[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 32 (Thursday, February 18, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8166-8168]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03136]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-0464; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-046-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Services B.V. 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
Fokker Services B.V. Model F.28 Mark 0070 and 0100 airplanes. This
proposed AD was prompted by the need for more restrictive airworthiness
limitations. This proposed AD would require revising the maintenance
program or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate certain
maintenance requirement tasks, thresholds, and intervals. We are
proposing this AD to reduce the potential for significant failure
conditions and consequent loss of controllability of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 4, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Fokker
Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O. Box 1357, 2130 EL
Hoofddorp, the Netherlands; telephone +31 (0)88-6280-

350; fax +31 (0)88-6280-111; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.myfokkerfleet.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>.

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-
0464; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2016-0464;
Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-046-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2015-0027, dated February 20, 2015 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for all Fokker Services
B.V. Model F.28 Mark 0070 and 0100 airplanes. The MCAI states:

    Fokker Services published issue 11 of Engineering Report SE-473,
containing Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMRs). This
report is Part 1 of the Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS Part
1) of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness, referred to in
Section 06, Appendix 1, of the Fokker 70/100 Maintenance Review
Board (MRB) document.
    The complete ALS currently consists of:
    Part 1--Report SE-473 (CMRs), Part 2--Report SE-623,
Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALIs) and Safe Life Items (SLIs),
and Part 3--Report SE-672, Fuel ALIs and Critical Design
Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCLs).
    The instructions contained in those reports have been identified
as mandatory actions for continued airworthiness.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires
implementation of the maintenance actions as specified in ALS Part 1
of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness, Fokker Services
Engineering Report SE-473 at issue 11.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
0464.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Fokker Services B.V. has issued Engineering Report, Airworthiness
Limitations Section (ALS), ``Fokker 70/100 Certification Maintenance
Requirements,'' of Fokker Services B.V. Engineering Report SE-473,
Issue 11, released January 19, 2015. This service information describes
certification maintenance requirements. This service information is
reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it
through their normal course of business or by the means identified in
the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of these
same type designs.
    This proposed AD would require revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to include new actions (e.g., inspections).
Compliance with these actions is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For
airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in
the areas addressed by this proposed AD, the operator may not be able
to accomplish the actions described in the revisions. In this
situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request
approval for an alternative method of compliance according to paragraph
(i)(1) of this proposed AD. The request should include a description of
changes to the required actions that will ensure the continued
operational safety of the airplane.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service
Information

    The MCAI specifies that if there are findings from the ALS
inspection tasks, corrective actions must be accomplished in accordance
with Fokker Services B.V. maintenance documentation or by contacting
Fokker Services B.V. for repair instructions, and provides for varying
compliance times for the corrective actions depending on the inspection
findings. However, this proposed AD does not include that requirement.
Operators of U.S.-registered airplanes are required by general
airworthiness and operational regulations to perform all maintenance
before further flight using methods that are acceptable to the FAA. We
consider those methods to be adequate to address any corrective actions
necessitated by the findings of ALS inspections required by this
proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 8 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We also estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product
to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average
labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate
the cost of this proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $680, or $85 per
product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this 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):

Fokker Services B.V.: Docket No. FAA-2016-0464; Directorate
Identifier 2015-NM-046-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by April 4, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Fokker Services B.V. Model F.28 Mark 0070 and
0100 airplanes, certificated in any category, all serial numbers.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Time Limits/
Maintenance Checks.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by the need for more restrictive
airworthiness limitations. We are issuing this AD to reduce the
potential for significant failure conditions and consequent loss of
controllability of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Maintenance Program Revision

    (1) Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, revise
the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate
the certification maintenance requirements (CMR) specified in Fokker
Services B.V. Engineering Report, Airworthiness Limitations Section
(ALS), ``Fokker 70/100 Certification Maintenance Requirements,'' of
Fokker Services B.V. Engineering Report SE-473, Issue 11, released
January 19, 2015.
    (2) Do the applicable initial CMR inspection at the time
specified in paragraph (g)(2)(i) or (g)(2)(ii) of this AD, as
applicable, as specified in Fokker Services B.V. Engineering ALS,
``Fokker 70/100 Certification Maintenance Requirements,'' Fokker
Services B.V. Engineering Report SE-473, Issue 11, released January
19, 2015. If any discrepancy is found during any inspection, repair
using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch, ANM-
116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European Aviation
Safety Agency; or Fokker B.V. Service's EASA Design Organization
Approval (DOA). Repair any discrepancy before further flight.
    (i) For CMR inspection 783100-CM-01: Within 1 year or 3,000
flight hours after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs
first, but not later than 12,000 flight hours after accomplishing
MRB task 783100-00-04.
    (ii) For CMR inspection 783500-CM-01: Within 1 year or 3,000
flight hours after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs
first, but not later than 10,000 flight hours after accomplishing
MRB task 783100-01-01.

