contact information
for contacting the manufacturer to https://support.cessna.com.
    The FAA agrees. The FAA has updated the contact information
accordingly.

Request for Docket Correction

    Stephen Greenwood noted that in the NPRM the docket number is
incorrectly listed as FAA-2017-0049 instead of FAA-2018-0049. The FAA
infers that the commenter is requesting that the FAA correct the docket
number.
    The FAA agrees. The FAA published a proposed rule; correction
because of the docket number error in the NPRM on February 13, 2018 (83
FR 6136). This SNPRM references the correct docket number.

Request To Extend the Comment Period

    Howard Nelson stated that after the proposed AD is updated with the
correct costs for the repair kit, the FAA should extend the comment
period.
    The FAA agrees. The FAA has updated the estimated cost of the
repair service kit and has made other changes that increase the burden
on the operators. Therefore, the FAA is issuing this SNPRM to allow
further comment on these changes.

Other Differences Between the NPRM and This SNPRM

    Table 1 to paragraph (c) of this SNPRM contains changes to some of
the model designations listed in the applicability in order to match
the models as they are listed in the type certificate data sheet. Where
the NPRM referred to ``P206/TP206,'' ``U206/TU206,'' and ``207/T207,''
series of airplanes, this SNPRM identifies the following model
designations: P206, P206A, P206B, P206C, P206D, P206E, TP206A, TP206B,
TP206C, TP206D, TP206E, U206, U206A, U206B, U206C, U206D, U206E, U206F,
U206G, TU206A, TU206B, TU206C, TU206D, TU206E, TU206F, TU206G, 207,
207A, T207, and T207A.
    The Model ``F182RG'' listed in Table 1 to paragraph (c) of the NPRM
was based on the model designation specified in the service
information. Table 1 to paragraph (c) of this SNPRM lists ``Model
FR182,'' which is the correct model designation as it is listed in the
type certificate data sheet for that model.
    This SNPRM also clarifies the affected serial numbers listed in
table 1 to paragraph (c) of the NPRM. Where the table to paragraph (c)
of this SNPRM identifies an affected serial number range that includes
all eligible serial numbers for a given model, the FAA has instead
specified ``All serial numbers'' in this SNPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Cessna Single Engine Service Bulletin SEB 95-19,
dated December 29, 1995 (SEB 95-19); and Cessna Single Engine Service
Bulletin SEB 93-5, Revision 2, dated May 29, 2019 (SEB 93-5R2). For the
applicable model airplanes, the service information contains procedures
for repetitively inspecting the lower area of the forward cabin
doorposts for cracks and repairing any cracks found by modifying the
area with an applicable Cessna service kit.
    The FAA also reviewed Cessna Single Engine Service Kit SK207-19A,
dated May 29, 2019. The service information contains procedures to
reinforce the lower forward doorpost bulkhead and wing strut fitting by
adding a doubler and a channel to each forward cabin doorpost bulkhead.
    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.

Other Related Service Information

    The FAA reviewed Cessna Single Engine Service Kit SK172-147, dated
December 29, 1995. This service kit provides instructions to add a
channel to each forward cabin doorpost bulkhead. The FAA also reviewed
Cessna Single Engine Service Kit SK182-115, dated December 29, 1995;
Cessna Single Engine Service Kit SK206-42D, dated May 29, 2019; and
Cessna Single Engine Service Kit SK210-156, dated December 29, 1995.
For the applicable model airplanes, these service kits provide
instructions to add a doubler and a channel to each forward cabin
doorpost bulkhead.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is proposing this AD because the FAA 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, the FAA has 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 repetitively inspecting the lower area of
the forward cabin doorposts for cracks and repairing any cracks found
by modifying the area with the applicable Cessna service kit.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD would affect 14,653
airplanes of U.S. registry.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
             Action                      Labor cost              Parts cost          product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspect the lower area of the     1.5 work-hours x $85 per  Not applicable.....         $127.50    $1,868,257.50
 forward cabin doorposts for       hour = $127.50.
 cracks.
Reporting requirement...........  1 work-hour x $85 per     Not applicable.....              85        1,245,505
                                   hour = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary repairs
that would be required based on the results of the proposed inspection.
Reference the applicable Cessna single engine service bulletin for kit
applicability. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
airplanes that might need this repair:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                   Action                                 Labor cost                Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Install Cessna Single-Engine Service Kit     36 work-hours x $85 per hour =               $3,415          $6,475
 SK172-147.                                   $3,060.
Install Cessna Single-Engine Service Kit     36 work-hours x 85 per hour = 3,060           7,490          10,550
 SK182-115.
Install Cessna Single-Engine Service Kit     36 work-hours x 85 per hour = 3,060           3,115           6,175
 SK206-42D.
Install Cessna Single-Engine Service Kit     36 work-hours x 85 per hour = 3,060           4,957           8,017
 SK207-19A.
Install Cessna Single-Engine Service Kit     36 work-hours x 85 per hour = 3,060           7,020          10,080
 SK210-156.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. The OMB
Control Number for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public
reporting for this collection of information is estimated to be
approximately 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, completing and reviewing the collection of
information. All responses to this collection of information are
mandatory. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other
aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for
reducing this burden to: Information Collection Clearance Officer,
Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX
76177-1524.

