[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 220 (Tuesday, November 16, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70052-70054]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28748]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-63284; File No. SR-EDGX-2010-15]

 Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
EDGX Rules 2.5 and 11.4 To Permit Qualification and Registration of
Authorized Traders of Members Pursuant to Certain Foreign Examination
Modules Equivalent to the Series 7 Examination

November 9, 2010.
    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 October 27, 2010, the EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
the ``EDGX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which items have been prepared by the 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\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rules 2.5 and 11.4 to permit
qualification and registration of Authorized Traders of Members
pursuant to certain foreign examination modules equivalent to the
Series 7 examination. The Exchange also proposes to make a technical
amendment to Rule 2.3. The text of the proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's Web site at http://www.directedge.com, at
the Commission's Web site at http://www.sec.gov, at the Exchange's
principal office, and at the Public Reference Room of the Commission.

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 these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization
has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B and C below, of the
most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    Exchange Rules 2.5 and 11.4 both state that the Series 7 is
required for registration with the Exchange as an Authorized Trader.
The purpose of the proposed rule change is to expand the types of exams
that may satisfy the Exchange's Series 7 requirement by recognizing
foreign examination modules equivalent to the Series 7 examination.
    The proposal would reduce duplicative qualification standards that
foreign registered representatives encounter to qualify as a U.S.
general securities registered representative. For example, the
examination modules for the U.K. (Series 17) and Canada (Series 37/38)
currently are accepted as equivalent to the U.S. Series 7 by the NYSE,
the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (``FINRA''), the NASDAQ
Stock Market, NYSE AlterNext US [sic], NYSE Arca, the Chicago Board
Options Exchange (``CBOE''), and the BATS Exchange, Inc. (``BATS'').\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 27967 (May 1,
1990), 55 FR 19124 (May 8, 1990) (approving File No. SR-NYSE-89-22,
Series 17); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 36629, International
Series Release No. 909 (Dec. 21, 1995), 60 FR 67385, corrected,
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 36629A, International Series
Release No. 909A (Jan. 4, 1996), 61 FR 744 (Jan. 10, 1996)
(approving File No. SR-NYSE-95-29, Series 37 and Series 38);
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 36825 (Feb. 9, 1996), 61 FR 6052
(approving File No. SR-NASD-96-04, Series 37 and 38); Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 38274 (February 12, 1997), 62 FR 7485
(approving File No. SR-CBOE-97-04, Series 17, 37 and 38); Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 38921 (August 11, 1997), 62 FR 44023
(approving File No. SR-AMEX-97-26, Series 17, 37 and 38); see also
NASD Rule 1032(a)(2)(B) and (C); NASDAQ Rule 1032(a)(2)(B) and (C);
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59292 (January 23, 2009), 74 FR
5690 (January 30, 2009) (approving File No. SR-BATS-2009-003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Series 17 version, the United Kingdom--Limited General
Securities Registered Representative Examination, is for U.K.
registrants who have successfully completed the basic exam of the U.K.
and who are in good standing with the Financial Services Authority
(``FSA''). Essentially, this modified Series 7 examination deletes
those substantive sections of the standard Series 7 that overlap with
the FSA examination. The Series 17 is a 100 question examination, is
120 minutes in duration, and deals with U.S. securities laws,
regulations, sales practices and special products drawn from the
standard Series 7 examination.
    The Series 37 version is for Canadian registrants who have
successfully completed the basic core module of the CSI Global
Education (``CSI'', formerly the Canadian Securities Institute)
program. The Series 38 version is for Canadian registrants who, in
addition to having successfully completed the basic core module of the
CSI program, have also successfully completed the Canadian option and
futures program. Both the Series 37 and 38 share topics and test
questions with the parent Series 7 program but cover only subject
matter that is not covered, or not covered in sufficient detail, on the
Canadian qualification examination. The Series 37 has 90 questions and
is 150 minutes in duration, while the Series 38, an abbreviated version
of the series 37, has only 45 questions and is 75 minutes in duration.
Forty-five questions pertaining to options from the series 37 were
omitted from the Series 38.
    The Exchange wishes to give U.K. and Canadian registered
representatives the same advantage they have at other exchanges by
eliminating duplicative examinations. The Exchange believes that
acceptance of these examinations will benefit both the Exchange and the
foreign representatives affected by the proposal. Accordingly, pursuant
to the amended rules, as proposed, the Exchange would approve the
examination modules for the U.K. (Series 17) and Canada (Series 37/38)
as equivalent foreign examination modules.\4\ The Exchange has added
Interpretation .05 to Rule 2.5 to define

