[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 19 (Wednesday, January 29, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4800-4801]
[FR Doc No: 2014-01673]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC); New Task
Assignment for the ARAC: Establishment of Airman Certification System
Working Group

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA assigned the ARAC a new task arising from
recommendations of the ARAC Airman Testing Standards and Training
Working Group (ATSTWG). The ATSTWG recommended ways to ensure that the
FAA's airman testing and training materials better support reduction of
fatal general aviation accidents. The FAA and the Aviation Industry
jointly seek to improve airman training and testing by establishing an
integrated, holistic airman certification system that clearly aligns
testing with certification standards, guidance, and reference
materials, and maintains that alignment. The new task is to establish
an Airman Certification System Working Group (ACSWG) that will provide
expert assistance and industry views to the FAA's Flight Standards
Service (AFS) on the development, modification, and continued alignment
of the major components of the airman certification system.
    This action item informs the public of the new ARAC's task and
solicits membership for the new ACSWG.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Van L. Kerns, Manager, Regulatory
Support Division, FAA Flight Standards Service, AFS 600, FAA Mike
Monroney Aeronautical Center, P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA established ARAC to provide advice and recommendations to
the FAA Administrator on the FAA's rulemaking activities. ARAC's
objectives are to improve the development of the FAA's regulations by
providing information, advice, and recommendations related to aviation
issues.
    On September 21, 2011, the FAA chartered the Airman Testing
Standards and Training Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) for the U.S.
aviation community to develop recommendations for more effective
training and testing in the areas of aeronautical knowledge and flight
proficiency required for safer operation in today's National Airspace
System (NAS). The FAA's charge to the ARC was to help ensure that FAA's
technical information related to existing standards for airman
knowledge and skill tests, computer testing supplements, knowledge test
guides, practical test standards and training handbooks incorporates
the most current, relevant, and effective approaches to training and
testing. The FAA specifically tasked the ARC with providing
recommendations on a process for ongoing stakeholder participation in
developing the content of these materials, and methodologies for
developing better test item bank questions.
    On August 30, 2012, the ARAC accepted the FAA's assignment of a new
task in response to several of the ARC's recommendations. ARAC
established the ATSTWG to address the private pilot, flight instructor,
and instrument rating training and testing materials by developing an
integrated Airman Certification Standards (ACS) document for each one.
The FAA also tasked the ATSTWG to develop a detailed proposal to
realign and, as appropriate, streamline and consolidate existing FAA
guidance material (e.g., handbooks) with each integrated ACS documents;
and to propose methodologies to ensure that knowledge test item bank
questions are consistent with both the ACS documents and the test
question development principles set forth in the ARC's recommendations.
    On September 30, 2013, the ARAC submitted to the FAA the ATSTWG's
final report and recommendations to improve airman training and testing
by establishing an integrated, holistic airman certification system
that clearly aligns testing with certification standards, guidance, and
reference materials, and maintains that alignment. The ATSTWG
recommended specific steps the FAA should take to adopt the proposed
Airman Certification System approach, and steps for its ongoing
management. One of these steps is for the FAA to establish an ACSWG to
assist the agency in ensuring that the content of its ACS, guidance,
and knowledge testing materials is relevant and current; and to ensure
that all components of the airman certification system are maintained
in alignment.

The Task

    On December 2013, the ARAC discussed the proposed actions for this
tasking. This notice advises the public that the FAA has assigned, and
the ARAC has accepted, a new task to establish the ACSWG. The FAA has
specifically tasked the ACSWG to support the FAA's goal to enhance
general aviation safety and reduce the fatal general aviation accident
rate by providing a means for the aviation industry to provide expert
assistance and industry views to the FAA's Flight Standards Service
(AFS) on the development, modification, and continued alignment of the
major components of the airman certification system, which include:
    1. The ACS for airman certificates and ratings (i.e. 8081-series
documents);
    2. Associated training guidance material (e.g., H-series
handbooks);
    3. Test management (e.g., test question development, test question
boarding, test composition/test ``mapping,'' and CT-8080-series
figures); and