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.
    The FAA is 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 airplanes 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

    The FAA 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) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.

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):

Textron Aviation Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2018-0049; Product Identifier
2017-CE-031-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments by July 13, 2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the following Textron Aviation Inc. (type
certificate previously held by Cessna Aircraft Company) model
airplanes, certificated in any category:

      Table 1 to Paragraph (c)--Affected Models and Serial Numbers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Model                             Serial Nos.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
172N.........................  17272885 through 17274009 inclusive.
172P.........................  All serial numbers.
172Q.........................  17275869, 17275927 through 17275934
                                inclusive, 17275952, 17275959, 17275960,
                                17275962, 17275964, 17275965, 17275967,
                                17275968, 17275969, 17275971, 17275992,
                                17275999, 17276002, 17276005, 17276029,
                                17276032, 17276042, 17276045, 17276051,
                                17276052, 17276054, 17276101, 17276109,
                                17276140, 17276147, 17276188, and
                                17276211.
172RG........................  All serial numbers.
F172N........................  F17201910 through F17202039 inclusive.
F172P........................  All serial numbers.

FR172K.......................  FR17200656 through FR17200675 inclusive.
R172K........................  R1723200 through R1723454 inclusive.
182E.........................  All serial numbers.
182F.........................  All serial numbers.
182G.........................  All serial numbers.
182H.........................  All serial numbers.
182J.........................  All serial numbers.
182K.........................  All serial numbers.
182L.........................  All serial numbers.
182M.........................  All serial numbers.
182N.........................  All serial numbers.
182P.........................  All serial numbers.
182Q.........................  All serial numbers.
182R.........................  All serial numbers.
T182.........................  All serial numbers.
F182P........................  All serial numbers.
F182Q........................  All serial numbers.
FR182........................  All serial numbers.
R182.........................  R18200002 through R18200583 inclusive.
R182 and TR182...............  R18200001 and R18200584 through R18202039
                                inclusive.
206..........................  All serial numbers.
P206, P206A, P206B, P206C,     All serial numbers.
 P206D, P206E, TP206A,
 TP206B, TP206C, TP206D, and
 TP206E.
U206, U206A, U206B, U206C,     All serial numbers.
 U206D, U206E, U206F, U206G,
 TU206A, TU206B, TU206C,
 TU206D, TU206E, TU206F, and
 TU206G.
207, 207A, T207, and T207A...  All serial numbers.
210-5 (205)..................  All serial numbers.
210-5A (205A)................  All serial numbers.
210B.........................  All serial numbers.
210C.........................  All serial numbers.
210D.........................  All serial numbers.
210E.........................  All serial numbers.
210F.........................  All serial numbers.
T210F........................  All serial numbers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of cracks found in the lower
area of the forward cabin doorpost bulkhead. The FAA is issuing this
AD to detect and address cracking of the wing strut attach point.
The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in failure of
the wing in operation, which could result in loss of control of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Initial Inspections

