[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 115 (Thursday, June 14, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27724-27728]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12733]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0512; Product Identifier 2017-NM-170-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Airbus Model A318, A319, A320 and A321 series airplanes. This
AD requires revising the maintenance or inspection

program to incorporate new or more restrictive airworthiness
limitations. This AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design
approval holder (DAH) indicating that the principal structural elements
and certain life-limited parts are subject to widespread fatigue damage
(WFD). We are proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on
these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 30, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Airbus,
Airworthiness Office--EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707
Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5 61 93 44
51; email [email protected]; internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-
231-3195.

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-2018-
0512; 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 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2018-0512;
Product Identifier 2017-NM-170-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM based on
those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this NPRM.

Discussion

    Fatigue damage can occur locally, in small areas or structural
design details, or globally, in widespread areas. Multiple-site damage
is widespread damage that occurs in a large structural element such as
a single rivet line of a lap splice joining two large skin panels.
Widespread damage can also occur in multiple elements such as adjacent
frames or stringers. Multiple-site damage and multiple-element damage
cracks are typically too small initially to be reliably detected with
normal inspection methods. Without intervention, these cracks will
grow, and eventually compromise the structural integrity of the
airplane. This condition is known as widespread fatigue damage. It is
associated with general degradation of large areas of structure with
similar structural details and stress levels. As an airplane ages, WFD
will likely occur, and will certainly occur if the airplane is operated
long enough without any intervention.
    The FAA's WFD final rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) became
effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD rule requires certain actions to
prevent structural failure due to WFD throughout the operational life
of certain existing transport category airplanes and all of these
airplanes that will be certificated in the future. For existing and
future airplanes subject to the WFD rule, the rule requires that DAHs
establish a limit of validity (LOV) of the engineering data that
support the structural maintenance program. Operators affected by the
WFD rule may not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, unless an extended LOV
is approved.
    The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) does not require
identifying and developing maintenance actions if the DAHs can show
that such actions are not necessary to prevent WFD before the airplane
reaches the LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend on accomplishment of
future maintenance actions. As stated in the WFD rule, any maintenance
actions necessary to reach the LOV will be mandated by airworthiness
directives through separate rulemaking actions.
    In the context of WFD, this action is necessary to enable DAHs to
propose LOVs that allow operators the longest operational lives for
their airplanes, and still ensure that WFD will not occur. This
approach allows for an implementation strategy that provides
flexibility to DAHs in determining the timing of service information
development (with FAA approval), while providing operators with
certainty regarding the LOV applicable to their airplanes.
    This AD was prompted by an evaluation by the DAH indicating that
the principal structural elements and certain life-limited parts are
subject to WFD.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2017-0231, dated November 21, 2017 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for all Airbus Model
A318, A319, A320 and A321 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    The airworthiness limitations for the A320 family aeroplanes are
currently defined and published in the Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321
Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) document(s). The Damage
Tolerant Airworthiness Limitation Items are published in ALS Part 2,
approved by EASA. The instructions contained in the ALS Part 2 have
been identified as mandatory actions for continued airworthiness.
    Failure to comply with these instructions could result in an
unsafe condition.
    Previously, EASA issued AD 2016-0239 [which corresponds to FAA
AD 2017-22-03, Amendment 39-19083 (82 FR 49091, October 24, 2017)
(``AD 2017-22-03'')] to require accomplishment of all maintenance
tasks as described in ALS Part 2 at Revision 05, and [EASA] AD 2015-
0038 (later revised) [which corresponds to FAA AD 2016-09-06,
Amendment 39-18504 (81 FR 26113, May 2, 2016) (``AD 2016-09-06'')]
to require the implementation of reduced thresholds and intervals
for the detailed inspection of the forward engine mount on both
right hand and left hand sides of aeroplanes equipped with CFM56-5A/
5B engines, as specified in the ALS task 712111-01.
    Since those [EASA] ADs were issued, Airbus published Revision 06
of the ALS Part

2, and variations up to 6.3, including new and/or more restrictive
items, and new A320 family models were certified and added to the
Applicability of the ALS. The ALS Part 2 Revision 06 also includes
the reduced threshold and intervals required by EASA AD 2015-0038R1.
    For the reason described above, this [EASA] AD retains the
requirements of EASA AD 2016-0239 and EASA AD 2015-0038R1, which are
superseded, requires accomplishment of all maintenance tasks as
described in the ALS Part 2 Revision 06, and ALS Part 2 variations
6.1, 6.2 and 6.3 (hereafter collectively referred to as ``the ALS''
in this [EASA] AD), and maintains specific compliance times for ALS
task 572021-01-1 (Wide Spread Fatigue Damage related).