what it means to have passed an equivalent foreign examination module.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange notes that the U.K. (Series 17) and Canada
(Series 37/38) represent foreign examination modules that allow
persons in good standing with the securities regulators of their
respective countries to qualify as general securities registered
representatives (equivalent to Series 7 registrants) by successfully
completing certain modified general securities representative
examinations which were developed, along with others for other
foreign jurisdictions, by the New York Stock Exchange (``NYSE'')
more than 10 years ago.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Technical Amendment to Rule 2.3(c)
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 2.3 to clarify that all
Authorized Traders who are to function as Principals on the Exchange
shall be registered as Principals with the Exchange consistent with
paragraph (e) of Rule 2.3, which requires that there be at least one
such Principal registered.
2. Statutory Basis
    The statutory basis for the Exchange's acceptance of these foreign
examination modules lies in Section 6(c)(3)(B) of the Act.\5\ Under
that section, it is the Exchange's responsibility to prescribe
standards of training, experience, and competence for persons
associated with Exchange Members. Pursuant to this statutory
obligation, the Exchange has adopted examinations that are administered
by other self-regulatory organizations to establish that Authorized
Traders of Exchange Members have attained specified levels of
competence and knowledge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(c)(3)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The rule change proposed in this submission is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder that
are applicable to a national securities exchange, and, in particular,
with the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\6\ Specifically, the
proposed change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\7\
because it would promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market
and a national market system, and, in general, protect investors and
the public interest, by helping foreign representatives to qualify for
registration with the Exchange by reducing duplicative qualification
requirements. Accordingly, the modifications to EDGX Rules 2.5 and 11.4
promote just and equitable principles of trade, remove impediments to,
and perfect the mechanism of, a free and open market and a national
market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from members or other interested
parties.

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

    The proposed rule change is effective upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder, in that the proposed rule change: (i) Does not
significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) does not impose any significant burden on competition;
and (iii) does not become operative for 30 days after the date of the
filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate if
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest;
provided the self-regulatory organization has given the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along
with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
    The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day
operative delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day
operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the
public interest, as it will allow the Exchange to recognize proficiency
examinations already currently recognized by other self-regulatory
organizations. The Exchange has noted that foreign representatives who
have passed foreign examination modules equivalent to the Series 7
examination, are registered with other self-regulatory organizations,
and wish to register with EDGX would be disadvantaged by having to wait
for the proposed rule changes to become operative. Accordingly, the
Commission designates the proposed rule change operative upon filing
with the Commission.\8\
    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78(c)(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-EDGX-2010-15 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 No. SR-EDGX-2010-15. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies
of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements
with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington,
DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 3
p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and
copying at the principal office of EDGX. 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 No. SR-EDGX-2010-15 and should be

submitted on or before December 7, 2010.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-28748 Filed 11-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 77 (Thursday, April 21, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22316-22319]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9429]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0379; Directorate Identifier 2011-CE-007-AD;
Amendment 39-16670; AD 2011-09-08]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Pacific Aerospace Limited Model 750XL
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) issued by the aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    This AD is prompted by a report from the manufacturer of finding
cracks in rudder pedal assemblies at the quadrant attachment weld on
early 750 XL aircraft.

    This AD requires actions that are intended to address the unsafe
condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: This AD becomes effective May 2, 2011.
    On May 2, 2011, the Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD.
    We must receive comments on this AD by June 6, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Pacific
Aerospace Limited, Hamilton Airport, Private Bag 3027 Hamilton 3240,
New Zealand; telephone: +64 7 843 6144; fax: +64 7 843 6134; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet: http://www.aerospace.co.nz/. You may
review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA, Small
Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 816-
329-4148.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karl Schletzbaum, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), which is the airworthiness
authority for New Zealand, has issued AD DCA/750XL/14, dated March 31,
2011, (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for the specified products. The MCAI states:

    This AD is prompted by a report from the manufacturer of finding
cracks in rudder pedal assemblies at the quadrant attachment weld on
early 750 XL aircraft.

The MCAI requires inspecting the left-hand and right-hand rudder pedal
assemblies for cracks and incorporating a modification repair scheme if
any cracks are found. You may obtain further information by examining
the MCAI in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Pacific Aerospace Limited has issued Mandatory Service Bulletin
PACSB/XL/050, Issue 1, dated December 15, 2010. The actions described
in this service information are intended to correct the unsafe
condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the 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 this State of Design Authority, they
have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we
evaluated all information provided by the State of Design Authority and
determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or
develop on other products of the same type design.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might have also required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
described in a separate paragraph of the AD. These requirements take
precedence over those copied from the MCAI.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies
waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because
cracks in the rudder pedal assemblies could cause the rudder pedal
assembly to fail, which could result in loss of control. Therefore, we
determined that notice and opportunity for public comment before
issuing this AD are impracticable and that good cause exists for making
this amendment effective in fewer than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2011-0379; Directorate
Identifier 2011-CE-007-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of
those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 15 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it would take about 4 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $85 per work-hour. Required parts would cost about $1,269 per
product.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the AD on U.S.
operators to be $24,135 or $1,609 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 AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866;
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and

    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2011-09-08 Pacific Aerospace Limited: Amendment 39-16670; Docket No.
FAA-2011-0379; Directorate Identifier 2011-CE-007-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective May 2,
2011.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Pacific Aerospace Limited Model 750XL
airplanes, all serial numbers through 111, certificated in any
category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 27: Flight
Controls.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:

    This AD is prompted by a report from the manufacturer of finding
cracks in rudder pedal assemblies at the quadrant attachment weld on
early 750 XL aircraft.