    (1) For airplanes without a lower forward doorpost bulkhead and
wing strut fitting reinforcement service kit (service kit) installed
in accordance with Cessna Single Engine Service Bulletin SEB95-19,
dated December 29, 1995 (SEB95-19), or Cessna Single Engine Service
Bulletin SEB93-5, Revision 2, dated May 29, 2019 (SEB93-5R2): At the
applicable compliance time specified in paragraph (g)(1)(i) or (ii)
of this AD, do a visual inspection of the lower forward doorpost at
the strut attach fitting for cracks in accordance with steps 1.A.,
1.B., 1.C., and 1.B. (the step following step 1.C.) of the
Accomplishment Instructions in SEB95-19; or steps 1.A. and 1.B. of
the Accomplishment Instructions in SEB93-5R2; as applicable to your
model airplane.
    (i) For airplanes that have accumulated less than 4,000 hours
time-in-service (TIS) as of the effective date of this AD: Initially
inspect prior to the accumulation of 4,000 hours TIS or within the
next 200 hours TIS after the effective date of this AD, whichever
occurs later.
    (ii) For airplanes that have accumulated 4,000 or more hours TIS
as of the effective date of this AD: Initially inspect within 200
hours TIS after the effective date of this AD or within 12 calendar
months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.
    (2) For airplanes with a service kit installed in accordance
with SEB95-19 or SEB93-5R2: At the later of the times specified in
paragraphs (g)(2)(i) and (ii) of this AD, do a visual inspection of
the lower forward doorpost at the strut attach fitting for cracks in
accordance with steps 1.A., 1.B., 1.C., and 1.B. (the step following
step 1.C.) of the Accomplishment Instructions in SEB95-19; or steps
1.A. and 1.B. of the Accomplishment Instructions in SEB93-5R2; as
applicable to your model airplane. Do not remove the installed
service kit; instead, inspect for cracking that extends beyond the
modified parts.
    (i) At the applicable time specified in paragraph (g)(1)(i) or
(ii) of this AD.
    (ii) Within 1,000 hours TIS or 36 calendar months, whichever
occurs first, since installing the service kit.

(h) Repetitive Inspections

    (1) If no cracks are found during the initial inspection
required by paragraph (g)(1) or (2) of this AD, thereafter repeat
the inspection at intervals not to exceed 36 calendar months or
1,000 hours TIS, whichever occurs first from the last inspection, as
long as no cracks are found.
    (2) If cracks are found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g)(1) or (h)(1) of this AD, do the inspection specified
in paragraph (g)(2) of this AD within 36 calendar months or 1,000
hours TIS, whichever occurs first after installing the service kit
required by paragraph (i)(1) of this AD. Thereafter, repeat the
inspection at intervals not to exceed 36 calendar months or 1,000
hours TIS, whichever occurs first from the last inspection, as long
as no additional cracks are found.

(i) Corrective Actions

    (1) If cracks are found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g)(1) or paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, before further

flight, install a service kit in accordance with step 1.D. of the
Accomplishment Instructions in SEB95-19; or step 1.C. of the
Accomplishment Instructions in SEB93-5R2; as applicable to your
model airplane.
    (2) If cracks are found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g)(2) or (h)(2) of this AD, before further flight, repair
the area using a method approved by the Manager, Wichita ACO Branch,
FAA. For a repair method to be approved by the Manager, Wichita ACO
Branch as required by this paragraph, the Manager's approval letter
must specifically refer to this AD. You may use the contact
information in paragraph (n)(1) of this AD to obtain FAA approval of
your repair method.

(j) Reporting Requirement

    Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, or within 30
days after completing the initial inspection required by paragraph
(g) of this AD, whichever occurs later, report the findings of the
initial inspection (regardless if cracks were found or not) to the
FAA at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Thereafter, within 30 days after
completing each repetitive inspection required by paragraph (h) of
this AD, if any crack was found, report the crack findings to the
FAA at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Include in your reports the following
information:
    (1) Name and address of the owner;
    (2) Date of the inspection;
    (3) Name, address, telephone number, and email address of the
person submitting the report;
    (4) Airplane serial number and total hours TIS on the airplane
at the time of the inspection; and
    (5) If any crack was found during the inspection, provide
detailed crack information as specified below:
    (i) A sketch or picture detailing the crack location;
    (ii) Measured length of the crack(s) found;
    (iii) Installation of a Cessna service kit or any other kit or
repair before the inspection; and
    (iv) Installation of any supplemental type certificates (STCs),
alterations, repairs, or field approvals affecting the area of
concern or affecting gross weight.