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0512.

Relationship Between Proposed AD, AD 2016-09-06 and AD 2017-22-03

    This NPRM would not supersede AD 2016-09-06 and AD 2017-22-03.
Rather, we have determined that a stand-alone AD would be more
appropriate to address the changes in the MCAI. This NPRM would require
revising the maintenance or inspection program to incorporate new or
more restrictive airworthiness limitations. Accomplishment of the
proposed actions would then terminate the requirements of paragraphs
(g) and (j) of AD 2016-09-06. Accomplishment of the proposed actions
would also terminate paragraphs (g)(2) and (i) of 2017-22-03.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Airbus has issued A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitation
Section Part 2--Damage Tolerant Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT-
ALI), Revision 06, dated April 10, 2017. The service information
describes new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations.
    Airbus has also issued the following variations to A318/A319/A320/
A321 Airworthiness Limitation Section Part 2--Damage Tolerant
Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT--ALI), Revision 06, dated April 10,
2017.
     A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitation Section Part
2--Damage Tolerant Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT-ALI), Variation
6.1, dated May 18, 2017. The service information describes ALI tasks
applicable to certain Model A320-200 and A321-200 airplane
configurations.
     A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitation Section Part
2--Damage Tolerant Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT-ALI), Variation
6.2, dated May 24, 2017. The service information describes ALI tasks
applicable to Model A321-271N and -272N airplanes.
     A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitation Section Part
2--Damage Tolerant Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT-ALI), Variation
6.3, October 24, 2017. The service information describes ALI tasks
associated with door stops for certain Model A318, A319, A320, and A321
series airplanes.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI

    The MCAI specifies that if there are findings from the
airworthiness limitations section (ALS) inspection tasks, corrective
actions must be accomplished in accordance with Airbus maintenance
documentation. However, this proposed AD does not include that
requirement. Operators of U.S.-registered airplanes are required by
general airworthiness and operational regulations to perform
maintenance using methods that are acceptable to the FAA. We consider
those methods to be adequate to address any corrective actions
necessitated by the findings of ALS inspections required by this
proposed AD.

Airworthiness Limitations Based on Type Design

    The FAA recently became aware of an issue related to the
applicability of ADs that require incorporation of an ALS revision into
an operator's maintenance or inspection program.
    Typically, when these types of ADs are issued by civil aviation
authorities of other countries, they apply to all airplanes covered
under an identified type certificate (TC). The corresponding FAA AD
typically retains applicability to all of those airplanes.In addition,
U.S. operators must operate their airplanes in an airworthy condition,
in accordance with 14 CFR 91.7(a). Included in this obligation is the
requirement to perform any maintenance or inspections specified in the
ALS, and in accordance with the ALS as specified in 14 CFR 43.16 and
91.403(c), unless an alternative has been approved by the FAA.
    When a type certificate is issued for a type design, the specific
ALS, including revisions, is a part of that type design, as specified
in 14 CFR 21.31(c).
    The sum effect of these operational and maintenance requirements is
an obligation to comply with the ALS defined in the type design
referenced in the manufacturer's conformity statement. This obligation
may introduce a conflict with an AD that requires a specific ALS
revision if new airplanes are delivered with a later revision as part
of their type design.
    To address this conflict, the FAA has approved alternative methods
of compliance (AMOCs) that allow operators to incorporate the most
recent ALS revision into their maintenance/inspection programs, in lieu
of the ALS revision required by the AD. This eliminates the conflict
and enables the operator to comply with both the AD and the type
design.
    However, compliance with AMOCs is normally optional, and we
recently became aware that some operators choose to retain the AD-
mandated ALS revision in their fleet-wide maintenance/inspection
programs, including those for new airplanes delivered with later ALS
revisions, to help standardize the maintenance of the fleet. To ensure
that operators comply with the applicable ALS revision for newly
delivered airplanes containing a later revision than that specified in
an AD, we plan to limit the applicability of