The MCAI requires inspecting the left-hand (LH) and right-hand (RH)
rudder pedal assemblies for cracks and incorporating a modification
repair scheme if any cracks are found. You may obtain further
information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions:
    (1) Inspect the quadrant welds in the LH rudder pedal assembly,
part number (P/N) 11-45711-1, and the RH rudder pedal assembly, P/N
11-45713-1, for cracks at the following times following Pacific
Aerospace Limited Mandatory Service Bulletin PACSB/XL/050, Issue 1,
dated December 15, 2010:
    (i) Initially before further flight after the effective date of
this AD.
    (ii) Repetitively thereafter at intervals not to exceed 300
hours time-in-service (TIS) until the modification repair scheme
required in paragraph (f)(2) of this AD is incorporated.
    (2) Incorporate modification repair scheme Pacific Aerospace
Drawing Number 11-03221/22, dated December 3, 2010, as specified in
Pacific Aerospace Limited Mandatory Service Bulletin PACSB/XL/050,
Issue 1, dated December 15, 2010, at the following time:
    (i) Before further flight after any inspection required in
paragraphs (f)(1)(i) or (f)(1)(ii) of this AD if any cracks are
found.
    (ii) Within the next 1,200 hours TIS after the effective date of
this AD or within the next 12 months after the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs first, if no cracks are found during any
inspection required in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) or (f)(1)(ii) of this
AD. Incorporating modification repair scheme Pacific Aerospace
Drawing Number 11-03221/22, dated December 3, 2010, terminates the
repetitive inspections required in paragraph (f)(1)(ii) of this AD.
    (3) You may incorporate modification repair scheme Pacific
Aerospace Drawing Number 11-03221/22, dated December 3, 2010, at any
time after the initial inspection required in paragraph (f)(1)(i) of
this AD but no later than the compliance time specified in paragraph
(f)(2)(ii) of this AD as long as no cracks were found. As required
in paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this AD, the modification repair scheme
must be incorporated before further flight if cracks are found.

FAA AD Differences

    Note:  This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: The MCAI Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) AD DCA/750XL/14,
dated March 31, 2011, and the applicable service bulletin specifies
repair of the rudder pedal assembly if cracks are found exceeding
certain limits and allows continued flight for a specified time if
cracks are found in the rudder pedal assembly that do not exceed
certain limits. This AD does not allow continued flight if any crack
is found. The FAA policy is to disallow airplane operation when
known cracks exist in primary structure, unless the ability to
sustain ultimate load with these cracks is proven. The rudder pedal
assembly is considered primary structure, and the FAA has not
received any analysis to prove that ultimate load can be sustained
with cracks in this area.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Standards Office, 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: Karl Schletzbaum, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, 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 5 minutes 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.

 Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) AD DCA/750XL/
14, dated March 31, 2011, and Pacific Aerospace Limited Mandatory
Service Bulletin PACSB/XL/050, Issue 1, dated December 15, 2010, for
related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use Pacific Aerospace Limited Mandatory Service
Bulletin PACSB/XL/050, Issue 1, dated December 15, 2010, and Pacific
Aerospace Drawing Number 11-03221/22, dated December 3, 2010, to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Pacific Aerospace Limited, Hamilton Airport, Private Bag HN3027
Hamilton, New Zealand; telephone: 0064 7 843 6144; fax: 0064 7 843
6134; Internet: http://www.aerospace.co.nz/.
    (3) You may review copies of the referenced service information
at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information
incorporated by reference for this AD at the National Archives and

Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability
of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri on April 13, 2011.
Earl Lawrence,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-9429 Filed 4-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: September 16, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 178)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 47495-47500]
[DOCID:fr16se09-15]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 71 and 93

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0837; Airspace Docket No. 09-AWA-2; Notice No. 09-
11]
RIN 2120-AJ59

Proposed Modification of the New York, NY, Class B Airspace Area;
and Proposed Establishment of the New York Class B Airspace Hudson
River and East River Exclusion Special Flight Rules Area

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to make a minor modification to the New
York,

NY, Class B airspace area by adjusting the floor of Class B airspace
above a portion of the Hudson River to 1,300 feet above mean sea level
(MSL). Additionally, this action proposes to establish a Special Flight
Rules Area (SFRA) over the Hudson River and East River to mandate
certain pilot operating practices for flight within the Hudson River
and East River Class B airspace Exclusions. The FAA is proposing this
action to enhance the safety of flight operations in the New York Class
B airspace Exclusion areas.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 16, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2009-
0837 using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12-
140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    For more information on the rulemaking process, see the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
    Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. Using the search function of our docket Web site, anyone can
find and read the electronic form of all comments received into any of
our dockets, including the name of the individual sending the comment
(or signing the comment for an association, business, labor union,
etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you
may visit http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
    Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to
http://www.regulations.gov at any time and follow the online
instructions for accessing the docket, or, the Docket Operations in
Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning
this proposed rule, contact Paul Gallant, Airspace and Rules Group,
Office of System Operations Airspace and AIM, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    For legal questions concerning this proposed rule, contact Lorelei
Peter, Office of the Chief Counsel, AGC-220, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Later in this preamble under the Additional Information section, we
discuss how you can comment on this proposal and how we will handle
your comments. Included in this discussion is related information about
the docket, privacy, and the handling of proprietary or confidential
business information. We also discuss how you can get a copy of related
rulemaking documents.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace.