(k) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) You may take credit for the initial inspection required by
paragraph (g) of this AD if you performed the inspection before the
effective date of this AD using Cessna Single Engine Service
Bulletin SEB93-5, dated March 26, 1993; or Cessna Single Engine
Service Bulletin SEB93-5, Revision 1, dated September 8, 1995.
    (2) You may take credit for the installation required by
paragraph (i)(1) of this AD as follows.
    (i) For Model 207, T207, 207A, and T207A airplanes with a
service kit installed using SK206-42, SK206-42A, SK206-42B, or
SK206-42C: You may take credit for the installation if done before
the effective date of this AD using Cessna Single Engine Service
Bulletin SEB93-5, dated March 26, 1993, or Cessna Single Engine
Service Bulletin SEB93-5, Revision 1, dated September 8, 1995; if
the reinforcement of the lower forward doorpost bulkhead and wing
strut fitting specified in Cessna Single Engine Service Kit SK207-
19A, dated May 29, 2019, is also accomplished within 200 hours TIS
after the effective date of this AD.
    (ii) For all other models: You may take credit for the
installation if done before the effective date of this AD using
Cessna Single Engine Service Bulletin SEB 93-5, dated March 26,
1993; or Cessna Single Engine Service Bulletin SEB 93-5, Revision 1,
dated September 8, 1995.

(l) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to
the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that
collection of information displays a current valid OMB Control
Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is
2120-0056. Public reporting for this collection of information is
estimated to be approximately 1 hour per response, including the
time for reviewing instructions, completing and reviewing the
collection of information. All responses to this collection of
information are mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this
burden and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to
the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, DC 20591, Attn:
Information Collection Clearance Officer, AES-200.

(m) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Wichita 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 (n)(1) of this AD.
    (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.

(n) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Bobbie Kroetch,
Aerospace Engineer, Wichita ACO Branch, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100,
Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (316) 946-
4107; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or 47102e242f2e33266a0408140721262669202831.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Textron Aviation Inc., Textron Aviation Customer Service, One Cessna
Blvd., Wichita, Kansas 67215; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet: https://support.cessna.com. You
may review this referenced service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 901
Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on May 21, 2020.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-11340 Filed 5-28-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: January 29, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 19)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 4758-4759]
[DOCID:fr29ja10-20]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R08-OAR-2009-0198; FRL-9102-8]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Montana; Revisions to the Administrative Rules of Montana

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revisions submitted by the State of Montana on January 16, 2009 and May
4, 2009. The revisions are to the Administrative Rules of Montana.
Revisions include minor editorial and grammatical changes, updates to
the citations and references to Federal and State laws and regulations,
and a clarification of agricultural activities exempt from control of
emissions of airborne particulate matter. This action is being taken
under section 110 of the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 1, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2009-0198, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER> (please alert the individual listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing comments).
     Mail: Director, Air Program, Environmental Protection
Agency

(EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado
80202-1129.
     Hand Delivery: Director, Air Program, Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street,
Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. Such deliveries are only accepted Monday
through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.

Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules Section
of this Federal Register for detailed instruction on how to submit
comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathy Dolan, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of
this Federal Register, EPA is approving the State's SIP revisions as a
direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views these
noncontroversial SIP revisions and anticipates no adverse comments. A
detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the preamble to the
direct final rule. If EPA receives no adverse comments, EPA will not
take further action on this proposed rule. If EPA receives adverse
comments, EPA will withdraw the direct final rule and it will not take
effect. EPA will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment
period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so
at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may
be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those
provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
See the information provided in the Direct Final action of the same
title which is located in the Rules and Regulations Section of this
Federal Register.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: January 5, 2010.
Carol Rushin,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2010-1746 Filed 1-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 1 (Monday, January 4, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 141-142]
[FR Doc No: E9-31091]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER10-425-000]