    4. Reference materials, to include AFS directives and Aviation
Safety Inspector guidance; FAA Orders, Advisory Circulars (ACs), and
other documents pertaining to the airman certification system.
    The ACSWG is expected to develop a report describing its work on
each of the listed elements. Any disagreements should be documented,
including the rationale for each position and the reasons for the
disagreement.
    In developing this report, the ACSWG shall familiarize itself with:
    1. A report to the FAA from the Airman Testing Standards and
Training Aviation Rulemaking Committee: Recommendations to Enhance
Airman Knowledge Test Content and Its Processes and Methodologies for
Training and Testing (www.faa.gov/aircraft/draft_docs/arc);
    2. A report from the Airman Testing Standards and Training Working
Group to the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee;
    3. Aeronautical knowledge standards set forth in 14 CFR part 61,
Certification: Pilots, Flight Instructors, and Ground Instructors;
    4. Flight proficiency standards set forth in 14 CFR part 61,
Certification: Pilots, Flight Instructors, and Ground Instructors;
    5. FAA Airman Knowledge Test Guide (FAA-G-8082-17E);
    6. Current Practical Test Standards documents for Private Pilot
Airplane (FAA-S-8081-14B); Flight Instructor Airplane (FAA-S-8081-6C);
and Instrument Rating for Airplane, Helicopter, and Powered Lift (FAA-
S-8081-4E); and
    7. Current FAA guidance materials, to include the Pilot's Handbook
of Aeronautical Knowledge (FAA-H-8083-25A); the Airplane Flying
Handbook (FAA-H-8083-3A); the Aviation Instructor's Handbook (FAA-H-
8083-9A); the Instrument Flying Handbook (FAA-H-8083-15A); and the
Instrument Procedures Handbook (FAA-H-8083-1A).

Schedule

    The report must be forwarded to the ARAC for review and approval no
later than December 31, 2015.

ARAC Acceptance of New Task

    The ARAC has accepted the task and will assign it to the ARAC
ACSWG. The ACSWG serves as staff to ARAC and assists in the analysis of
the assigned new task. ARAC must review and approve the ACSWG's report.
If ARAC accepts the ACSWG's written report, it will transmit it to the
FAA.

Working Group Activity

    The ACSWG must comply with the procedures adopted by ARAC. As part
of the procedures, the ACSWG must:
    1. Recommend a work plan for completion of the task, including the
rationale supporting such a plan, for consideration at the next ARAC
meeting held following publication of this notice.
    2. Provide a status report at each meeting of the ARAC.
    3. Draft the report and required analyses and/or any other related
materials or documents.
    4. Present the final report to the ARAC for review and approval.

Participation in the ARAC Working Group

    The ACSWG will be comprised of aviation professionals with
experience and expertise in airman training and testing, and technical
experts having an interest in the assigned new task. The FAA would like
a wide range of members, to include individuals with experience in the
part 61, part 121, part 135, part 141, and part 142 communities, to
ensure that all appropriate aspects of airman testing and training,
including best practices, are considered in the development of its
report.
    If you wish to become a member of the ACSWG, please write the
person listed under the caption FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
expressing such desire. Describe your interest in the new task and
state the expertise you would bring to the ACSWG. We must receive all
requests by February 28, 2014.
    The ARAC and the FAA will review the requests and advise you
whether your request is approved.
    If you are chosen for membership on the ACSWG, you must actively
participate by attending all meetings and providing written comments
when requested to do so. You must devote the resources necessary to
support the ACSWG in meeting any assigned deadlines. You must keep your
management chain, and those you may represent, advised of the ACSWG's
activities and decisions to ensure the proposed technical solutions do
not conflict with your sponsoring organization's position, when the
subject is presented to ARAC for approval. Once the ACSWG has begun
deliberations, members will not be added or substituted without the
approval of the FAA and the ACSWG Chair.
    The Secretary of Transportation determined the formation and use of
ARAC is necessary and in the public interest in connection with the
performance of duties imposed on the FAA by law. ARAC meetings are open
to the public. However, ARAC Working Group meetings are not open to the
public, except to the extent individuals with an interest and expertise
are selected to attend. The FAA will make no public announcement of the
Working Group's meetings.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 24, 2014.
Lirio Liu,
Designated Federal Officer, Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 2014-01673 Filed 1-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: November 9, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 216)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 68690-68693]
[DOCID:fr09no10-6]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0548; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-041-AD;
Amendment 39-16497; AD 2010-23-08]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Model BD-700-1A10 and
BD-700-1A11 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