Background

    On August 8, 2009, a midair collision occurred between a helicopter
and a single-engine, fixed-wing aircraft operating in accordance with
visual flight rules (VFR) over the Hudson River near Hoboken, New
Jersey. This accident prompted the FAA and the National Transportation
Safety Board (NTSB) to examine the airspace configuration and pilot
procedures that apply in the vicinity of the incident.
    There are three major airports in the New York City area: John F.
Kennedy International Airport (JFK); Newark Liberty International
Airport (EWR): and LaGuardia Airport (LGA). The FAA has designated the
airspace surrounding the three airports as Class B airspace. Class B
airspace is designated to enhance safety around airports with high
density air traffic operations. An air traffic control (ATC) clearance
is required to enter Class B airspace and, with limited exceptions, all
aircraft operating in the area must be equipped with a two-way radio
and an operational transponder. ATC provides separation to aircraft
operating within the Class B airspace area.
    The New York Class B airspace area originated in 1971 when the FAA
issued a final rule establishing a terminal control area (TCA) around
the above mentioned airports (36 FR 13376 July 21, 1971). In 1991, the
term ``TCA'' was replaced with ``Class B airspace'' as part of the
Airspace Reclassification rule (56 FR 65638, December 17, 1991) which
harmonized United States airspace classifications with the terminology
used by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). The
original TCA airspace configuration for these airports was developed
with considerable public input. Concerns were expressed to the FAA
regarding the impact of the new airspace on operations by general
aviation users, police, fire and Coast Guard rescue activities,
helicopter operators and seaplane operators. A workgroup was formed to
address these concerns and as a result, the FAA decided to raise the
floor of certain subareas near EWR and LGA to 1,100 feet MSL over the
Hudson River and the East River to provide more accessible airspace for
the above-described operations. These areas are commonly referred to as
the Hudson River Exclusion and the East River Exclusion. The
configuration of the New York Class B airspace area has essentially
remained the same since designated as a TCA in 1971. The volume of air
traffic in the area, however, has grown significantly since that time.
    The Hudson River Exclusion extends along the Hudson River between
the vicinity of the George Washington Bridge, on the north, and the
Verrazano-Narrows Bridge on the south. The exclusion extends from the
surface of the Hudson River up to the base of the overlying New York
Class B airspace area. Currently, the floor of Class B airspace along
the Hudson River varies between an altitude above 1,100 feet MSL and
1,500 feet MSL. The exclusion effectively is a ``cutout'' from the New
York Class B airspace area and permits pilots to fly through the area
without an ATC clearance.
    The East River Class B Exclusion extends between the east and west
banks of the East River from Governors Island to the north tip of
Roosevelt Island. The exclusion extends from the surface of the river
up to the base of the overlying Class B airspace. This proposal would
not alter or amend the

configuration of the East River Exclusion.
    Aeronautical charts that depict the New York Class B airspace area
carry a note advising pilots that a high density of uncontrolled
helicopter and fixed wing traffic operate in the Hudson River and East
River Class B Exclusions. The note also requests that all aircraft
self-announce their positions on the appropriate radio frequency as
noted on the charts. The charts alert pilots to the heavy concentration
of air tour operations in the vicinity of the Statue of Liberty and
Ellis Island. Additionally, the charts provide voluntary procedures
that are in effect for aircraft operating in the Hudson and East River
exclusions. These procedures request that aircraft operating in the
area:
     Not exceed 140 knots indicated airspeed;
     Turn on anticollision, position, navigation and/or landing
lights; and
     Self announce on frequency 123.075 for the East River and
123.05 for the Hudson River.
    These recommended procedures do not relieve pilots of compliance
with applicable Federal regulations, including regulations covering
minimum safe altitudes.
    As a result of the August 8, 2009 accident, the FAA issued Notice
to Airmen (NOTAM) number 9/3952 encouraging pilots to follow the
recommended procedures described above. The FAA also formed a task
force to review current procedures for VFR flight operations in the New
York City area. A goal of the review was to identify safety
enhancements to flight operations in the Hudson River area. The
proposals in this notice respond to recommendations of the FAA's task
force, including recommendations to amend 14 CFR part 93 to establish
an SFRA covering the Hudson River and East River Exclusions and to
define operational procedures for use within the SFRA. Additionally, an
NTSB investigation of the accident is currently ongoing. Based on
preliminary findings, the NTSB issued a number of recommendations that
are similar to those developed by the FAA task force. This notice also
responds to those recommendations. A copy of the ``Review of New York
Visual Flight Rules Airspace: Task Force Report,'' dated August 28,
2009, has been placed in this rulemaking docket.