Oceanside Power, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

December 23, 2009.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Oceanside Power, LLC's application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426,

in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a
motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on
the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is January 12, 2010.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-31091 Filed 12-31-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 226 (Monday, November 24, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69961-69963]
[FR Doc No: 2014-27698]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-73620; File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2014-96]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change to the NYSE MKT LLC
Equities Proprietary Market Data Fee Schedule (``Market Data Fee
Schedule'') Regarding Non-Display Use Fees

November 18, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that on November 7, 2014, NYSE MKT LLC (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE MKT'') 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 self-regulatory
organization. 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\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes Change to the NYSE MKT LLC Equities
Proprietary Market Data Fee Schedule (``Market Data Fee Schedule'')
regarding non-display use fees.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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
    The Exchange proposes a change to the Market Data Fee Schedule
regarding non-display use fees for NYSE MKT OpenBook, NYSE MKT Trades,
NYSE MKT BBO and NYSE MKT Order Imbalances, the market data products to
which non-display use fees apply. Specifically, with respect to the
three categories of, and fees applicable to, market data recipients for
non-display use, the Exchange proposes to describe the three categories
in the Market Data Fee Schedule.
    In September 2014, the Exchange revised the fees for non-display
use of NYSE MKT OpenBook, NYSE MKT Trades, and NYSE MKT BBO and added
fees for non-display use of NYSE MKT Order Imbalances.\4\ In the 2014
Filing, the Exchange proposed certain changes to the categories of, and
fees applicable to, data recipients for non-display use. As set forth
in the 2014 Filing: (i) Category 1 Fees apply when a data recipient's
non-display use of real-time market data is on its own behalf as

opposed to use on behalf of its clients; (ii) Category 2 Fees apply
when a data recipient's non-display use of real-time market data is on
behalf of its clients as opposed to use on its own behalf; and (iii)
Category 3 Fees apply when a data recipient's non-display use of real-
time market data is for the purpose of internally matching buy and sell
orders within an organization, including matching customer orders on a
data recipient's own behalf and/or on behalf of its clients. The Market
Data Fee Schedule currently lists each category as Category 1, Category
2, and Category 3, without further description.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72020 (September 9,
2014), 79 FR 55040 (September 15, 2014) (SR-NYSEMKT-2014-72) (``2014
Filing'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is proposing to amend the Market Data Fee Schedule to
add the descriptions of the three categories, as set forth above, as a
footnote to the Market Data Fee Schedule. Because there will now be
multiple footnotes to the Market Data Fee Schedule, the Exchange
proposes non-substantive edits to change the existing footnote
references from asterisks to numbers.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) \5\ of the
Act, in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) \6\ of
the Act, in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, 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, and it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination
among customers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes that adding the description of the three
categories of data recipients for non-display use to the Market Data
Fee Schedule will remove impediments to and help perfect a free and
open market by providing greater transparency for the Exchange's
customers regarding the category descriptions that have been previously
filed with the Commission and are applicable to the existing Market
Data Fee Schedule.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See supra n. 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 because the Exchange is
merely adding to the Market Data Fee Schedule information that has been
previously filed with the Commission.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See supra n. 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \9\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\10\
Because the foregoing proposed rule 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 if consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest, provided that the self-regulatory organization
has given the Commission written notice of its intent to file the
proposed rule change at least five business days prior to the date of
filing of the proposed rule change or such shorter time as designated
by the Commission,\11\ the proposed rule change has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \12\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \11\ The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \14\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b4(f)(6)(iii),\15\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has
requested that the Commission waive the 30-day delayed operative date
so that the proposed rule change may become effective and operative
upon filing with the Commission pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the
Act \16\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \17\ thereunder. The Commission believes
that the proposal raises no novel issues and that adding the
description of the categories of market data recipients for non-display
use to the Market Data Fee Schedule is consistent with the protection
of investors and the public interest because it will provide more
transparency in the Exchange's Market Data Fee Schedule regarding the
existing definitions in that schedule. Based on the foregoing, the
Commission has determined to waive the 30-day operative date so that
the proposal may take effect upon filing.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Id.
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \18\ For purposes only of accelerating the operative date of
this proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's
impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \19\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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-NYSEMKT-2014-96 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Brent J. Fields,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEMKT-2014-96. 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 the filing will also be available for inspection
and copying at the NYSE's principal office and on its Internet Web site
at www.nyse.com. 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-
NYSEMKT-2014-96 and should be submitted on or before December 15, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-27698 Filed 11-21-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 53 (Tuesday, March 19, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9987-9989]
[FR Doc No: 2019-05149]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 121