(h) No Alternative Inspections or Inspection Intervals

    After accomplishment of the actions specified in paragraph
(g)(2) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g., inspections) and
intervals, may be used, unless the actions or intervals are approved
as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Tom
Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information
may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office. The
AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Fokker Services B.V.'s
EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the
approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(j) Related Information

    (1) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness Directive 2015-0027, dated
February 20, 2015, for related information. This MCAI may be found
in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-0464.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Fokker Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O. Box 1357, 2130
EL Hoofddorp, the Netherlands; telephone +31 (0)88-6280-350; fax +31
(0)88-6280-111; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.myfokkerfleet.com. You may view this service information at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 6, 2016.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-03136 Filed 2-17-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 107 (Thursday, June 4, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31946-31948]
[FR Doc No: 2015-13542]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee; Transport Airplane and
Engine Issues; New Task

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of new task assignment for the Aviation Rulemaking
Advisory Committee (ARAC).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA assigned the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee
(ARAC) a new task to provide recommendations regarding the
incorporation of airframe-level crashworthiness and ditching standards
into Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 25 and
development of associated advisory material. The issue is during the
development of current airworthiness standards and regulatory guidance,
the FAA assumed that airframe structure for transport airplanes would
be constructed predominantly of metal, using skin-stringer-frame
architecture. Therefore, certain requirements either do not address all
of the issues associated with nonmetallic materials, or have criteria
that are based on experience with traditionally-configured large
metallic airplanes. With respect to crashworthiness, there is no
airframe-level standard for crashworthiness. Many of the factors that
influence airframe performance under crash conditions on terrain also
influence airframe performance under ditching conditions. Past studies
and investigations have included recommendations for review of certain
regulatory requirements and guidance material to identify opportunities
for improving survivability during a ditching event; consideration of
these recommendations is included in this tasking.
    This notice informs the public of the new ARAC activity and
solicits membership for the Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and
Ditching Working Group.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ian Won, Federal Aviation
Administration, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98055,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone number<PHONE_NUMBER>, facsimile number 425-227-
1232.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

ARAC Acceptance of Task

    As a result of the March 19, 2015 ARAC meeting, the FAA has
assigned and ARAC has accepted this task and will establish the
Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and Ditching Working Group,
Transport Airplane and Engine Issues. The working group will serve as
staff to the ARAC and provide advice and recommendations on the
assigned task. The ARAC will review and approve the recommendation
report and will submit it to the FAA.

Background

    The FAA established the ARAC to provide information, advice, and
recommendations on aviation related issues that could result in
rulemaking to the FAA Administrator, through the Associate
Administrator of Aviation Safety.
    The Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and Ditching Working Group
will provide advice and recommendations to the ARAC on airframe-level
crashworthiness and ditching standards to incorporate into part 25 and
any associated advisory material.
    The requirements of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
25.561 apply equally to structure constructed from either metallic or
nonmetallic materials, and regardless of the design architecture and
airplane size. Guidance material is mainly contained in FAA Advisory
Circular (AC) 25-17A. While not explicitly stated in part 25, during
the development of current airworthiness standards and published
advisory circulars, the FAA assumed that airplane airframes would be
constructed predominantly of metal, using skin-stringer-frame
architecture. Therefore, some of the requirements either do not address
all of the issues associated with nonmetallic materials, or have
criteria that are based on experience with traditionally-configured
large metallic airplanes. With respect to crashworthiness, there is no
airframe-level standard for crashworthiness. The FAA promulgated
standards for occupant protection at the seat installation level, with
the presumption that the airframe provides an acceptable level of
crashworthiness. Thus when an applicant proposes to use unconventional
fuselage structure (materials, design, or both), the FAA has written
special conditions to ensure the level of crash protection is
equivalent to that provided by a traditionally-configured metallic
airplane. These special conditions have been comparative in nature, and
do not establish performance standards that are independent of
traditional metallic skin-stringer-frame architecture for airframe
crashworthiness.
    Crashworthiness Factors: Many factors influence the crashworthiness
of an airframe, including materials of