Discussion of the Proposals

14 CFR Part 71

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to modify portions of the New York, NY,
Class B airspace area in order to establish a uniform Class B airspace
floor of 1,300 feet MSL above the Hudson River Class B Exclusion. The
Hudson River Exclusion consists of that airspace overlying the Hudson
River beginning near the Alpine Tower (a visual reference point north
of the George Washington Bridge), south to the Verrazano-Narrows
Bridge, from the surface up to the overlying floor of the New York
Class B airspace area. Currently, the floor of Class B airspace above
the Hudson River Exclusion varies between the altitudes of ``above''
1,100 feet MSL and 1,500 feet MSL, at different points along the river.
In order to change the Class B airspace floor to 1,300 feet MSL in that
area, the FAA proposes to modify the legal description of Area D to
remove two segments where the floor of Class B airspace extends from
above 1,100 feet MSL over the Hudson River. The two segments to be
removed from Area D are that airspace within a 6-mile radius circle of
the LGA VOR/DME west of the east bank of the Hudson River; and that
airspace within the 6.5-mile radius circle centered at lat.
40[deg]41'30'' N., long. 74[deg]09'59'' W. The modified Area D would
only describe that airspace above 1,100 feet above that lies above the
East River. A new Area K would be added to describe that Class B
airspace extending upward from 1,300 feet MSL above the Hudson River.
The Area E description would be modified to exclude that airspace
contained in Area K. The purpose of this proposed change is to provide
separate altitudes for aircraft conducting local operations within the
Hudson River Exclusion and those overflight aircraft that are
transiting through the area predominantly in level flight.

14 CFR Part 93

    The FAA is also proposing to establish an SFRA in part 93 covering
the New York Class B airspace Hudson River and East River Exclusions.
The SFRA would mandate that pilots follow certain operating practices
that at present are voluntary. In addition, pilots would need to comply
with mandatory charted reporting points that would be established for
position reporting in the Hudson River Exclusion. Lastly, the SFRA
would incorporate restrictions for fixed wing aircraft operations in
the East River Exclusion that are currently published in Flight Data
Center NOTAM number 6/3495 and were imposed following an October 11,
2006 accident. This accident occurred when a fixed wing aircraft,
attempting a 180[deg] turn in the East River Exclusion, crashed into an
apartment building in Manhattan, New York City.
    The following voluntary practices, applicable in both the Hudson
River and East River Exclusions, would become mandatory for all pilots:
     Maintain an indicated airspeed not to exceed 140 knots.
     Turn on anti-collision, position/navigation, and/or
landing lights.
     Self announce position on the appropriate radio frequency
for the East River or Hudson as depicted on the New York VFR Terminal
Area Chart (TAC) and/or New York Helicopter Route Chart.
    In addition, the following new procedures would be adopted:

For Operations in Both the East River and Hudson River Exclusions

     Pilots must have a current New York TAC chart and/or New
York Helicopter Route Chart in the aircraft and familiarize themselves
with the information contained therein.

For Hudson River Exclusion Operations

     Pilots must self announce at the charted mandatory
reporting points, the following information: aircraft type and color,
current position, direction of flight and altitude.
     Pilots must fly along the West shoreline of the Hudson
River when southbound, and along the East shoreline of the Hudson River
when northbound.
     Aircraft overflying the area within the Hudson River
Exclusion, but not landing or departing any of the Manhattan heliports,
or landing facilities, or conducting any local area operations, must
transit the Hudson River Exclusion at or above an altitude of 1,000
feet MSL up to, but not including the floor of the overlying Class B
airspace.

For East River Exclusion Operations

     VFR flight operations by fixed wing aircraft (excluding
amphibious fixed wing aircraft landing or departing the New York
Skyports, Inc., Seaplane Base) in the East River Class B Exclusion
(from the southwestern tip of Governors Island to the northern tip of
Roosevelt Island) are prohibited unless authorized and being controlled
by ATC. To obtain authorization, pilots must contact LaGuardia Airport
Traffic Control Tower prior to Governors Island.

Regulatory Evaluation, Regulatory Flexibility Determination,
International Trade Impact Assessment, and Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses.

First, Executive Order 12866 directs that each Federal agency shall
propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that
the benefits of the intended regulation justify its costs. Second, the
Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) requires agencies
to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes on small entities.
Third, the Trade Agreements Act (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits agencies from
setting standards that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
commerce of the United States. In developing U.S. standards, the Trade
Act requires agencies to consider international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis of U.S. standards. Fourth, the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies
to prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits, and other
effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate
likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or Tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100
million or more annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of
1995). This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's analysis of
the economic impacts of this proposed rule.
    Department of Transportation Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies
and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of regulations.
If the expected cost impact is so minimal that a proposed or final rule
does not warrant a full evaluation, this order permits that a statement
to that effect and the basis for it be included in the preamble if a
full regulatory evaluation of the cost and benefits is not prepared.
Such a determination has been made for this proposed rule. The
reasoning for this determination follows.
    This rule merely sets a uniform ceiling in the Hudson River
Exclusion to facilitate segregation of overflights from local traffic.
Pilots would self-announce at the reporting points while in the
Exclusion area. Pilot training regarding this change is voluntary. We
are incorporating the existing NOTAM restricting certain fixed-wing
operations in the East River Exclusion Area. Therefore, this rule does
not change the quantity of flights, nor training requirements, and
continues the existing safety restriction in the East River Exclusion
Area. Pilots will be required to carry current charts, at a cost of
$5.25 each. As a result, the expected cost is minimal. In addition,
these changes are expected to improve airspace safety. We request
comments with supporting justification regarding the FAA determination
of minimal impact.
    FAA has, therefore, determined that this proposed rule is not a
``significant regulatory action'' as defined in section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, and is not ``significant'' as defined in DOT's
Regulatory Policies and Procedures.

Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA)
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall
endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions
subject to regulation. To achieve this principle, agencies are required
to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain
the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals are given
serious consideration.'' The RFA covers a wide range of small entities,
including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
    Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA.
    However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the
agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required. The certification must include a statement providing the
factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be
clear. We agree the rule may well affect a substantial number of small
entities. However, the FAA expects this rule to impose only minimal
cost; therefore there is not a significant economic impact.
    Therefore, the FAA certifies that this proposed rule would not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The FAA solicits comments regarding this determination.

International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing any standards or engaging in related
activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of
the United States. Legitimate domestic objectives, such as safety, are
not considered unnecessary obstacles. The statute also requires
consideration of international standards and, where appropriate, that
they be the basis for U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed the
potential effect of this proposed rule and has determined that it would
have only a domestic impact and therefore no effect on international
trade.

Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement
assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final
agency rule that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more
(in 1995 dollars) in any one year by State, local, and Tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate
is deemed to be a ``significant regulatory action.'' The FAA currently
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $136.1 million in lieu of $100
million. This proposed rule does not contain such a mandate; therefore,
the requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.

Environmental Analysis

    FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA actions that are categorically
excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy
Act in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has
determined that this proposed rulemaking action qualifies for the
categorical exclusion identified in paragraph 312f and involves no
extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has further determined that the
modification of the New York, NY Class B airspace area qualifies for
the categorical exclusion identified in paragraph 311a and involves no
extraordinary circumstances. Finally, the FAA determined the proposed
SFAR and corresponding operational and pilot procedures qualify for the
categorical exclusion identified in paragraph 311j and involve no
extraordinary circumstances.

Additional Information

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites interested persons to participate in this
rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. We also
invite comments relating to the economic, environmental, energy, or
federalism impacts that might result from adopting the proposals in
this document. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion
of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and
include supporting data. To ensure the docket

does not contain duplicate comments, please send only one copy of
written comments, or if you are filing comments electronically, please
submit your comments only one time.
    We will file in the docket all comments we receive, as well as a
report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we
will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for
comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has
closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay.
We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.

Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    You can get an electronic copy of rulemaking documents using the
Internet by--
    1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://
www.regulations.gov);
    2. Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at http://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies or
    3. Accessing the Government Printing Office's Web page at http://
www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html.
    You can also get a copy by sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. Make
sure to identify the docket number, notice number, or amendment number
of this rulemaking.
    You may access all documents the FAA considered in developing this
proposed rule, including economic analyses and technical reports, from
the Internet through the Federal eRulemaking Portal referenced in
paragraph (1).

List of Subjects

14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

14 CFR Part 93

    Aircraft flight, Airspace, Aviation safety, Air traffic control,
Aircraft, Airmen, Airports.

The Proposed Amendments

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 and 14 CFR part 93 as
follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

    1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the FAA Order
7400.9T, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated and
effective September 15, 2009, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 3000 Class B Airspace

* * * * *

AEA NY B New York, NY [Amended]