ADs that mandate ALS revisions to those airplanes that are subject to
an earlier revision of the ALS, either as part of the type design or as
mandated by an earlier AD.
    This proposed AD therefore applies to certain Model Airbus Model
A318, A319, A320 and A321 series airplanes with an original certificate
of airworthiness or original export certificate of airworthiness that
was issued on or before the date of approval of the ALS revision
identified in this proposed AD. Operators of airplanes with an original
certificate of airworthiness or original export certificate of
airworthiness issued after that date must comply with the airworthiness
limitations specified as part of the approved type design and
referenced on the type certificate data sheet.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 1,180 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:
    We have determined that revising the maintenance or inspection
program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator, although we
recognize that this number may vary from operator to operator. In the
past, we have estimated that this action takes 1 work-hour per
airplane. Since operators incorporate maintenance or inspection program
changes for their affected fleet(s), we have determined that a per-
operator estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane estimate.
Therefore, we estimate the total cost per operator to be $7,650 (90
work-hours x $85 per work-hour).

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.
    This proposed AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated
by the Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as
authorized by FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order,
issuance of ADs is normally a function of the Compliance and
Airworthiness Division, but during this transition period, the
Executive Director has delegated the authority to issue ADs applicable
to transport category airplanes to the Director of the System Oversight
Division.

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Airbus: Docket No. FAA-2018-0512; Product Identifier 2017-NM-170-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by July 30, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD affects AD 2016-09-06, Amendment 39-18504 (81 FR 26113,
May 2, 2016) (``AD 2016-09-06'') and AD 2017-22-03, Amendment 39-
19083 (82 FR 49091, October 24, 2017) (``AD 2017-22-03'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus airplanes identified in paragraphs
(c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(3), and (c)(4) of this AD; certificated in any
category; with an original certificate of airworthiness or original
export certificate of airworthiness issued on or before October 24,
2017.
    (1) Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes.
    (2) Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133
airplanes.
    (3) Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, -233, -251N,
and -271N airplanes.
    (4) Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, -232, -
251N, -253N, 271N, and -272N airplanes.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design approval
holder, which indicates that principal structural elements and
certain life-limited parts are subject to widespread fatigue damage
(WFD). We are issuing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking,
accidental damage, or corrosion in principal structural elements,
and WFD, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) New Maintenance or Inspection Program Revision

    (1) Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, revise
the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate
the airworthiness limitations (ALIs) specified in Airbus A318/A319/
A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitation Section Part 2--Damage Tolerant
Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT-ALI), Revision 06, dated April
10, 2017; and A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitation Section
Part 2--Damage Tolerant Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT-ALI),
Variation 6.3, October 24, 2017. Except for ALIs identified in
paragraphs (g)(2) and (g)(3) of this AD, the initial compliance time
for accomplishing the actions is at the applicable time identified
in the ALIs specified in Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness
Limitation Section Part 2--Damage Tolerant Airworthiness Limitation
Items (DT-ALI), Revision 06, dated April 10, 2017; A318/A319/A320/
A321 Airworthiness Limitation Section Part 2--Damage Tolerant
Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT-ALI), Variation 6.3, October 24,
2017; or within 90 days after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later; without exceeding the inspection intervals
in

the ALIs required by paragraph (i) of AD 2017-22-03.
    (2) For airplanes identified in Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321
Airworthiness Limitation Section Part 2--Damage Tolerant
Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT-ALI), Variation 6.1, dated May
18, 2017: Concurrently with the revision required by paragraph
(g)(1) of this AD, revise the maintenance or inspection program, as
applicable, to incorporate the ALIs specified in Airbus A318/A319/
A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitation Section Part 2--Damage Tolerant
Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT-ALI), Variation 6.1, dated May
18, 2017. The initial compliance time for accomplishing the actions
is at the applicable time identified in the ALIs specified in Airbus
A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitation Section Part 2--Damage
Tolerant Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT-ALI), Variation 6.1,
dated May 18, 2017, or within 90 days after the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs later; without exceeding the inspection
intervals in the ALIs required by paragraph (i) of AD 2017-22-03.
    (3) For airplanes identified in Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321
Airworthiness Limitation Section Part 2--Damage Tolerant
Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT-ALI), Variation 6.2, dated May
24, 2017: Concurrently with the revision required by paragraph
(g)(1) of this AD, revise the maintenance or inspection program, as
applicable, to incorporate the ALIs specified in A318/A319/A320/A321
Airworthiness Limitation Section Part 2--Damage Tolerant
Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT-ALI), Variation 6.2, dated May
24, 2017. The initial compliance time for accomplishing the actions
is at the applicable time identified in the ALIs specified in Airbus
A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitation Section Part 2--Damage
Tolerant Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT-ALI), Variation 6.2,
dated May 24, 2017, or within 90 days after the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs later; without exceeding the inspection
intervals in the ALIs required by paragraph (i) of AD 2017-22-03.