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

    Following five reported cases of balance washer screw failure on
similar RATs [ram air turbines]/air driven generators installed on
other aircraft types, an investigation * * * determined that a
specific batch of the screws had a metallographic non-conformity
that increased their susceptibility to brittle fracture. * * *
    Failure of a balance washer screw can result in loss of the
related balance washer, with consequent turbine imbalance. Such
imbalance could potentially result in RAT structural failure
(including blade failure), loss of RAT electrical power and
structural damage to the aircraft and, if deployment was activated
by a dual engine shutdown, could also result in loss of hydraulic
power for the flight controls [and consequent reduced ability of the
flightcrew to maintain the safe flight and landing of the airplane].
* * * * *

We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective December 14, 2010.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of December 14,
2010.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Alfano, Aerospace
Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New
York Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, New York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on June 4, 2010 (75 FR
31731). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    Following five reported cases of balance washer screw failure on
similar RATs [ram air turbine]/air driven generators installed on
other aircraft types, an investigation by Hamilton Sundstrand
determined that a specific batch of the screws had a metallographic
non-conformity that increased their susceptibility to brittle
fracture. Subsequently, it was established that 187 RATs [Part
Number (P/N) GL456-1101-7 and Hamilton Sundstrand P/Ns in the 762826
series] had non-conforming screws installed either during production
or possibly during maintenance or repair at Hamilton Sundstrand
repair stations.
    Failure of a balance washer screw can result in loss of the
related balance washer, with consequent turbine imbalance. Such
imbalance could potentially result in RAT structural failure
(including blade failure), loss of RAT electrical power and
structural damage to the aircraft and, if deployment was activated
by a dual engine shutdown, could also result in loss of hydraulic
power for the flight controls [and consequent reduced ability of the
flightcrew to maintain the safe flight and landing of the airplane].
    This [Canadian] directive mandates checking of the RAT and
replacing the balance washer screws, if required. It also prohibits
future installation of unmodified RATs.

You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Actions Since NPRM Was Issued

    We have determined that this AD should refer to the latest service
information. We have reviewed Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-1A11-24-
014, Revision 02, dated March 15, 2010; and Bombardier Service Bulletin
700-24-075, Revision 02, dated March 15, 2010; which introduce minor
changes, but do not add any additional work. We have revised this final
rule to include the latest version of the applicable Bombardier service
information and to provide credit for work done before the effective
date of this AD, in accordance with the previous revisions of the
service information.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of
the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD with the changes described
previously. We determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD.

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 also have required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow our FAA policies. Any such differences
are highlighted in a NOTE within the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 115 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take about 1 work-hour per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of
this AD to the U.S. operators to be $9,775, or $85 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this 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 this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

Examining the AD Docket

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2010-23-08 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-16497. Docket No. FAA-
2010-0548; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-041-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective December
14, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. Model BD-700-1A10 and
BD-700-1A11 airplanes, serial numbers 9002 and subsequent;
certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 24:
Electrical power.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    Following five reported cases of balance washer screw failure on
similar RATs [ram air turbines]/air driven generators installed on
other aircraft types, an investigation by Hamilton Sundstrand
determined that a specific batch of the screws had a metallographic
non-conformity that increased their susceptibility to brittle
fracture. Subsequently, it was established that 187 RATs [Part
Number (P/N) GL456-1101-7 and Hamilton Sundstrand P/Ns in the 762826
series] had non-conforming screws installed either during production
or possibly during maintenance or repair at Hamilton Sundstrand
repair stations.
    Failure of a balance washer screw can result in loss of the
related balance washer, with consequent turbine imbalance. Such
imbalance could potentially result in RAT structural failure
(including blade failure), loss of RAT electrical power and
structural damage to the aircraft and, if deployment was activated
by a dual engine shutdown, could also result in loss of hydraulic
power for the flight controls [and consequent reduced ability of the
flightcrew to maintain the safe flight and landing of the airplane].
    This [Canadian] directive mandates checking of the RAT and
replacing the balance washer screws, if required. It also prohibits
future installation of unmodified RATs.

