[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 192 (Thursday, October 7, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55747-55749]
[FR Doc No: 2021-21832]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 192 / Thursday, October 7, 2021 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0845; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00651-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS 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 Airbus SAS Model A330-200, -300, -800, and -900 series
airplanes; and Model A340-200, -300, -500, and -600 series airplanes.
This proposed AD was prompted by reports that the instructions on the
doghouse door lock placard are unclear and incomplete. This proposed AD
would require replacing the placard with an improved instruction
placard, as specified in a European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)
AD, which is proposed for incorporation by reference. This proposed AD
would also prohibit the installation of affected parts under certain
conditions. 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 November
22, 2021.

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 material that will be incorporated by reference (IBR) in this
AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany;
telephone +49 221 8999 000; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet
www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this material on the EASA website at
https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this material at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in the AD
docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2021-0845.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0845; 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, the
mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI), any comments
received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer,
Large Aircraft Section, FAA, International Validation Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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-2021-0845; Project Identifier
MCAI-2021-00651-T'' 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
Vladimir Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA,
International Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA
98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not specifically
designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this
rulemaking.

Background

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2021-0136, dated June 4, 2021 (EASA
AD 2021-0136) (also referred to as the MCAI), to correct an unsafe
condition for all Airbus SAS A330-201, A330-202, A330-203, A330-223,
A330-243, A330-301, A330-302, A330-303, A330-321, A330-322, A330-323,
A330-341, A330-342, A330-343, A330-841, A330-941, A340-211, A340-212,
A340-213, A340-311, A340-312, A340-313, A340-541, A340-542, A340-642,
and A340-643 airplanes. Model A340-542 and A340-643 airplanes are not
certificated by the FAA and are not included on the U.S.

type certificate data sheet; this AD therefore does not include those
airplanes in the applicability.
    This proposed AD was prompted by reports of unclear and incomplete
door lock handling instructions for the door of the passenger cabin
doghouse, which contains emergency equipment intended to minimize the
effects of survivable accidents.
    The FAA is proposing this AD to address possible incorrect
operation of the doghouse door lock due to unclear and incomplete
handling instructions on the door placard installed near the lock. This
condition, if not addressed, could lead to failure of the latch, which
could block the door in the closed position and prevent access to the
emergency equipment inside the doghouse.
    See the MCAI for additional background information.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2021-0136 specifies procedures for replacing the
instruction placard on the passenger cabin doghouse door. EASA AD 2021-
0136 also prohibits the installation of doghouses with incorrect
instruction placards.
    This material 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

    These products have been approved by the aviation authority of
another country and are approved for operation in the United States.
Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with the State of Design
Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in
the MCAI referenced above. The FAA is issuing this NPRM after
determining that the unsafe condition described previously is likely to
exist or develop in other products of these same type designs.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in EASA AD 2021-0136 described previously, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA developed a process to use some civil aviation
authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance
with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been
coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result, the
FAA proposes to incorporate EASA AD 2021-0136 by reference in the FAA
final rule. This proposed AD would therefore require compliance with
EASA AD 2021-0136 in its entirety through that incorporation, except
for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of
this proposed AD. Using common terms that are the same as the heading
of a particular section in EASA AD 2021-0136 does not mean that
operators need comply only with that section. For example, where the AD
requirement refers to ``all required actions and compliance times,''
compliance with this AD requirement is not limited to the section
titled ``Required Action(s) and Compliance Time(s)'' in EASA AD 2021-
0136. Service information required by EASA AD 2021-0136 for compliance
will be available at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0845 after the FAA final rule is
published.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD would affect 62 airplanes
of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Labor cost                      Parts cost            Cost per product      Cost on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 work-hours x $85 per hour = $170...  Up to $95 per placard..  Up to $265 per placard.  Up to $16,430.*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Assuming one placard per product. The number of placards on an airplane depends on the passenger configuration
  and varies from operator to operator.