(h) No Alternative Actions, Intervals, and Critical Design
Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCLs)

    After the maintenance or inspection program has been revised as
required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g.,
inspections) or intervals may be used unless the actions or
intervals are approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC)
in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (j)(1) of
this AD.

(i) Terminating Action for Other FAA ADs

    (1) Accomplishing the action required by paragraph (g) of this
AD terminates the requirements of paragraphs (g) and (j) of AD 2016-
09-06.
    (2) Accomplishing the action required by paragraph (g) of this
AD terminates the requirements of paragraphs (g)(2) and (i) of AD
2017-22-03.

(j) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Section, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (k)(2) of this AD. Information
may be emailed to: [email protected].
    (i) 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.
    (ii) AMOCs previously approved for AD 2015-05-02, Amendment 39-
18112 (80 FR 15152, March 23, 2015) that required incorporation of
the service information in paragraphs (j)(1)(ii)(A), (j)(1)(ii)(B),
(j)(1)(ii)(C), or (j)(1)(ii)(D), are approved as AMOCs for the
corresponding provisions of this AD.
    (A) Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitation Section
Part 2--Damage Tolerant Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT-ALI),
Revision 06, dated April 10, 2017.
    (B) Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitation Section
Part 2--Damage Tolerant Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT-ALI),
Variation 6.1, dated May 18, 2017.
    (C) Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitation Section
Part 2 -Damage Tolerant Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT-ALI),
Variation 6.2, dated May 24, 2017.
    (D) A318/A319/A320/A321 Airworthiness Limitation Section Part
2--Damage Tolerant Airworthiness Limitation Items (DT-ALI),
Variation 6.3, October 24, 2017.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA); or Airbus's EASA Design Organization Approval
(DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-
authorized signature.

(k) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA AD 2017-0231, dated November 21, 2017, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet
at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket
No. FAA-2018-0512.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Sanjay Ralhan,
Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus, Airworthiness Office--EIAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte,
31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5
61 93 44 51; email [email protected]; internet http://www.airbus.com. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on June 6, 2018.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-12733 Filed 6-13-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Dear Mr. Zeller:

I am writing as an individual consumer and user of ecigarettes and a member of the vapeing community to request an extension of the comment period for the Food and Drug Administration's ("FDA") Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. On behalf of myself, I am requesting that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.

The Proposed Rule raises a number of significant issues and questions that are important and relevant to me, as a consumer of products (ecigarettes and liquid) that are proposed for regulation under the Proposed Rule. The Proposed Rule asks a lot of different questions I might want to respond to and need more time to make a full response. I want to provide my thoughts and comments on many of these issues, as a consumer, but my time to devote to researching and providing thoughtful comments on these important questions is limited as I work for a living and have a family that takes almost all my free time. I have already spent many hours researching and dissecting these issues, but they take time. I know that the FDA took many years to even come up with the Proposed Rule, so I do not think it is at all unreasonable to allow the public a mere six months to comment on it. This is our only opportunity, as consumers, to provide our feedback.

I feel very strongly about e-cigarettes as an alternative to combustible cigarettes. Quite simply, I firmly believe that they saved my life. I wish to provide you with my personal story, as well as science- and evidence-based responses to your questions so that you can take my comment into account. I realize that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past. I would therefore ask that you do so here, so that all stakeholders have the opportunity to provide their comments on this proposed regulation.