[Docket No. FDA-2018-D-1398]

Mitigation Strategies To Protect Food Against Intentional
Adulteration: Draft Guidance for Industry; Public Meeting; Request for
Comments

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notification of public meeting; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, the Agency, or we) is
announcing a public meeting entitled ``Mitigation Strategies to Protect
Food Against Intentional Adulteration: Draft Guidance for Industry.''
The purpose of the public meeting is to discuss the draft guidance for
compliance and implementation of the ``Mitigation Strategies to Protect
Food Against Intentional Adulteration'' rule, which was issued under
the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act.

DATES: The public meeting will be held on April 17, 2019 (from 8:30
a.m. to 2 p.m.). Submit either electronic or written comments on this
public meeting by July 5, 2019, in order for comments to be considered
before work begins on the final guidance. See the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for registration date and information.

ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held at the Food and Drug
Administration, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Harvey
Wiley Building Auditorium (First Floor), 5001 Campus Dr., College Park,
MD 20740. Public meeting participants (non-FDA employees) will undergo
routine security check procedures.
    You may submit comments as follows. Please submit comments by July
5, 2019, for your comments to be considered before we begin work on the
final guidance.

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2018-D-1398 for ``Mitigation Strategies to Protect Food Against
Intentional Adulteration: Draft Guidance for Industry.'' Received
comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted
as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For questions about registering for the meeting or to register by
phone: Melissa Schroeder, SIDEM, 1775 Eye St. NW, Ste. 1150,
Washington, DC 20006,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For general questions about the meeting, to request an opportunity
to make oral comments or to request special accommodations due to a
disability: Juanita Yates, Center for Food Safety and Applied
Nutrition, (HFS-009), Food and Drug Administration, 5001 Campus Dr.,
College Park, MD 20740,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Mitigation Strategies to Protect Food Against Intentional
Adulteration rule (IA rule, 21 CFR part 121, published in the Federal
Register of May 27, 2016, 81 FR 34165) requires domestic and foreign
food facilities that are required to register under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) to address hazards that may be
introduced with the intention to cause wide scale public health harm.
These food facilities are required to conduct a vulnerability
assessment to identify significant vulnerabilities and actionable
process steps and implement mitigation strategies to significantly
minimize or prevent significant vulnerabilities identified at
actionable process steps in a food operation. The rule is part of the
Agency's ongoing efforts to implement the FDA Food Safety Modernization
Act (FSMA; Pub. L. 111-353).
    In the Federal Register of June 20, 2018 (83 FR 28651), we
announced the first installment of the draft guidance on complying with
the IA rule, ``Mitigation Strategies to Protect Food Against
Intentional Adulteration: Draft Guidance for Industry.'' More recently,
in the Federal Register of March 6, 2019 (84 FR 8103), we announced the
availability of the second installment of the draft guidance. Both
installments provide information on and recommendations for compliance
with important requirements of the IA rule. The comment period on both
installments of the draft guidance is open until July 5, 2019, for
comments to be considered before work in begun on a final guidance.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Under FDA's Good Guidance Practices regulation, anyone may
comment on an FDA guidance document at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FDA is announcing a public meeting entitled, ``Mitigation
Strategies to Protect Food Against Intentional Adulteration: Draft
Guidance for Industry.'' The meeting will be held during the comment
period on the draft guidance.
    While oral presentations from specific individuals and
organizations will be necessarily limited due to time constraints
during the public meetings, stakeholders may submit electronic or
written comments discussing any issues of concern to the administrative
record (the docket) for the draft guidance (Docket No. FDA-2018-D-
1398).

II. Purpose and Format of the Public Meeting

    The purpose of the public meeting is to provide information and
facilitate comments so that stakeholders can better evaluate and
provide input on the draft guidance. We invite interested parties to
provide information and offer comments related to the IA rule draft
guidance. During the public meeting, we will present information on the
draft guidance, with emphasis on chapters related to rule requirements
for vulnerability assessments; mitigation

strategies; food defense monitoring; and education, training, or
experience. There will be an opportunity for questions, as well as an
opportunity for open public comment.

