[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 219 (Monday, November 15, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69612-69614]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28605]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-1111; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-129-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Model 747-200B, -
300, -400, -400D, and -400F Series Airplanes Powered by Pratt and
Whitney 4000 or General Electric CF6-80C2 Series Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Model 747-200B, -300, -400, -400D, and -400F series airplanes.
This proposed AD would require an inspection to determine the part
number of the door and to determine if the correct mid-pivot access
door is installed, and the installation of a marker on the mid-pivot
access door, and if necessary, repetitive ultrasonic inspections for
cracking of the mid-pivot bolt assembly and eventual replacement of the
mid-pivot bolt assembly. This proposed AD results from a report that
the left and right spring beam mid-pivot bolt assembly access doors for
the No. 1 strut were inadvertently installed in the incorrect position
during strut modification. We are proposing this AD to detect and
correct incorrectly installed mid-pivot bolt assemblies on the spring
beam on the outboard struts. Incorrectly installed bolt assemblies
could lead to fatigue cracking and consequent fracturing of the mid-
pivot bolt assembly, which could lead to loss of the spring beam load
path and the possible separation of a strut and engine from the
airplane during flight.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 30,
2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:

     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone 206-
544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the
referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth Paoletti, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone
(425) 917-6434; 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-2010-1111;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-129-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

    We have received a report that the mid-pivot access doors on the
No. 1 strut were inadvertently installed in the incorrect position
during strut modification. The design of the access doors can allow the
doors to be installed on either side of the strut. The mid-pivot access
door has machined tabs that fit the slots in the head of the mid-pivot
bolt assembly. The machined tabs correctly orient the mid-pivot bolt
assembly and prevent the mid-pivot bolt from rotating in the spring
beam. The correct orientation of the mid-pivot bolt reduces the fatigue
on the cross-drilled lubrication channel. If the lubrication channel is
not in the correct orientation, fatigue cracking could develop in the
mid-pivot bolt assembly. The fatigue cracking could lead to the
fracture of the mid-pivot bolt assembly. Fracture of the mid-pivot bolt
assembly could result in the loss of the spring beam load path. Loss of
the spring beam load path could result in the separation of a strut and
engine from the airplane during flight.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-54A2232, dated
April 15, 2010. The service bulletin describes procedures for doing an
inspection to determine the part number of the door and to determine if
the correct mid-pivot access door is installed. For airplanes on which
the correct door is installed, the service bulletin describes
procedures for installing a marker on the mid-pivot access door. For
airplanes on which the correct access door is not installed, Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-54A2232, dated April 15, 2010, describes
procedures for rotating the mid-pivot bolt assembly to the correct
orientation and replacing the access door, and installing the marker on
the mid-pivot access door. In addition, for those airplanes without the
correct door, the service bulletin describes procedures for doing one
of two options:
     Doing repetitive ultrasonic inspections for cracks of the
mid-pivot bolt assembly, and if no cracking is found, eventually
replacing the assembly.
     Replacing the mid-pivot bolt assembly before further
flight. Replacing the mid-pivot bolt assembly terminates the need for
repetitive inspections.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of these same type
designs. This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions
specified in the service information described previously.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 95 airplanes of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it would take about 3 work-hours per
product to comply with this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85
per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this
proposed AD to the U.S. operators to be $24,225, or $255 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), and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2010-1111; Directorate Identifier
2010-NM-129-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by December 30, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 747-200B, -300,
-400, -400D, and -400F series airplanes, certificated in any
category; equipped with Pratt and Whitney 4000 or General Electric
CF6-80C2 series engines, as identified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-54A2232, dated April 15, 2010.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 54:
Nacelles/pylons.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from a report that the left and right spring
beam mid-pivot bolt assembly access doors for the no. 1 strut were
inadvertently installed in the incorrect position during strut
modification. The Federal Aviation Administration is issuing this AD
to detect and correct incorrectly installed mid-pivot bolt
assemblies on the spring beam on the outboard struts. Incorrectly
installed bolt assemblies could lead to fatigue cracking and
consequent fracturing of the mid-pivot bolt assembly, which could
lead to loss of the spring beam load path and the possible
separation of a strut and engine from the airplane during flight.