I appreciate your consideration of my request and am happy to discuss this issue with you further.


[Federal Register: February 14, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 31)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 8593-8594]
[DOCID:fr14fe08-7]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2007-0309; Airspace Docket No. 07-AEA-20]

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Gettysburg, PA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Direct final rule, request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: This action modifies Class E Airspace at Gettysburg, PA. The
existing controlled airspace from nearby Gettysburg Regional Airport
does not adequately support a new Area Navigation (RNAV) Global
Positioning System (GPS) Special Instrument Approach Procedure (IAP)
that has been developed for medical flight operations for the
Gettysburg Hospital. This action will enhance the safety and management
of Instrument Flight Rule (IFR) operations by providing the required
controlled airspace to protect for this approach at Gettysburg, PA.
Additionally this action imparts a technical correction to the airport
name.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, June 05, 2008. The director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1,
Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments. Comments for
inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or before March 31,
2008.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this rule to: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001;
Telephone: 1-800-647-5527; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify the
Docket Number FAA-2007-0309; Airspace Docket No. 07-AEA-20, at the
beginning of your comments. You may also submit and review received
comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    You may review the public docket containing the rule, any comments
received, and any final disposition in person at the Dockets Office
(see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays. An informal
docket may also be examined during normal business hours at the office
of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, Room
210, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melinda Giddens, System Support Group,
Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O. Box
20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Fax (404) 305-
5572.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Direct Final Rule Procedure

    The FAA anticipates that this regulation will not result in adverse
or negative comments, and, therefore, issues it as a direct final rule.
The FAA has determined that this rule only involves an established body
of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are
necessary to keep them operationally current. Unless a written adverse
or negative comment or a written notice of intent to submit an adverse
or negative comment is received within the comment period, the
regulation will become effective on the date specified above. After the
close of the comment period, the FAA will publish a document in the
Federal Register indicating that no adverse or negative comments were
received and confirming the effective date. If the FAA receives, within
the comment period, an adverse or negative comment, or written notice
of intent to submit such a comment, a document withdrawing the direct
final rule will be published in the Federal Register, and a notice of
proposed rulemaking may be published with a new comment period.

Comments Invited

    Although this action is in the form of a direct final rule, and was
not preceded by a notice of proposed rulemaking, interested persons are
invited to comment on this rule by submitting such written data, views,
or arguments as they may desire. An electronic copy of this document
may be downloaded from and comments may be submitted and reviewed via
http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking documents can
also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://www.faa.gov. or
the Federal Register's Web page at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/
index.html. Communications should identify both docket numbers and be
submitted in triplicate to the address specified under the caption
ADDRESSES above or you may comment through the Web site. All
communications received on or before the closing date for comments will
be considered, and this rule may be amended or withdrawn in light of
the comments received.
    Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might
suggest a need to modify the rule. Factual information that supports
the commenter's ideas and suggestions is extremely helpful in
evaluating the effectiveness of this action and determining whether
additional rulemaking action would be needed. All comments submitted
will be available, both before and after the closing date for comments,
in the Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. Those
wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments submitted in
response to this rule must submit a self-addressed, stamped postcard on
which the following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-
2007-0309; Airspace Docket No. 07-AEA-20.'' The postcard

will be date stamped and returned to the commenter.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 amends Class E5 airspace at Gettysburg, PA, providing the
controlled airspace required to support the new Copter Area Navigation
(RNAV) Global Positioning System (GPS) 070 Point in Space (PinS)
approach developed to facilitate helicopter arrival and departures at
the Gettysburg Hospital in Gettysburg. Although Class E exists near the
area, it is insufficient for the protection for this approach that will
serve medical flights. Controlled airspace, known as Class E5 airspace,
extending upward from 700 feet Above Ground Level (AGL) is required to
encompass all Instrument Approach Procedures (IAPs) to the extent
practical and for general Instrument Flight Rule (IFR) operations. The
FAA is amending Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71
to modify existing Class E5 airspace by adding a 6-mile radius around
the Point in Space Coordinates that serve the Gettysburg Hospital in
Gettysburg, PA. Designations for Class E airspace areas extending
upward from 700 feet or more above the surface of the Earth are
published in FAA Order 7400.9R, signed August 15, 2007, effective
September 15, 2007, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 17.1.
The Class E designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.
    In 1996, the airport experienced a name change from ``Gettysburg
Airport and Travel Center'' to Gettysburg Regional Airport and this
rule provides for that technical correction for this amended Class E5
airspace.