construction, geometry, structural philosophy, and fuselage size
(fuselage diameter). The key elements of crashworthy airframe design
are managing energy absorption and maintaining structural integrity.
For the most part, energy absorption is managed through plastic
deformation and controlled failures of the lower fuselage structure.
Maintaining the integrity of the structure is a balance between keeping
loads within human tolerance levels, retaining items of mass,
preserving a survivable volume and maintaining access to exits.
Existing airworthiness requirements mainly focus on the safety of
flight, and not crashworthiness, consequently when deviating from the
traditional methods of construction an adequate level of safety cannot
be assured.
    Increased Use of Composites: In June 2009, the FAA Transport
Airplane Directorate requested comments through the Federal Register
(74 FR 26919) on whether there was a need for future rulemaking to
address manufacturers' extensive use of composite materials in airplane
construction. Several candidate technical areas were noted in the
request, including fire safety, crashworthiness, lightning protection,
fuel tank safety and damage tolerance. All responses that the FAA
received indicated that crashworthiness in particular needs improved
guidance and possible rulemaking.
    Ditching: The FAA conducted several investigations on ditching and
water-related impacts in the 1980s and 1990s. In conjunction with
Transport Canada and the United Kingdom Civil Aviation Authority (UK
CAA), the FAA recently investigated ditching/water-related impacts and
ditching certification. One of the findings of these investigations is
that current practices may not provide an adequate level of safety for
the most likely ditching scenarios. From this research, a ditching
event can be categorized as a specific type of emergency landing. Many
of the factors (e.g., airframe energy absorption characteristics,
structural deformation, etc.) that influence airframe performance under
crash conditions on terrain also influence airframe performance under
ditching conditions. Flight crew procedures, airplane configuration,
safety equipment, and passenger preparedness also have a significant
influence on survivability during a ditching event. Findings from these
investigations include recommendations for review of certain regulatory
requirements and guidance material related to the aforementioned
factors to identify opportunities for improving survivability during a
ditching event.

The Task

    The Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and Ditching Working Group
is tasked to:
    1. Specifically advise and make written recommendations on what
airframe-level crashworthiness and ditching standards to incorporate
into 14 CFR part 25 and any associated advisory material.
    2. Evaluate Sec. Sec.  25.561, 25.562, 25.563, 25.785, 25.787,
25.789, 25.801, 25.807, 25.1411, 25.1415, and associated regulatory
guidance material (e.g., ACs and policy memorandums) to determine what
aspects need to be revised to maintain the current level of safety.
Evaluate Special Conditions Nos. 25-321-SC, 25-362-SC, 25-528-SC, 25-
537-SC, as a basis for future requirements. The Transport Airplane
Crashworthiness and Ditching Working Group will specifically review the
following factors in making its recommendations:
    a. Fuselage size effects as discussed in FAA report DOT/FAA/CT-
TN90/23;
    b. Safety benefit considerations as identified in CAA Paper 96011
(and any subsequent revisions);
    c. Other non-traditional airplane level configurations or
structural configurations (e.g., non-skin, stringer, frame
construction).
    3. Make recommendations, using the information in FAA reports DOT/
FAA/TC-14/8 (draft), DOT/FAA/AR-95/54, DOT/FAA/CT-92/04, DOT/FAA/CT-84/
3, FAA policy memorandum PS-ANM100-1982-00124, and any other pertinent
information that may be available on:
    a. Assumptions used in establishing the airplane configuration for
ditching, both planned and unplanned;
    b. Validation of assumptions used for establishing airplane flight
performance for planned and unplanned ditching scenarios;
    c. Procedures to be used to execute a successful ditching;
    d. Minimum equipment needed to address the likely ditching
scenarios.
    4. Consider the performance of existing-conventional metallic
airframe structure in crash conditions (with consideration to size
effects) when developing recommendations for airframe-level
crashworthiness and ditching standards, such that conventionally
configured airplanes fabricated with typical metallic materials and
design details can be shown to meet the proposed regulations without
extensive investigation or documentation.
    5. Based on the Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and Ditching
Working Group recommendations, perform the following:
    a. Estimate what regulated parties will do differently as a result
of the proposed regulation and how much it would cost;
    b. Estimate the improvement (if any) in survivability of future
accidents from this proposed regulation (cite evidence in the
historical record as support if possible);
    c. Estimate any other benefits (e.g., reduced administrative
burden) or costs that would result from implementation of the
recommendations.
    6. Develop a report containing recommendations on whether to
incorporate airframe-level crashworthiness and ditching standards into
14 CFR part 25, the recommended requirements, and any associated
advisory material.
    7. Develop a report containing recommendations on the findings and
results of the tasks explained above.
    a. The report should document both majority and dissenting
positions on the findings and the rationale for each position.
    b. Any disagreements should be documented, including the rationale
for each position and the reason for the disagreement.
    8. Consider EASA requirements, accepted means of compliance (AMC)
and guidance material (GM) for harmonization to the extent possible.
    9. The Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and Ditching Working
Group may be reinstated to assist the ARAC by responding to the FAA's
questions or concerns after the recommendation report has been
submitted.