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

    (g) For airplanes having serial numbers 9002 through 9380
inclusive: At the earliest of the times identified in paragraphs
(g)(1), (g)(2), (g)(3) and (g)(4) of this AD, inspect to determine
the serial number of the installed ram air turbine (RAT), in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable
service bulletin listed in Table 1 of this AD. This inspection may
be conducted visually, which requires lowering the RAT. A review of
airplane maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of this
inspection if the serial number of the RAT can be conclusively
determined from that review.

    (1) Within 500 flight hours or 24 months after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first; or
    (2) Prior to the next in-flight or on-ground functional test of
the RAT, whichever occurs first after the effective date of this AD;
or
    (3) Prior to the next in-flight or on-ground operational test of
the RAT, whichever occurs first after the effective date of this AD;
or
    (4) Prior to the next scheduled RAT in-flight deployment.
    (h) If the RAT serial number, as determined in paragraph (g) of
this AD, is not listed in paragraph 1.A of the applicable service
bulletin listed in Table 1 of this AD, no further action is required
by this AD, except as required by paragraph (j) of this AD.

                                           Table 1--Service Bulletins
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Bombardier Service
               Model--                       Bulletin--          Revision--                 Dated--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BD-700-1A11.........................  700-1A11-24-014........              02  March 15, 2010.
BD-700-1A10.........................  700-24-075.............              02  March 15, 2010.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     (i) If the RAT serial number, determined in paragraph (g) of
this AD, is listed in paragraph 1.A. of the applicable service
bulletin listed in Table 1 of this AD, before further flight,
inspect to determine if the symbol ``24-7'' is marked on the RAT
identification plate, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of the applicable service bulletin listed in Table 1 of
this AD. A review of airplane maintenance records is acceptable in
lieu of this inspection if the symbol ``24-7'' mark can be
conclusively determined from that review.
    (1) If the symbol ``24-7'' is marked on the RAT identification
plate, the balance washer screws have already been replaced and no
further action is required by this AD, except as required by
paragraph (j) of this AD.
    (2) If the symbol ``24-7'' is not marked on the RAT
identification plate, before further flight, replace all balance
washer screws with new balance washer screws, part number MS24667-
14, and mark the RAT identification plate with the symbol ``24-7,''
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable
service bulletin listed in Table 1 of this AD.
    (j) For all airplanes: As of the effective date of this AD, no
person may install on any airplane a replacement or spare RAT (P/N
GL456-1101-7; Hamilton Sundstrand P/Ns in the 762826 series) having
one of the S/Ns listed in paragraph 1.A. of the applicable service
bulletin listed in Table 1 of this AD unless the balance washer
screws have already been replaced and the symbol ``24-7'' is marked
on the RAT identification plate.

Credit for Actions Accomplished in Accordance With Previous Service
Information

    (k) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD,
in accordance with the applicable service bulletin listed in Table 2
of this AD, are considered acceptable for compliance with the
corresponding action specified in this AD.

                                        Table 2--Credit Service Bulletins
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Bombardier Service
               Model--                       Bulletin--          Revision--                 Dated--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BD-700-1A11.........................  700-1A11-24-014........              01  July 15, 2009.
BD-700-1A10.........................  700-24-075.............              01  July 15, 2009.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: Although Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2010-01,
dated January 18, 2010, recommends accomplishing the visual
inspection prior to the next scheduled in-flight operational test of
the RAT, we have determined that interval would not address the
identified unsafe condition soon enough to ensure an adequate level
of safety for the affected fleet in light of the degree of urgency
associated with the subject unsafe condition. This difference has
been coordinated with Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA).

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (l) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE-170, 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: Program
Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600
Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York, 11590; telephone 516-
228-7300; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. 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.
    (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, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection requirements and has assigned
OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Related Information

    (m) Refer to MCAI TCCA Airworthiness Directive CF-2010-01, dated
January 18, 2010; and Bombardier Service Bulletins 700-24-075,
Revision 02, dated March 15, 2010, and 700-1A11-24-014, Revision 02,
dated March 15, 2010; for related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (n) You must use Bombardier Service Bulletins 700-24-075,
Revision 02, dated March 15, 2010; or Bombardier Service Bulletin
700-1A11-24-014, Revision 02, dated March 15, 2010; as applicable;
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
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 514-855-
7401; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://
www.bombardier.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the 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>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the 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/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington on October 21, 2010.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-28174 Filed 11-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 59 (Thursday, March 27, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17229-17230]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06838]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2010-0149]