Agency Findings

    The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among various levels of government. Therefore, it is
determined that this final rule does not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore, (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) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    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
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends controlled airspace at Gettysburg, PA near the Gettysburg
Hospital.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

Adoption of the Amendment

0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration
amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

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

0
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]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9R, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, signed August 15, 2007, effective September 15, 2007, is
amended as follows:

Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Designated as Surface Areas.

* * * * *

AEA PA E5 Gettysburg, PA [Amended]

Gettysburg Regional Airport, Gettysburg, PA
    (Lat. 39[deg]50'27'' N., long. 77[deg]16'27'' W.)
Gettysburg Hospital Heliport
    (Lat. 39[deg]49'29'' N., long. 77[deg]14'09'' W.)
Point in Space Coordinates
    (Lat. 39[deg]49'09'' N., long. 77[deg]14'53'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
of the Earth within a 6-mile radius of the Gettysburg Regional
Airport and that airspace within a 6-mile radius of the Point in
Space Coordinates (lat. 39[deg]49'09'' N., long. 77[deg]14'53'' W.)
serving the Gettysburg Hospital.
* * * * *

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on January 30, 2008.
Barry A. Knight,
Acting Manager, Systems Support Group, Eastern Service Center.
[FR Doc. 08-615 Filed 2-13-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


[Federal Register: July 30, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 146)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 44884-44885]
[DOCID:fr30jy10-3]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0270; Airspace Docket No. 10-AAL-8]

Revision of Class E Airspace; Kulik Lake, AK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action revises Class E airspace at Kulik Lake, AK, to
correct an error in the airspace legal description. The FAA is taking
this action to enhance safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules
(IFR) operations at Kulik Lake Airport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, September 23, 2010. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Derril Bergt, AAL-BAL, Federal
Aviation Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue, Box 14, Anchorage, AK
99513-7587; telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet address: http://www.faa.gov/about/
office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/service_units/systemops/fs/
alaskan/rulemaking/.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On Tuesday, May 11, 2010, the FAA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking in the Federal Register to revise Class E airspace at Kulik
Lake, AK (75 FR 26151).
    Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
proceeding by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA.
No comments were received, and the rule is adopted as proposed.
    The Class E airspace areas designated as 700/1,200 ft. transition
areas are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9T, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, signed August 27, 2009, and
effective September 15, 2009, which is incorporated by reference in 14
CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document
will be published subsequently in the Order.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by revising Class E airspace at Kulik Lake Airport, AK, to
correct an old airspace description error. This Class E airspace will
provide adequate controlled airspace upward from 700 feet above the
surface for safety and management of IFR operations at Kulik Lake
Airport.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(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) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Because this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle 1, 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 1, Section 40103, Sovereignty and use of
airspace. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing
regulations to ensure the safe and efficient use of the navigable
airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because
it creates Class E airspace sufficient in size to contain aircraft
executing instrument procedures for the

Kulik Lake Airport and represents the FAA's continuing effort to safely
and efficiently use the navigable airspace.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration
amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

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

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR 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]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9T, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, signed August 27, 2009, and effective September 15, 2009, is
amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Extending Upward From 700 Feet or
More Above the Surface of the Earth

* * * * *

AAL AK E5 Kulik Lake, AK [Revised]

Kulik Lake Airport, AK
    (Lat. 58[deg]58'55'' N., long. 155[deg]07'17'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 4.3-mile radius of the Kulik Lake Airport, AK, and within 4
miles either side of the 278 bearing from the Kulik Lake Airport,
extending from the 4.3-mile radius to 7.5 miles west of the Kulik
Lake Airport, AK.