* * * * *

Boundaries

    By removing the description of Area D and Area E and
substituting the following; and by adding a new Area K as follows:
    Area D. That airspace extending upward from above 1,100 feet MSL
to and including 7,000 feet MSL within the area between the east and
west banks of the East River southwest of the north end of Roosevelt
Island.
    Area E. That airspace extending upward from 1,500 feet MSL to
and including 7,000 feet MSL within the area bounded by a line
beginning at the intersection of the 20-mile radius circle of JFK
VORTAC and the JFK VORTAC 208[deg] radial, thence counterclockwise
along the 20-mile arc to its intersection with the Long Island
shoreline, thence southwest along the Long Island shoreline to and
counterclockwise along the 13-mile radius circle of JFK VORTAC to
and counterclockwise along the 11-mile radius circle of LGA VOR/DME
to the LGA VOR/DME 351[deg] radial, thence direct to the LGA VOR/DME
283[deg] radial at the LGA VOR/DME 17-mile DME fix, thence
counterclockwise along a 10-mile radius circle centered at lat.
40[deg]41'30'' N., long. 74[deg]09'59'' W., to its intersection with
the Colts Neck VORTAC 005[deg] radial, thence direct to the
intersection of the Colts Neck VORTAC 034[deg] radial and the New
Jersey shoreline at Sandy Hook, thence south along the New Jersey
shoreline to the point of beginning; and that airspace within 2
miles each side of the Newark ILS Runway 4L localizer course,
extending from the CHESA outer marker to 6 miles southwest of the
outer marker, excluding that airspace within and below Areas A, B,
C, and D previously described; and excluding the airspace within and
below Areas F, J and K hereinafter described.
    Area K. That airspace extending upward from 1,300 feet MSL, to
and including 7,000 feet MSL north of LaGuardia Airport within the
area beginning at the intersection of the LGA VOR/DME 11-mile DME
arc and the west bank of the Hudson River (near Alpine Tower) thence
south along the west bank of the Hudson River to intersect the Colts
Neck VOR/DME 012[deg] (T)/023[deg] (M) radial, thence southwest
along the Colts Neck 012[deg] (T)/023[deg] (M) radial to the Hudson
River shoreline, thence south along the shoreline to the Verrazano-
Narrows Bridge, thence east along the Bridge to the east bank of the
Hudson River, thence north along the east bank of the Hudson River
to lat. 40[deg]38'39'' N., long. 74[deg]02'03'' W., thence north
along a line drawn direct to the southwesternmost point of Governors
Island, thence north along a line drawn direct to the southwest tip
of Manhattan Island, thence north along the east bank of the Hudson
River to the LGA VOR/DME 11-DME arc, north of LaGuardia Airport,
thence counterclockwise along the 11-mile arc to the point of
beginning.
* * * * *

PART 93--SPECIAL AIR TRAFFIC RULES

    3. The authority citation for part 93 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40109, 40113, 44502,
44514, 44701, 44719, 46301.

    4. Add subpart W, consisting of Sec. Sec.  93.350 through 93.353,
to read as follows:
Subpart W--New York Class B Airspace Hudson River and East River
Exclusion Special Flight Rules Area
Sec.
93.350 Definitions.
93.351 General requirements for operating in the East River and/or
Hudson River Exclusions.
93.352 Hudson River Exclusion specific procedures.
93.353 East River Exclusion specific procedures.

Subpart W--New York Class B Airspace Hudson River and East River
Exclusion Special Flight Rules Area

Sec.  93.350  Definitions.

    For the purposes of this subpart:
    New York Class B airspace East River Exclusion is an area between
the east and west banks of, and overlying, the East River from the
southwestern tip of Governors Island to the north tip of Roosevelt
Island, from the surface up to 1,100 feet MSL.
    New York Class B airspace Hudson River Exclusion is an area from
the surface up to but not including the overlying floor of the New York
Class B airspace area, between the east and west banks of, and
overlying, the Hudson River within the area beginning north of
LaGuardia Airport at the intersection of the LGA VOR/DME 11-mile DME
arc and the west bank of the Hudson River (near Alpine Tower) thence
south along the west bank of the Hudson River to intersect the Colts
Neck VOR/DME 012[deg] (T)/023[deg] (M) radial, thence southwest along
the Colts Neck 012[deg] (T)/023[deg] (M) radial to the Hudson River
shoreline,

thence south along the shoreline to the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge,
thence east along the Bridge to the east bank of the Hudson River,
thence north along the east bank of the Hudson River to lat.
40[deg]38'39'' N., long. 74[deg]02'03'' W., thence north along a line
drawn direct to the southwesternmost point of Governors Island, thence
north along a line drawn direct to the southwest tip of Manhattan
Island, thence north along the east bank of the Hudson River to the LGA
VOR/DME 11-DME arc, north of LaGuardia Airport, thence counterclockwise
along the 11-mile arc to the point of beginning.

Sec.  93.351  General requirements for operating in the East River and/
or Hudson River Exclusions.

    Pilots must adhere to the following requirements:
    (a) Maintain an indicated airspeed not to exceed 140 knots.
    (b) Turn on anticollision, position/navigation, and/or landing
lights.
    (c) Self announce position on the appropriate radio frequency for
the East River or Hudson River as depicted on the New York VFR Terminal
Area Chart (TAC) and/or New York Helicopter Route Chart.
    (d) Have a current New York TAC chart and/or New York Helicopter
Route Chart in the aircraft and be familiar with the information
contained therein.

Sec.  93.352  Hudson River Exclusion specific procedures.

    In addition to the requirements in Sec.  93.351, the following
procedures apply:
    (a) Pilots must self announce at the charted mandatory reporting
points, the following information: Aircraft type and color, current
position, direction of flight and altitude.
    (b) Pilots must fly along the West shoreline of the Hudson River
when southbound, and along the East shoreline of the Hudson River when
northbound.
    (c) Aircraft overflying the area within the Hudson River Exclusion,
but not landing or departing any of the Manhattan heliports, or
conducting any local area operations, must transit the Hudson River
Exclusion at or above an altitude of 1,000 feet MSL up to, but not
including the floor of the overlying Class B airspace.

Sec.  93.353  East River Exclusion specific procedures.