III. Participating in the Public Meeting

    Registration: To register for the public meeting, please visit the
following website by April 10, 2019: https://www.fda.gov/Food/NewsEvents/WorkshopsMeetingsConferences/default.htm. Please provide
complete contact information for each attendee, including name, title,
affiliation, address, email, and telephone.
    Registration is free and based on space availability. Persons
interested in attending this public meeting must register by April 10,
2019, 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time. Early registration is recommended
because seating is limited; therefore, FDA may limit the number of
participants from each organization. Registrants will receive
confirmation when they have been accepted. If time and space permit,
onsite registration on the day of the public meeting will be provided
beginning at 8 a.m. We will let registrants know if registration closes
before the day of the public meeting.
    For questions about registering for the meeting or to register by
phone, please contact Melissa Schroeder (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
    If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please
contact Juanita Yates, (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) no later
than March 28, 2019.
    Requests for Oral Presentations: During online or telephone
registration you may indicate if you wish to present during a public
comment session or participate in a specific session, and which
topic(s) you wish to address. We will do our best to accommodate
requests to make public comments. Individuals and organizations with
common interests are urged to consolidate or coordinate their
presentations, and request time for a joint presentation, or submit
requests for designated representatives to participate in the focused
sessions. Following the close of registration, we will determine the
amount of time allotted to each presenter and the approximate time each
oral presentation is to begin, and will select and notify participants
by April 3, 2019. All requests to make oral presentations must be
received by March 28, 2019. No commercial or promotional material will
be permitted to be presented or distributed at the public meeting.
    Streaming Webcast of the Public Meeting: This public meeting will
also be webcast. https://www.fda.gov/Food/NewsEvents/WorkshopsMeetingsConferences/default.htm.
    If you have never attended a Connect Pro event before, test your
connection at https://collaboration.fda.gov/common/help/en/support/meeting_test.htm. To get a quick overview of the Connect Pro program,
visit https://www.adobe.com/go/connectpro_overview. FDA has verified
the website addresses in this document, as of the date this document
publishes in the Federal Register, but websites are subject to change
over time.
    Transcripts: Please be advised that as soon as a transcript of the
public meeting is available, it will be accessible at https://www.regulations.gov. It may also be viewed at the Dockets Management
Staff (see ADDRESSES). A link to the transcript will also be available
on the internet at https://www.fda.gov/Food/NewsEvents/WorkshopsMeetingsConferences/default.htm.

    Dated: March 14, 2019.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Acting Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-05149 Filed 3-18-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 65 (Tuesday, April 5, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19512-19514]
[FR Doc No: 2016-07577]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-5042; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-140-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
The Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, -900 and -900ER
series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by an evaluation by the
design approval holder (DAH) indicating that certain fastener locations
in the window corner surround structure are subject to widespread
fatigue damage (WFD). This proposed AD would require repetitive high
frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspections for cracking in certain
fastener locations in the window corner surround structure, and repair
if necessary. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct fatigue
cracking around certain fastener locations that could cause multiple
window corner skin cracks, which could result in rapid decompression
and consequent reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 20, 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: 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 NPRM, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box
3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
extension 1; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet: https://www.myboeingfleet.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-
5042.

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-
5042; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jason Deutschman, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-
6595; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2016-5042;
Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-140-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD 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