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:

Airbus SAS: Docket No. FAA-2021-0845; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-
00651-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by November 22, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Airbus SAS airplanes, certificated in any
category, as identified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (8) of this AD.
    (1) Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, and -243 airplanes.
    (2) Model A330-301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342,
and -343 airplanes.
    (3) Model A330-841 airplanes.
    (4) Model A330-941 airplanes.
    (5) Model A340-211, -212, and -213 airplanes.
    (6) Model A340-311, -312, and -313 airplanes.
    (7) Model A340-541 airplanes.
    (8) Model A340-642 airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 25, Equipment/
furnishings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports that the instructions on the
doghouse door lock placard are unclear and incomplete. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address possible incorrect operation of the
doghouse door lock due to unclear and incomplete handling
instructions on the door placard installed near the lock. This
condition, if not addressed, could lead to failure of the latch,
which could block the door in the closed position and prevent access
to the emergency equipment inside the doghouse.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2021-0136, dated June 4, 2021 (EASA AD 2021-0136).

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2021-0136

    (1) Where EASA AD 2021-0136 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Although EASA AD 2021-0136 specifies to ``remove the placard
and install an improved handling instructions placard on each
affected part,'' this AD requires replacing the placard on each
affected part with an improved handling instructions placard.
    (3) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2021-0136 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) Additional AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation 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 responsible Flight
Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to
the Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, send it
to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (j)(2) of
this AD. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, Large Aircraft
Section, International Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus
SAS's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the
DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by
paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, if any service information contains
procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those procedures and
tests must be done to comply with this AD; any procedures or tests
that are not identified as RC are recommended. Those procedures and
tests that are not identified as RC may be deviated from using
accepted methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or
inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided
the procedures and tests identified as RC can be done and the
airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition. Any
substitutions or changes to procedures or tests identified as RC
require approval of an AMOC.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For EASA AD 2021-0136, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this
EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may
view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section,
Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
206-231-3195. This material may be found in the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2021-0845.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Vladimir
Ulyanov, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, FAA,
International Validation Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines,
WA 98198; telephone and fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact EASA,
Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221
8999 000; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You
may find this material on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on September 30, 2021.
Ross Landes,
Deputy Director for Regulatory Operations, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-21832 Filed 10-6-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 166 (Tuesday, August 27, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44954-44957]
[FR Doc No: 2019-18380]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-86723; File No. SR-BOX-2019-24]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BOX Exchange LLC; Notice of Filing
of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 7600

August 21, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on August 19, 2019, BOX Exchange LLC (``BOX'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items
have been prepared by the self-regulatory organization. The Commission
is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7600 to extend split-price
functionality to Complex QOO Orders on the BOX Trading Floor. The text
of the proposed rule change is available from the principal office of
the Exchange, at the Commission's Public Reference Room and also on the
Exchange's internet website at http://boxoptions.com.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization
has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the
most significant aspects of such statements.

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

1. Purpose
    In March 2018, the Exchange adopted rules that allowed for split-
price transactions for Qualified Open Outcry (``QOO'') Orders on the
BOX Trading Floor.\3\ The Exchange now proposes to extend this
functionality to Complex QOO Orders on the BOX Trading Floor. The
Exchange believes the proposed change is reasonable as split-price
functionality applies to complex orders at another exchange with a
physical trading floor.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82891 (March 16,
2018), 83 FR 12627 (March 22, 2018)(Notice of Filing of Amendment
No. 1 and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule
Change, as Modified by Amendment No. 1, To Adopt Rule 7600(i) To
Allow Split-Price Transactions on the BOX Trading Floor)(``Approval
Order'').
    \4\ See Nasdaq PHLX LLC (``Phlx'') Floor Trading Rules Section
22(a)(2)(D)(ii). On Phlx, split price functionality for complex and
multi-leg orders are allowed on the trading floor, but due to Phlx
system limitations, require manual calculation. Under this proposal,
BOX is not requiring split price complex orders and multi-leg orders
to be manually calculated, as the BOX system has the functionality
to process these orders. Further, on Phlx, complex and multi-leg
orders that qualify for the exception in Phlx Section 22(a)(2)(D)
are afforded the priority provision in Phlx Floor Allocation Section
25(a)(2). The Exchange notes that this priority provision on Phlx is
similar to BOX's split price priority provision detailed in BOX Rule
7600(i)(2). As such, the Exchange believes that the proposed change
to expand split price priority to Complex QOO Orders and multi-leg
QOO Orders on the Exchange is appropriate as another options
exchange currently has a similar offering in place.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background
    The industry first recognized the complexity of the split-price
order in 2005 when Nasdaq Phlx, LLC (``Phlx'') filed to create an
exception from existing priority rules for spit-price orders.\5\ The
purpose behind the split-