Notice of Reinstatement of Informal Hearing Procedure

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces that it is reinstating the informal hearing
procedure authorized under the Rules of Practice for Motor Carrier,
Intermodal Equipment Provider, Broker, Freight Forwarder, and Hazardous
Materials Proceedings (Rules of Practice), codified at 49 CFR part 386.
On June 7, 2010, the Agency stated that it would not entertain new
requests for informal hearings pending a reevaluation of the procedure,
based on concerns about the neutrality of Agency Hearing Officers.
After conducting numerous informal hearings (involving cases that were
pending at the time the 2010 notice was published) with an attorney in
the Office of Chief Counsel's Section of Adjudications serving as
Hearing Officer, the Agency believes informal hearings should remain an
option for administrative adjudication of contested civil penalty
claims and will again permit respondents in enforcement cases to
request this option. Prior to June 7, 2010, FMCSA had made informal
hearings available only to respondents located within its Eastern and
Midwestern Service Centers. The Agency removes this geographical
limitation and will make informal hearings available to all
respondents, regardless of where they are domiciled.

DATES: Effective March 27, 2014.

ADDRESSES: For access to the docket to read background documents,
including those referenced in this document, or to read comments
received, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time and insert
``FMCSA-2010-0149'' in the ``Keyword'' box, and then click ``Search.''
The docket is also available by going to the ground floor, Room W12-
140, DOT Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sue Lawless, Office of Chief Counsel,
Adjudications Counsel (MC-CCA), FMCSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590. Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 113(f), Congress directed FMCSA to carry out the
duties and powers related to motor carriers or motor carrier safety
vested in the Secretary of Transportation by chapters 5, 51, 55, 57,
59, 133 through 149, 311, 313, 315 and 317 of title 49 of the U.S.
Code, except as otherwise delegated by the Secretary. Regulations
implementing this statutory authority include the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) (49 CFR parts 380-399), the Federal Motor
Carrier Commercial Regulations (FMCCRs) (49 CFR parts 360-379), and the
Federal Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMRs) (49 CFR parts 171-180).
    FMCSA's enforcement powers include the general authority to conduct
administrative enforcement proceedings for violations of the FMCCRs (49
U.S.C. 14701) as well as to assess civil penalties for violations
related to commercial motor vehicle safety (49 U.S.C. chapter 5) and
hazardous materials (49 U.S.C. chapter 51).
    In accordance with this authority, the Agency promulgated
regulations governing civil penalty and driver disqualification
proceedings before the Agency. These regulations are known as the Rules
of Practice for Motor Carrier, Intermodal Equipment Provider, Broker,
Freight Forwarder, and Hazardous Materials Proceedings (Rules of
Practice) and are codified at 49 CFR part 386.
    In May 2005, the Agency amended the Rules of Practice to establish,
among other things, an informal hearing process as an option for
adjudicating administrative enforcement proceedings (see 70 FR 28467,
May 18, 2005). Civil penalty proceedings are initiated by issuance of a
Notice of Claim by a representative of the Agency (Claimant) pursuant
to 49 CFR 386.11(c). Under 49 CFR 386.14(b)(2), the party against whom
a claim is made (Respondent) must reply to the Notice of Claim by
electing one of three options: (1) paying the full amount of the claim;
(2) contesting the claim by requesting administrative adjudication
pursuant to section 386.14(d); or (3) seeking binding arbitration in
accordance with the Agency's arbitration program. Under 49 CFR
386.14(d)(1)(iii), a respondent electing administrative adjudication
may request that the matter be adjudicated either through: (A)
Submission of written evidence without hearing; or (B) an informal
hearing; or (C) a formal hearing.
    The informal hearing process was intended to provide expedited
consideration of a civil penalty case by a neutral third party without
the formalities attendant to a hearing before an Administrative Law
Judge (see 69 FR 61620, Oct. 20, 2004). Section 386.2 defines an
informal hearing as ``a hearing in which the parties have the
opportunity to present relevant evidence to a neutral Hearing Officer,
who will prepare findings of fact and recommendations for the Agency
decisionmaker. The informal hearing will not be on the transcribed
record, and discovery will not be allowed. Parties will have the
opportunity to discuss their case and present testimony and evidence
before the Hearing Officer without the formality of a formal hearing.''
After receiving the Hearing Officer's report and recommendations, the
Assistant Administrator (AA), who, pursuant to section 386.2, is the
Agency's ``decisionmaker,'' has the discretion to either adopt the
report or issue other orders as he or she deems appropriate. [See
sections 386.16(b)(4)(i)(A) and 386.61(b).]
    FMCSA implemented informal hearings on a graduated basis in order
to evaluate the efficacy of this new process. In the first phase of
implementation, FMCSA considered requests for informal hearings only
from respondents in the Midwestern Service Center's geographical area
(see 71 FR 13894, Mar. 17, 2006). In the second phase, FMCSA expanded
eligibility to respondents in the Eastern Service Center's geographical
area (see 72 FR 6806, Feb. 13, 2007). FMCSA was concerned about the
appropriateness of the personnel the Agency assigned to serve as
Hearing Officers. Section 386.2 defines ``Hearing officer'' as ``a
neutral Agency employee designated by the Assistant Administrator to
preside over an informal hearing.'' The Agency selected two FMCSA
employees--one located in the Southern Service Center and one located
in the Western Service Center--to serve as Hearing Officers. However,
the Agency did not receive enough informal hearing requests to dedicate
these employees as full-time Hearing Officers. As a result, these
employees also continued to carry out their existing responsibilities
related to the implementation of the enforcement programs in their
respective Service Center areas. FMCSA was concerned that FMCSA
personnel involved in the Agency's enforcement program may not be
considered neutral.