    In addition to the requirements in Sec.  93.351, VFR flight
operations by fixed wing aircraft (excluding seaplane fixed wing
aircraft landing or departing the New York Skyports, Inc. seaplane
base) in the East River Class B Exclusion extending from the
southwestern tip of Governors Island to the north tip of Roosevelt
Island are prohibited unless authorized and being controlled by ATC. To
obtain authorization, pilots must contact LaGuardia Airport Traffic
Control Tower prior to Governors Island.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 11, 2009.
Edith V. Parish,
Manager, Airspace and Rules Group.
[FR Doc. E9-22344 Filed 9-15-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 195 (Friday, October 7, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 69666-69668]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22707]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-3986; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-147-AD;
Amendment 39-18661; AD 2016-19-12]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
The Boeing Company Model 747-400, 747-400D, and 747-400F series
airplanes. This AD was prompted by a determination that a certain
fastener type in the fuel tank walls has insufficient bond to the
structure, and an electrical wiring short could cause arcing to occur
at the ends of fasteners in the fuel tanks. This AD requires the
installation of new clamps and polytetrafluoroethylene (TFE) sleeves on
the wire bundles of the front spars and rear spars of the wings. This
AD also requires inspecting the existing TFE sleeves under the wire
bundle clamps for correct installation, and replacement if necessary.
We are issuing this AD to prevent potential ignition sources in the
fuel tank in the event of a lightning strike or high-powered short
circuit, and consequent fire or explosion.

DATES: This AD is effective November 14, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of November 14,
2016.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
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 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-
3986.

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-
3986; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-
5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tung Tran, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Branch, ANM-140S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: 425-917-
6505; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain The Boeing Company
Model 747-400, 747-400D, and 747-400F series airplanes. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on March 1, 2016 (81 FR 10537) (``the
NPRM''). The NPRM was prompted by a determination that a certain
fastener type in the fuel tank walls has insufficient bond to the
structure, and an electrical wiring short could cause arcing to occur
at the ends of fasteners in the fuel tanks. The NPRM proposed to
require the installation of new clamps and TFE sleeves on the wire
bundles of the front spars and rear spars of the wings. The NPRM also
proposed to require inspecting the existing TFE sleeves under the wire
bundle clamps for correct installation, and replacement if necessary.
We are issuing this AD to prevent potential ignition sources in the
fuel tank in the event of a lightning strike or high-powered short
circuit, and consequent fire or explosion.

Comments

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

Support for the NPRM

    Boeing supported the content of the NPRM. United Airlines had no
objection to the NPRM.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD as proposed, except for minor editorial changes. We have
determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-28-2324,
Revision 1, dated July 27, 2015. The service information describes
procedures for installing new clamps and TFE sleeves on the wire
bundles of the front spars and rear spars of the wings. The service
information also describes procedures for inspecting TFE sleeves under
the wire bundle clamps that were installed using the procedures
specified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-28-2324,
dated November 3, 2014, for correct installation, and replacing them if
necessary. 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.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 135 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                      Labor cost          Parts cost    Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Installation of wire bundle       Up to 7 work-hours x $85         $138  Up to $733.........  Up to $98,955.
 clamps.                           per hour = $595.
Inspection......................  Up to 5 work-hours x $85            0  Up to $425.........  Up to $57,375.
                                   per hour = $425.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator,

the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

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

2016-19-12 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-18661; Docket No. FAA-
2016-3986; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-147-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective November 14, 2016.

 (b) Affected ADs

    None.

 (c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 747-400, 747-400D,
and 747-400F series airplanes, certificated in any category, as
identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-28-2324,
Revision 1, dated July 27, 2015.

 (d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28, Fuel.

 (e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a determination that a certain fastener
type in the fuel tank walls has insufficient bond to the structure,
and an electrical wiring short could cause arcing to occur at the
ends of fasteners in the fuel tanks. We are issuing this AD to
prevent potential ignition sources in the fuel tank in the event of
a lightning strike or high-powered short circuit, and consequent
fire or explosion.

 (f) Compliance

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

 (g) Installation/Inspection

    Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, do the
actions specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD, as
applicable.
    (1) For airplanes on which the modification specified in Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-28-2324, dated November 3,
2014, has not been done as of the effective date of this AD: Install
new clamps and polytetrafluoroethylene (TFE) sleeves on the wire
bundles of the front spars and rear spars of the wings, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 747-28-2324, Revision 1, dated July 27,
2015.
    (2) For airplanes on which the modification specified in Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-28-2324, dated November 3,
2014, has been done as of the effective date of this AD: Do a
detailed inspection of the TFE sleeves under the wire bundle clamps
for correct installation, and replace the sleeves if not correctly
installed, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-28-2324, Revision 1,
dated July 27, 2015.

 (h) 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 (i) 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, alteration, or modification 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 method, modification deviation, or
alteration deviation must meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.

 (i) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Tung Tran, Aerospace
Engineer, Propulsion Branch, ANM-140S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 747-28-2324,
Revision 1, dated July 27, 2015.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) 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.
    (4) 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>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 13, 2016.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-22707 Filed 10-6-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P