price priority exception was ``to bring about the execution of large
orders, which by virtue of their size and the need to execute them at
multiple prices may be difficult to execute without a limited exception
to the priority rules.'' \6\ The proposed exception allows a
Participant effecting a trade that betters the market to have priority
on the balance of that trade at the next pricing increment, even if
there are orders in the book at the same price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51820 (June 10,
2005), 70 FR 35759 (June 21, 2005) (SR-Phlx-2005-028) (pilot
approval). See also Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55993 (June
29, 2007), 72 FR 37301 (July 9, 2007) (SR-Phlx-2007-044) (permanent
approval).
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 51820 (June 10,
2005), 70 FR 35759 (June 21, 2005) (SR-Phlx-2005-028).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BOX adopted rules for split-price transactions on the BOX Trading
Floor in March 2018.\7\ BOX's split-price priority rules are only
available for Qualified Open Outcry (``QOO'') Orders and are not
available for Complex Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82891 (March 18,
2018), 83 FR 12627 (March 22, 2018) (SR-BOX-2019-36).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposal
    The Exchange now proposes to extend the split-price priority
functionality to Complex QOO Orders \8\ on the BOX Trading Floor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The Exchange also proposes to extend split-price priority
functionality to multi-leg QOO Orders on the BOX Trading Floor.
Multi-leg QOO Orders are the same as Complex QOO Orders except for
the ratio restrictions. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
85052 (February 5, 2019), 84 FR 3265 (February 11, 2019) (SR-BOX-
2019-01).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BOX Rule 7600(i)(1) details current priority principles for single
leg split-price transactions of less than 100 contracts occurring in
open outcry on the Trading Floor. Generally, under BOX Rule 7600(i)(1),
if an order or offer (bid) for any number of contracts of a series is
represented to the trading crowd, a Floor Participant that buys (sells)
one or more contracts of that order or offer (bid) at one price will
have priority over all other orders and quotes, except Public Customer
Orders resting in the BOX Book, to buy (sell) up to the same number of
contracts of those remaining from the same order or offer (bid) at the
next lower (higher) price. The Exchange proposes to allow the above
priority principles for split-price transactions for Complex QOO Orders
and multi-leg QOO Orders with less than 100 contracts on the BOX
Trading Floor.
    Specifically, the Exchange proposes to add Rule 7600(i)(1)(i) which
states that if an order or offer (bid) for any number of units of a
Complex QOO Order or multi-leg QOO order is represented to the trading
crowd, a Floor Participant that buys (sells) one or more units of that
order or offer (bid) at one price will have priority over all other
orders and quotes, except Public Customer Orders resting in the BOX
Book or Complex Order Book, to buy (sell) up to the same number of
units of those remaining from the same order or offer (bid) at the next
lower (higher) price. The Exchange notes that the proposed language is
substantially similar to the current language of Rule 7600(i)(1),
except the proposed provision governs Complex QOO Orders and multi-leg
QOO orders of less than 100 units.
    The Exchange believes that the proposal to extend the split-price
priority detailed in Rule 7600(i)(1) to Complex QOO Orders and multi-
leg QOO orders of less than 100 units is reasonable and consistent with
the Act. As stated herein, the Commission has recognized the importance
of split-price trades because they permit the execution of large
blocks, even permitting a limited exception to priority rules. As such,
due to the nature and complexity of Complex QOO Order and multi-leg QOO
orders and the occasional need to execute these orders at sub-increment
prices, the Exchange believes that extending split-price functionality
to these orders is appropriate.
    For example, assume a Floor Broker is looking to execute a split
price Complex QOO Order at a price of 2.005 in strategy A+B for 50.
Assume a Floor Market Maker is willing to sell 25 units at $2.00
provided that he can also sell the remaining 25 units at $2.01. Under
the proposed change, that Floor Market Maker could offer $2.00 for 25
units and then, by virtue of the proposed split-price priority, he will
have priority for the balance of the order (up to 25 units) over all