Suspension of Informal Hearing Procedure

    On June 7, 2010, FMCSA published a Federal Register notice stating
that it was suspending the use of informal hearings for enforcement
actions

initiated after publication of the notice pending reevaluation of the
informal hearing procedure (see 75 FR 32242). At that time, there were
20 pending cases awaiting informal hearings and an additional 13 cases
in which respondents had requested informal hearings subject to
objections by the Eastern and Midwestern Service Centers. In order to
avoid further delaying the resolution of these cases, the Agency
assigned them to a Hearing Officer located within the Office of Chief
Counsel's Section of Adjudications. This section is not connected with
the Agency's enforcement program and the attorneys assigned to this
section currently draft decisions and orders in civil penalty cases,
safety rating appeals, and Hazardous Materials Permit appeals for the
review and signature of FMCSA's Assistant Administrator. See 49 CFR
386.3. In its June 7, 2010 notice, FMCSA sought public comment on
options for implementing an effective informal hearing process.

Comments on the Notice

    Only the American Trucking Associations (ATA) submitted a comment
in response to the Notice. The ATA made three suggestions that it
believed would either enhance the neutrality of the process or speed
its resolution: (1) Allow service of claims and responses to claims via
electronic means; (2) utilize hearing officers who are not employed by
FMCSA to conduct informal hearings; and (3) permit carriers who opt for
an informal hearing to preserve their right to a formal hearing.