    Issued in Anchorage, AK, on July 20, 2010.
Anthony M. Wylie,
Manager, Alaska Flight Services Information Area Group.
[FR Doc. 2010-18663 Filed 7-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 228 (Wednesday, December 1, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 68171-68173]
[FR Doc No: 2021-26041]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-1017; Project Identifier AD-2021-00495-A]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; True Flight Holdings LLC Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for all True Flight Holdings LLC Model AA-1, AA-1A, AA-1B, AA-1C, AA-5,
AA-5A, and AA-5B airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by the report
of an accident of an airplane with bondline corrosion and delamination
of the horizontal stabilizers. This proposed AD would require
inspecting the wings, fuselage, and stabilizers for bondline
separation, corrosion, and previous repair. This AD would also require
repairing or replacing parts and applying corrosion inhibitor as
necessary. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition
on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 18,
2022.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact True
Flight Holdings LLC, 2300 Madison Highway, Valdosta, GA 31601; phone:
(229) 242-6337; email: [email protected]. You may view this
service information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section,
Operational Safety Branch, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (816)
329-4148. It is also available at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-1017.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-1017; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this NPRM, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred Caplan, Aviation Safety Engineer,
Atlanta ACO Branch, FAA, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-1017; Project Identifier
AD-2021-00495-A'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Fred
Caplan, Aviation Safety Engineer, Atlanta ACO Branch, FAA, 1701
Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337. Any commentary that the FAA
receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in
the public docket for this rulemaking.

Background

    The FAA received a report of an accident involving a True Flight
Holdings LLC Model AA-5 airplane that occurred on January 19, 2021.
During flight, the outboard elevator attach bracket on the horizontal
stabilizer detached, causing loss of elevator control, flutter, and
significant damage to the airplane. An investigation identified
corrosion and delamination of the airplane skin bondlines around the
area of the horizontal stabilizer where the elevator attach bracket was
attached, as well as on the trailing edge of the elevator trim tab.
Field reports have identified additional instances of corrosion and
delamination of skin bondlines around the horizontal stabilizer and
other primary structures.
    Model AA-1, AA-1A, AA-1B, AA-1C, AA-5, AA-5A, and AA-5B airplanes
are similar in design and are constructed using a metal-to-metal
bonding process. While the bond adhesive remains structurally sound
throughout the aging process, factors such as corrosion and freezing
moisture may compromise the structural integrity of some of the bond
joints. This can lead to delamination of the skin from the primary
structure.
    Field reports indicate that bondline inspections are not being
adequately performed during routine inspections, which emphasize a
visual scanning for problem areas. However, damage can exist with no
visual indications, and a mechanic might miss damage in a hidden area.
The FAA has determined that a more thorough inspection procedure is
necessary to reliably identify corrosion and delamination of bondlines
in these critical areas.
    This condition, if not addressed, could result in reduced
structural integrity of the affected airplane component, with
consequent loss of

control of the airplane. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is issuing this NPRM after determining that the unsafe
condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other
products of the same type design.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed True Flight Aerospace Service Bulletin SB-195,
Revision A, dated June 1, 2021 (True Flight SB-195A). This service
information specifies procedures for inspecting the primary structure
and flight controls for bondline separation and corrosion and repairing
or replacing parts and applying corrosion inhibitor as 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 ADDRESSES.

Other Related Service Information

    The FAA also reviewed True Flight Aerospace Service Kit 125,
Revision B. This service information specifies procedures for repairing
bondline delamination of flight controls and structures.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in True Flight SB-195A as already described, except as discussed under
``Differences Between the AD and the Service Information.''

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    This proposed AD would only require the Part A inspections, and not
the Part B inspection, from True Flight SB-195A. In addition, True
Flight SB-195A specifies reporting information to the manufacturer, and
this proposed AD would not.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 2,466 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this proposed
AD:

                                                 Estimated costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per        Cost on U.S.
            Action                  Labor cost             Parts cost             airplane          operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspect for delamination and    8 work-hours x     Not applicable...........  $680 per          $1,676,880 per
 corrosion.                      $85 per hour =                                inspection        inspection
                                 $680 per                                      cycle.            cycle.
                                 inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates that it would take 3 work-hours at $85 per work-
hour to do the proposed corrosion inhibitor treatment. Parts would cost
$104 for a total proposed cost of $359 per airplane. In addition, there
could be a wide range of areas that may require repair (fuselage,
stabilizers, and wings) for the delaminated bondlines and/or corrosion
with potential replacement of the entire component. The FAA has no way
of determining the number of airplanes that might need these repairs or
the exact costs for corrective actions needed as a result of the
proposed inspection, as the damage may vary significantly from airplane
to airplane.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil 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