    Structural fatigue damage is progressive. It begins as minute
cracks, and those cracks grow under the action of repeated stresses.
This can happen because of normal operational conditions and design
attributes, or because of isolated situations or incidents such as
material defects, poor fabrication quality, or corrosion pits, dings,
or scratches. Fatigue damage can occur locally, in small areas or
structural design details, or globally. Global fatigue damage is
general degradation of large areas of structure with similar structural
details and stress levels. Multiple-site damage is global damage that
occurs in a large structural element such as a single rivet line of a
lap splice joining two large skin panels. Global damage can also occur
in multiple elements such as adjacent frames or stringers. Multiple-
site-damage and multiple-element-damage cracks are typically too small
initially to be reliably detected with normal inspection methods.
Without intervention, these cracks will grow, and eventually compromise
the structural integrity of the airplane, in a condition known as WFD.
As an airplane ages, WFD will likely occur, and will certainly occur if
the airplane is operated long enough without any intervention.
    The FAA's WFD final rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) became
effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD rule requires certain actions to
prevent structural failure due to WFD throughout the operational life
of certain existing transport category airplanes and all of these
airplanes that will be certificated in the future. For existing and
future airplanes subject to the WFD rule, the rule requires that DAHs
establish a limit of validity (LOV) of the engineering data that
support the structural maintenance program. Operators affected by the
WFD rule may not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, unless an extended LOV
is approved.
    The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) does not require
identifying and developing maintenance actions if the DAHs can show
that such actions are not necessary to prevent WFD before the airplane
reaches the LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend on accomplishment of
future maintenance actions. As stated in the WFD rule, any maintenance
actions necessary to reach the LOV will be mandated by airworthiness
directives through separate rulemaking actions.
    In the context of WFD, this action is necessary to enable DAHs to
propose LOVs that allow operators the longest operational lives for
their airplanes, and still ensure that WFD will not occur. This
approach allows for an implementation strategy that provides
flexibility to DAHs in determining the timing of service information
development (with FAA approval), while providing operators with
certainty

regarding the LOV applicable to their airplanes.
    The FAA has received a report indicating that an evaluation by the
DAH has indicated that certain fastener locations in the window corner
surround structure are subject to WFD. Fatigue cracking around certain
fastener locations could cause multiple window corner skin cracks,
which could result in rapid decompression and consequent reduced
structural integrity of the airplane.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1351, dated July
8, 2015. The service information describes procedures for HFEC
inspections for cracking in certain fastener locations in the window
corner surround structure and repair. 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

    We are proposing this AD 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.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information identified previously, except as discussed
under ``Difference 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-2016-5042.

Difference Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1351, dated July 8, 2015,
specifies to contact the manufacturer for instructions on how to repair
certain conditions, but this proposed AD would require repairing those
conditions 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 proposed AD affects 1,528 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                   Labor cost          Parts cost       Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection......................  38 work-hours x     $0 [per inspection  $3,230 [per         $4,935,440 [per
                                   $85 per hour =      cycle].             inspection cycle].  inspection
                                   $3,230 [per                                                 cycle].
                                   inspection cycle].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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-2016-5042; Directorate Identifier
2015-NM-140-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by May 20, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700, -
700C, -800, -900 and -900ER series airplanes, certificated in any
category.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design approval
holder (DAH) indicating that certain fastener locations in the
window corner surround structure are subject to

widespread fatigue damage (WFD). We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct fatigue cracking around certain fastener locations that
could cause multiple window corner skin cracks, which could result
in rapid decompression and consequent reduced structural integrity
of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Repetitive Inspections and Repair

    At the applicable time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1351, dated
July 8, 2015: Do an external high frequency eddy current (HFEC)
inspection for cracking of the skin around the fastener locations at
the upper forward and lower aft corners of each window between
station (STA) 360 and STA 540, as applicable, and at the lower
forward and upper aft corners of each window between STA 727 and STA
887, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1351, dated July 8, 2015. Repeat the
inspection thereafter at the applicable times specified in paragraph
1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1351,
dated July 8, 2015. If any crack is found during any inspection,
repair before further flight using a method approved in accordance
with the procedures specified in paragraph (i) of this AD.

(h) Exception to the Service Bulletin Specifications

    Although Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1351, dated July
8, 2015, specifies to contact Boeing for repair instructions, and
specifies that action as ``RC'' (Required for Compliance), this AD
requires repair before further flight using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (i) of this
AD.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (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. 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 ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (j)(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, Seattle ACO, 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) Except as required by paragraph (h) of this AD: For service
information that contains steps that are labeled as RC, the
provisions of paragraphs (i)(4)(i) and (i)(4)(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. 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.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Jason
Deutschman, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA,
Seattle ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:
425-917-6595; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone: 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet: https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view the 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>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 24, 2016.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-07577 Filed 4-4-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P