Schedule

    The recommendation report must be submitted to the FAA for review
and acceptance no later than 24 months after publication of this
notice.

Working Group Activity

    The Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and Ditching Working Group
must comply with the procedures adopted by the ARAC. As part of the
procedures, the working group must:
    1. Conduct a review and analysis of the assigned tasks and any
other related materials or documents.
    2. Draft and submit a work plan for completion of the task,
including the rationale supporting such a plan, for consideration by
the Transport Airplane and Engine Subcommittee.
    3. Provide a status report at each Transport Airplane and Engine
Subcommittee meeting.

    4. Draft and submit the recommendation report based on the review
and analysis of the assigned tasks.
    5. Present the recommendation report at the Transport Airplane and
Engine Subcommittee meeting.

Participation in the Working Group

    The Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and Ditching Working Group
will be comprised of technical experts having an interest in the
assigned task. A working group member need not be a member
representative of the ARAC. The FAA would like a wide range of members
to ensure all aspects of the tasks are considered in development of the
recommendations. The provisions of the August 13, 2014 Office of
Management and Budget guidance, ``Revised Guidance on Appointment of
Lobbyists to Federal Advisory Committees, Boards, and Commissions'' (79
FR 47482), continues the ban on registered lobbyists participating on
Agency Boards and Commissions if participating in their ``individual
capacity.'' The revised guidance now allows registered lobbyists to
participate on Agency Boards and Commissions in a ``representative
capacity'' for the ``express purpose of providing a committee with the
views of a nongovernmental entity, a recognizable group of persons or
nongovernmental entities (an industry, sector, labor unions, or
environmental groups, etc.) or state or local government.'' (For
further information see Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (LDA) as
amended, 2 U.S.C. 1603, 1604, and 1605.)
    If you wish to become a member of the Transport Airplane
Crashworthiness and Ditching Working Group, write the person listed
under the caption FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT expressing that
desire. Describe your interest in the task and state the expertise you
would bring to the working group. The FAA must receive all requests by
July 6, 2015. The ARAC and the FAA will review the requests and advise
you whether or not your request is approved.
    If you are chosen for membership on the working group, you must
actively participate in the working group by attending all meetings,
and providing written comments when requested to do so. You must devote
the resources necessary to support the working group in meeting any
assigned deadlines. You must keep your management chain and those you
may represent advised of working group activities and decisions to
ensure the proposed technical solutions do not conflict with the
position of those you represent. Once the working group has begun
deliberations, members will not be added or substituted without the
approval of the ARAC Chair, the FAA, including the Designated Federal
Officer, and the Working Group Chair.
    The Secretary of Transportation determined the formation and use of
the ARAC is necessary and in the public interest in connection with the
performance of duties imposed on the FAA by law.
    ARAC meetings are open to the public. However, meetings of the
Transport Airplane Crashworthiness and Ditching Working Group are not
open to the public, except to the extent individuals with an interest
and expertise are selected to participate. The FAA will make no public
announcement of working group meetings.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 28, 2015.
Brenda D. Courtney,
Acting Designated Federal Officer, Aviation Rulemaking Advisory
Committee.
[FR Doc. 2015-13542 Filed 6-3-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 85 (Thursday, May 2, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25779-25780]
[FR Doc No: 2013-10353]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-69468; File No. SR-CBOE-2013-046]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Delete Rule 6.74(b) That Sets Forth Expired
SizeQuote Mechanism Pilot Program