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

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

True Flight Holdings LLC: Docket No. FAA-2021-1017; Project
Identifier AD-2021-00495-A.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by January 18, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to True Flight Holdings LLC Model AA-1, AA-1A,
AA-1B, AA-1C, AA-5, AA-5A, and AA-5B airplanes, all serial numbers,
certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code: 5330, Fuselage
Main, Plate/Skin; 5512, Horizontal Stabilizer, Plate/Skin; 5522,
Elevator, Plates/Skin Structure; 5532, Vertical Stabilizer, Plates/
Skin; 5542, Rudder, Plate/Skin; 5730, Wing, Plates/Skins.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by corrosion and delamination of the
horizontal stabilizer bondlines. The FAA is issuing this AD to
detect and address cracks, buckles, corrosion,

delamination, rust, and previous repair of the wings, fuselage, and
stabilizers. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in
reduced structural integrity of the affected airplane component with
consequent loss of control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspection of Bondlines of the Wings, Stabilizers, and Aft Fuselage

    Within 100 hours time-in-service after the effective date of
this AD or within 12 months after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs first, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 12
months, inspect the wings, stabilizers, and aft fuselage for
bondline separation, corrosion, and previous repair and take all
necessary corrective action before further flight in accordance with
paragraphs A.1. through A.7. in True Flight Aerospace Service
Bulletin SB-195, Revision A, dated June 1, 2021. Pay particular
attention to the areas listed in paragraphs (g)(1) through (3) of
this AD.
    (1) Bondlines of the horizontal stabilizer outboard rib at the
elevator bearing support assembly.
    (2) Bondlines of the elevator trim tab inboard rib.
    (3) Bondlines and previous repairs of the trailing edges of the
elevator trim tabs, elevators, rudder, ailerons, and wings.

 (h) Special Flight Permits

    Special flight permits are prohibited.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Atlanta ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request
to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District
Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the
manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the
person identified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Fred Caplan,
Aviation Safety Engineer, Atlanta ACO Branch, FAA, 1701 Columbia
Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (404)
474-5606; email: [email protected].
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact True
Flight Holdings LLC, 2300 Madison Highway, Valdosta, GA 31601;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected]. You may
view this referenced service information at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 901 Locust, Kansas
City, MO 64106. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on November 23, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-26041 Filed 11-30-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: March 30, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 61)]
[Notices]
[Page 16182-16183]
[DOCID:fr30mr06-98]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon written request, copies available from: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC
20549.

Extension: Rule 15c2-1; SEC File No. 270-418; OMB Control No. 3235-
0485.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget

requests for approval of extension on the following rule: Rule 15c2-1.
    Rule 15c2-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (17 CFR
240.15c2-1) prohibits the commingling under the same lien of securities
of margin customers (a) with other customers without their written
consent and (b) with the broker or dealer. The rule also prohibits the
rehypothecation of customers' margin securities for a sum in excess of
the customer's aggregate indebtedness. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 2690 (November 15, 1940); Securities Exchange Act Release
No. 9428 (December 29, 1971). Pursuant to Rule 15c2-1, respondents must
collect information necessary to prevent the rehypothecation of
customer securities in contravention of the rule, issue and retain
copies of notices of hypothecation of customer securities in accordance
with the rule, and collect written consents from customers in
accordance with the rule. The information is necessary to ensure
compliance with the rule and to advise customers of the rule's
protections.
    There are approximately 145 respondents (i.e., broker-dealers that
carry or clear customer accounts that also have bank loans) that
require an aggregate total of 3263 hours to comply with the rule. Each
of these approximately 145 registered broker-dealers makes an estimated
45 annual responses. Each response takes approximately 0.5 hours to
complete. Thus, the total compliance burden per year is 3263 burden
hours.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid control number.
    Comments regarding the estimated burden hours should be directed
to: (i) The Desk Officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission,
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503
or by sending an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and (ii) R.
Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and
Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way,
Alexandria, Virginia 22312 or send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice.

    Dated: March 23, 2006.
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-4624 Filed 3-29-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P