Compliance

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

Inspection To Determine if Correct Door Is Installed

    (g) Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD, do an
inspection to determine if the correct mid-pivot access door is
installed, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-54A2232, dated April 15, 2010.
    (h) If, during the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this
AD, the correct mid-pivot door is found to be installed, before
further flight, install a marker on the mid-pivot access door, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-54A2232, dated April 15, 2010.
    (i) If, during the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this
AD, the correct mid-pivot door is not found to be installed, before
further flight, do the actions required by paragraphs (i)(1),
(i)(2), and (i)(3) of this AD, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-54A2232, dated
April 15, 2010.
    (1) Rotate the mid-pivot bolt assembly to the correct
orientation and replace the mid-pivot access door with a new or
serviceable mid-pivot access door.
    (2) Install a marker on the mid-pivot access door.
    (3) Do the actions required by paragraph (i)(3)(i) or (i)(3)(ii)
of this AD.
    (i) (Option 1) Do an ultrasonic inspection for cracking of the
mid-pivot bolt assembly.
    (A) If no cracking is found, do the actions required by
paragraphs (i)(3)(i)(A)(1) and (i)(3)(i)(A)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Repeat the ultrasonic inspection for cracking of the mid-
pivot bolt assembly thereafter at intervals not to exceed 24 months
until the action required by paragraph (i)(3)(i)(A)(2) of this AD is
done.
    (2) Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD,
replace the mid-pivot bolt assembly with a new mid-pivot bolt
assembly. Replacement terminates the repetitive inspections required
by paragraph (i)(3)(i)(A)(1) of this AD.
    (B) If any cracking is found, replace the mid-pivot bolt
assembly with a new mid-pivot bolt assembly, before further flight.
    (ii) (Option 2) Replace the mid-pivot bolt assembly with a new
mid-pivot bolt assembly.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (j)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to
Attn: Kenneth Paoletti, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-
120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425) 917-
6434; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may be e-mailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO to make
those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must
meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 2, 2010.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-28605 Filed 11-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on January 6, 2004

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST 1997-2878

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  AEROSERVICIOS EJECUTIVOS CORPORATIVOS, S.A. de C.V.
Date Filed:  November 26, 2003

Relief requested:  Exemption from 49 USC section 41301 to permit the
applicant to continue to conduct passenger charter operations between
Mexico and the United States, and other passenger charters in accordance
with 14 CFR Part 212, using small equipment.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  December 20, 2002, in
this Docket.

Applicant representative:  Lee A. Bauer,<PHONE_NUMBER>          DOT
analyst:  Allen Brown,<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None.

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved
                                            Action date:  January 6,
2004

Effective dates of authority granted:  January 6, 2004, through January
6, 2005

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity):  United
States-Mexico Air Transport Services Agreement of August 15, 1960, as
amended and extended (Agreement).

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

     X  Standard exemption conditions.

Special conditions/Partial grant/Denial basis/Remarks:  In the conduct
of these operations, the carrier must adhere to all applicable
provisions of the U.S.-Mexico Agreement.  In the conduct of these
operations, the carrier may only use aircraft capable of carrying no
more than 60 passengers and having a maximum payload capacity of no more
than 18,000 pounds (small equipment).  The above grant includes
authority to conduct Third and Fourth Freedom charter operations.  While
we have subjected, consistent with the provisions of the Agreement,
Mexican carriers conducting charter operations with large aircraft to
prior approval or submission of notice for their Third and Fourth
Freedom charters, we determined that any such requirement was not
necessary on public interest grounds in this case, since the carrier
will be conducting these operations solely with small aircraft.  (Other
charter operations to/from the United States under this authority,
however, are subject to prior approval under 14 CFR Part 212.)  Further,
we are continuing to allow Mexican carriers conducting passenger
charters using small equipment to make stopovers in the United States in
the conduct of such operations.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) the applicant was qualified to perform its proposed
operations; (3) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (4) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in
the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp


PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION Please read the instructions before completing this form. For additional forms or assistance in completing this form, contact your agency's Paperwork Clearance Officer. Send two copies of this form, the collection instrument to be reviewed, the Supporting Statement and any additional documentation to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW Washington, DC 20503.

1. Agency/ Subagency originating request EPA/ OW/ OGWDW 2. OMB control number b. G None a. 2040 0246 3. Type of information collection ( check one) a. G New collection b. G Revision of a currently approved collection c. X Extension of a currently approved collection d. G Reinstatement, without change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired e. G Reinstatement, with change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired f. G Existing collection in use without an OMB control number 4. Type of review requested ( check one) a. X Regular b. G Emergency  Approval requested by: / / c. G Delegated 5. Small entities Will this information collection have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? G Yes X No For b f, note item A2 of Supporting Statement Instructions 6. Requested expiration date a. X Three years from approval date b. Other Specify: / /___

7. Title: Laboratory Quality Assurance Evaluation Program for Analysis of Cryptosporidium Under the Safe Drinking Water Act 8. Agency form number( s) ( If applicable): 2067.03 9. Keywords: Cryptosporidium, Giardia, laboratory, certification, approval, LT2, LT2ESWTR, Lab QA Program, Method 1622, Method 1623, protozoa, water analysis 10. Abstract: The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) is proposing a Laboratory Quality Evaluation Program for Analysis of Cryptosporidium Under the Safe Drinking Water Act. This voluntary program applies to public and private laboratories that analyze water samples for Cryptosoridium. The program will help ensure that laboratories meet the quality assurance and quality control criteria of EPA Method 1622 and EPA Method 1623 when using these methods to measure Cryptosporidium in water. In addition, the program will assist in determining capacity at qualified laboratories to support monitoring under the Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule.