April 26, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on April 25, 2013, the Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated (the ``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change
as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by
the Exchange. The Exchange filed the proposal as a ``non-
controversial'' proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    CBOE proposes to delete Rule 6.74(f) that sets forth the SizeQuote
Mechanism pilot program because this pilot program expired on February
15, 2008. The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the
Secretary, 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 purpose of this filing is to delete Rule 6.74(f) that sets
forth the open outcry SizeQuote Mechanism program, which was approved
on a pilot basis in February 2005 and was expanded to include solicited
orders in January 2006. The SizeQuote Mechanism pilot program was
extended twice and expired on February 15, 2008.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 51205 (February 15,
2005), 70 FR 8647 (February 22, 2005) (approving SR-CBOE-2004-72 on
a pilot basis through February 15, 2006); 53135 (January 17, 2006),
71 FR 3908 (January 24, 2006) (approving SR-CBOE-2005-83, which
modified the pilot program); 53252 (February 8, 2006), 71 FR 8012
(February 15, 2006) (immediately effective proposal, SR-CBOE-2006-
05, extending the pilot program from February 15, 2006 to February
15, 2007); and 55174 (January 25, 2007), 72 FR January 31, 2007
(immediately effective proposal, SR-CBOE-2007-07, extending the
pilot program from February 15, 2007 to February 15, 2008).
    The expired pilot program provided a process by which a Floor
Broker (using his/her exercise of due diligence to execute orders at
the best price(s)) could execute and facilitate large-sized orders
in open outcry. The Exchange issued a Regulatory Circular announcing
the expiration of the SizeQuote Mechanism Pilot, which was no longer
operative after February 15, 2008. See CBOE Regulatory Circular
RG08-028 (Expiration of SizeQuote Mechanism Pilot).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In connection with the March 18, 2013 launch of mini-options, the
Exchange amended, among other rules, Rule 6.74(f) to establish a
minimum eligible order size for mini-options in an amount proportional
to the minimum eligible order size that is required for standard
options (i.e., not less than 250 standard option contracts delivering
100 shares and not less than 2,500 for mini-option contracts delivering
10 shares).\6\ In that filing, the Exchange deleted obsolete rule text
from Rule 6.74(f)(i) that referenced that the SizeQuote Mechanism pilot
program had expired on February 15, 2008. The Exchange believes that
the entirety of 6.74(f) should be deleted since the SizeQuote Mechanism
pilot program has expired, the rule text language is obsolete and to
eliminate confusion as to availability of the SizeQuote Mechanism pilot
program that may arise if the language remains in Rule 6.74(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69235 (March 25,
2013), 78 FR 19552 (April 1, 2013) (notice of filing and immediate
effectiveness of SR-CBOE-2013-036).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder, including the
requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\7\ In particular, the Exchange
believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section
6(b)(5) \8\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, to remove
impediments to and to perfect the mechanism for a free and open market
and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and
the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, the Exchange believes that investors and market
participants would benefit from Rule 6.74(d) being deleted because it
sets forth the SizeQuote Mechanism pilot program that expired on
February 15, 2008 and therefore contains obsolete and outdated rule
text. If the current rule text language remains, confusion could arise
as to whether the SizeQuote Mechanism pilot program is currently
available. Because CBOE did not to renew and/or revise or seek to make
the SizeQuote Mechanism pilot program permanent, CBOE believes that it
is appropriate to delete the obsolete rule text that references the
SizeQuote Mechanism pilot program which expired on February 15, 2008.

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

    This proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition
that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act. In this regard and as indicated above, the Exchange notes that
the rule change is being proposed to delete obsolete rule text language
that sets forth the expired SizeQuote Mechanism pilot program in Rule
6.74(d). Since all market participants cannot currently utilize the
expired SizeQuote Mechanism pilot

program, the rule change will not have any burden on competition.

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

    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,\9\ the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \10\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\11\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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-CBOE-2013-046 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2013-046. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the CBOE. 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-CBOE-2013-046 and should be
submitted on or before May 23, 2013.

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

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

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-10353 Filed 5-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P