Response to Comments

    The ATA's first suggestion could potentially speed the adjudicatory
process, not only for informal hearings, but for other matters coming
before the Assistant Administrator under 49 CFR part 386.
Implementation of this proposal, however, would require the Agency to
revise its rules regarding service of documents to permit electronic
service, and the Agency will consider doing so at the appropriate time.
    ATA's second suggestion is based on the misconception that any
FMCSA employee, regardless of his or her position in the agency, is
necessarily biased and cannot act as a neutral arbiter. Under the
Agency's Rules of Practice, the Chief Counsel, the Special Assistant to
the Chief Counsel, and attorneys in the Chief Counsel's Section of
Adjudications are separated from enforcement functions and enforcement
counsel, and advise the Assistant Administrator in contested cases.
(See 49 CFR 386.3.) These attorneys have advised the Assistant
Administrator, and prepared numerous orders and decisions in matters
coming before the Assistant Administrator during the past several
years, many of which have been favorable to respondents in contested
enforcement cases.
    After suspending the informal hearing process for enforcement
actions initiated on or after June 7, 2010, the Agency held informal
hearings in more than 30 cases pending before that date, with an
Adjudications attorney serving as Hearing Officer. The informal
hearings, which were held via teleconference, proved to be an
efficient, less expensive means of adjudication than a formal hearing
before an administrative law judge. They were less resource intensive
for both parties, provided a timely means of resolution, and were an
effective means to resolve enforcement cases. The Agency intends to
continue to use personnel identified in section 386.3, including
Adjudications counsel, as hearing officers, but reserves the right to
use other neutral arbiters.
    The ATA's third suggestion is essentially a request to amend 49 CFR
386.16(b)(4)(A) by eliminating the final sentence of that paragraph,
which states: ``By participating in an informal hearing, respondent
waives its right to a formal hearing.'' Implementation of this
recommendation would require notice and comment rulemaking and, as
such, is beyond the scope of this notice. Moreover, it appears to be
based on the erroneous assumption that a respondent waives its right to
appeal the decision of the Hearing Officer by requesting an informal
hearing. This is not the case.
    The Hearing Officer issues a report to the Assistant Administrator
that includes findings of fact and a recommended disposition of the
case. The Assistant Administrator then issues either a Final Order
adopting the report or other orders he or she may deem appropriate. If
a respondent disagrees with the Final Order, it may submit a petition
for reconsideration under 49 CFR 386.64. Final Orders in informal
hearing cases are also subject to the appeal provisions of section
386.67. There is a right, therefore, to appeal the Hearing Officer's
recommendation.
    Furthermore, if a respondent is concerned about the fairness of the
informal hearing process, it has the option of requesting a formal
hearing in its reply to the Notice of Claim. A respondent requesting a
formal hearing simply because it is dissatisfied with the results of
the informal hearing process would essentially be engaging in forum
shopping. Permitting such a practice would be an inefficient use of
Agency resources and delay resolution of the matter.

Reinstatement of Informal Hearings

    Accordingly, FMCSA rescinds its June 7, 2010 notice suspending the
availability of informal hearings for enforcement actions initiated on
or after the date of that Notice. In addition, the Agency removes the
geographical limitations on eligibility for informal hearings imposed
on March 17, 2006 and February 13, 2007. The informal hearing option
will be available to all respondents subject to civil penalty
enforcement actions initiated by Notices of Claim issued on or after
the date of this notice.

    Issued on: March 14, 2014.
Anne S. Ferro,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2014-06838 Filed 3-26-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 246 (Friday, December 21, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75697-75698]
[FR Doc No: 2012-30876]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2012-0089]

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with Part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), this document provides the public notice that by a document
dated September 12, 2012, Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority

(CMTA) has petitioned the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) for a
waiver of compliance from certain provisions of the Federal railroad
safety regulations contained at 49 CFR 213.57--Curves; elevation and
speed limitations. FRA has assigned the petition Docket Number FRA-
2012-0089.
    CMTA seeks a waiver of compliance from provisions regarding ``cant
deficiency'' contained at 49 CFR 213.57. Cant deficiency is a technical
term describing the imbalance of inner and outer wheel loads when a
rail vehicle traverses a curve. With the right combination of speed,
curvature, and superelevation (the amount the outer rail is elevated
above the inner rail), the loads on both inner and outer wheels will be
equal, i.e., balanced. The curving speed corresponding to this balanced
state is referred to as ``balance speed.'' At speeds higher than the
balance speed, the centrifugal force will cause the outer wheel load to
increase and the inner wheel load to decrease. The manifestation of
this load imbalance is that a lateral throw will be sustained by the
passengers when the vehicle is traversing the curve. To counter the
imbalance, the superelevation on the curve would have to be increased.
The necessary amount of the increase in the superelevation is the
amount of cant deficiency.
    CMTA intends to operate its Stadler Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU)
fleet on curves at speeds which will generate a cant deficiency up to,
but not more than, 5 inches; but no more than the maximum authorized
speed.
    In support of it petition, CMTA has conducted a ``static lean
test,'' a test to demonstrate that the Stadler DMU fleet can safely be
operated at the requested 5 inches of cant deficiency.
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov and in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation's (DOT) Docket Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey Ave.
SE., W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Operations Facility is
open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
Holidays.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received by February 4, 2013 will be considered by
FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date
will be considered as far as practicable.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477-78), or online at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 17, 2012.
Robert C. Lauby,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2012-30876 Filed 12-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P