11. Affected public ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Individuals or households d. Farms b. P Business or other for profit e. Federal Government c. Not for profit institutions f. X State, Local or Tribal Government 12. Obligation to respond ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. P Voluntary b. G Required to obtain or retain benefits c. G Mandatory 13. Annual reporting and recordkeeping hour burden a. Number of respondents 22 b. Total annual responses 65 1. Percentage of these responses collected electronically 0 % c. Total hours requested 3,980 d. Current OMB inventory 4,347 e. Difference ( 367) f. Explanation of difference 1. Program Change 0 2. Adjustment ( 367) 14. Annual reporting and recordkeeping cost burden ( in thousands of dollars) a. Total annualized capital/ startup costs $ 0 b. Total annual costs ( O& M) $ 109 c. Total annualized cost requested $ 109 d. Current OMB inventory $ 123 e. Difference ($ 14) f. Explanation of difference 1. Program change $ 0 2. Adjustment ($ 14)

15. Purpose of information collection ( Mark Primary With " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. __ Application for benefits e. P Program planning or management b. __ Program evaluation f. __ Research c. __ General purpose statistics g. __ Regulatory or compliance d. __ Audit 16. Frequency of recordkeeping or reporting ( check all that apply) a. Q Recordkeeping b. Q Third party disclosure c. X Reporting 1. Q On occasion 2. Q Weekly 3. Q Monthly 4. Q Quarterly 5. Q Semi annually 6. Q Annually 7. Q Biennially 8. X Other ( describe): 3 times per year 17. Statistical methods Does this information collection employ statistical methods?

Q Yes X No 18. Agency contact ( person who can best answer questions regarding the content of this submission) Name: Carrie Moulton Phone: 513 569 7919 OMB 83 I 10/ 95 19. Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions On behalf of this Federal agency, 1 certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with' 5 CFR 1320.9.

NOTE: The text of 5 CFR 1320.9, and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3), appear at the end of the instructions. The certification is to be made with reference to those regulatory provisions as set forth in the instructions.

The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:

( a) It is necessary for the proper performance of agency functions;

( b) It avoids unnecessary duplication;

( c) It reduces burden on small entities;

( d) It uses plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology that is understandable to respondents;

( e) Its implementation will be consistent and compatible with current reporting and recordkeeping practices;

( f) It indicates the retention periods for recordkeeping requirements;

( g) It informs respondents of the information called for under 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3): ( I) Why the information is being collected' ( ii) Use of information; ( iii) Burden estimate; ( iv) Nature of response ( voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory); ( v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and ( vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control number;

( h) It was developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected ( see note in Item 19 of the instructions);

( I) It uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology; and ( j) It makes appropriate use of information technology.

If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item below and explain the reason in Item 18 of the Supporting Statement.

Signature of Program Official Date Signature of Senior Official or designee Oscar Morales, Director Collection Strategies Division Office of Environmental Information Date OMB 83 I 10/ 95 Certification Requirement for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions 5 CFR 1320.9 reads " As part of the agency submission to OMB of a proposed collection of information, the agency ( through the head of the agency, the Senior Official or their designee) shall certify ( and provide a record supporting such certification) that the proposed collection of information

"( a) is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including that the information to be collected will have practical utility;

"( b) is not unnecessarily duplicative of information otherwise reasonably accessible to the agency;

"( c) reduces to the extent practicable and appropriate the burden on persons who shall provide information to or for the agency, including with respect to small entities, as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act 5 U. S. C § 601( 6)), the use of such techniques as:

"( 1) establishing differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to those who are to respond; "( 2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and reporting requirements; or collection of information , or any part thereof; "( 3) an exemption from coverage of the collection of information, or any part thereof;

"( d) is written using plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology and is understandable to those who are to respond;

"( e) is to be implemented in ways consistent and compatible, to the maximum extent practicable, with the existing reporting and recordkeeping practices of those who are to respond;

"( f) indicates for each recordkeeping requirement the length of time persons are required to maintain the records specified;

"( g) informs potential respondents of the information called for under § 1320.8( b)( 3); [ see below]

"( h) has been developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected, including the processing of the information in a manner which shall enhance, where appropriate, the utility of the information to agencies and the public;

"( I) uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology appropriate to the purpose for which the information is to be collected; and "( j) to the maximum extent practicable, uses appropriate information technology to reduce burden and improve data quality, agency efficiency and responsiveness to the public."

NOTE: 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3) requires that each collection of information:

"( 3) informs and provides reasonable notice to the potential persons to whom the collection of information is addressed of: "( I) the reasons the information is planned to be and/ or has been used to further the proper performance of the functions of the agency; "( ii) the way such information is planned to be and/ or has been used to further the proper performance of the functions of the agency; "( iii) an estimate, to the extent practicable, of the average burden of the collection ( together with a request that the public direct to the agency any comments concerning the accuracy of this burden estimate and any suggestions for reducing this burden); "( iv) whether responses to the collection of information are voluntary, required to obtain or retain a benefit ( citing authority), or mandatory ( citing authority); "( v) the nature and extent of confidentiality to be provided, if any ( citing authority); and "( vi) the fact that any agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number."

OMB 83 I ( Instructions) 10/ 95