other Participants, except Public Customer Orders resting on the BOX
Book or Complex Order Book. The Floor Broker will enter strategy A+B
for 50 at a price of $2.005. The system will then split the QOO Order.
The first transaction will be for 25 units at $2.00. The second
transaction will be for 25 units at $2.01, the next best price for the
Floor Broker [sic] customer. The Floor Market Maker (i.e., the contra-
side of the QOO Order) would have priority over all other Participants
to sell the 25 contracts at $2.01, except Public Customer Orders
resting on the BOX Book or Complex Order Book. The Floor Broker's
customer will receive a net purchase price of $2.005 for 50
contracts,\9\ which is the price that the Floor Broker entered when
submitting the QOO Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Floor Broker's customer would receive 25 contracts at
$1.00 and 25 contracts at $1.01. The net price that the customer
paid for the contracts would be $2.005 ((25 * $2.00 + 25 * $2.01)/
50)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Rule 7600(i)(3) details split-price priority for Complex
QOO Orders or offers (bids) and multi-leg QOO Orders or offers (bids)
of 100 or more units. If an order or offer (bid) of 100 or more units
of a Complex QOO Order or multi-leg QOO Order is represented to the
trading crowd, a Floor Participant that buys (sells) 50 or more of the
units of that Complex QOO Order or offer (bid) or multi-leg QOO Order
of offer (bid) at one price will have priority over all other orders
and quotes to buy (sell) up to the same number of units of those
remaining from the same order or offer (bid) at the next lower (higher)
price. The incoming Complex QOO Order or multi-leg QOO order will have
priority over all orders and quotes on the BOX Book and Complex Order
Book.
    In order for a Floor Participant to avail himself to split-price
priority pursuant to BOX Rule 7600(i)(3) for Complex QOO Orders or
multi-leg QOO Orders, there are certain requirements. First, the
priority is available for open outcry transactions only (i.e., QOO
Orders). The Floor Participant must make its bid (offer) at the next
lower (higher) price for the second (or later) transaction at the same
time as the first bid (offer) or promptly following the announcement of
the first (or earlier) transaction. The second (or later) purchase
(sale) must represent the opposite side of a transaction with the same
order or offer (bid) as the first (or earlier) purchase (sale).
    For example, assume a Floor Broker is looking to execute a split
price Complex QOO Order at a price of 2.005 in strategy A+B for 100.
Assume there is a resting Public Customer order to buy leg A at 1.00
and a resting Public Customer order to sell leg A at 1.01. Leg B has a
resting Public Customer Order to buy at 1.00 and no resting orders to
sell Leg B. The order would be split into 50 A+B at 2.01 and 50 A+B at
2.00 for a net price of 2.005 for the strategy. The strategy order for
50 A+B at 2.00 is permitted because the order is for at least 100
contracts, and the Floor Broker executed 50 contracts at the first
price (i.e., 2.01) giving the Floor Broker priority at the second price
(i.e., 2.00). The following executions would be reported: 50 Leg A at
1.00, 50 Leg A at 1.00, 50 Leg B at 1.00, and 50 Leg B at 1.01.
    The Exchange further proposes that if the width of the quote is
$0.01, and both the bid and offer represent Public Customer Orders
resting in the BOX Book and/or Complex Order Book, split-price priority
pursuant to proposed Rule 7600(i)(3) is not available to a Floor

Participant until the Public Customer Order(s) resting in the BOX Book
and/or Complex Order Book on either side of the market trades.\10\ This
exception is consistent with the Exchange's allocation and priority
rules, which provide for Public Customer Orders to have priority at the
best price in open outcry over QOO Orders.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See proposed Rule 7600(i)(3)(i).
    \11\ See Rule 7600 (c) and (d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For example, assume a Floor Broker is looking to execute a split
price Complex QOO Order at a price of 2.013 in strategy A+B for 100.
Assume there is a resting Market Maker order to buy A+B at 2.01 for 50
and a resting Public Customer order to buy A+B at 2.01 for 40 resting
behind it. Assume there is a resting Public Customer Order to sell at
2.02 for 1. The order would be split into 70 A+B at 2.01 and 30 A+B at
2.02 for a net price of 2.013 for the strategy. Further, assume the
Floor Broker provides a book sweep size \12\ of 100 contracts. Because
the initiating side's quantity (30) is smaller than the required 50
contracts pursuant to proposed rule 7600(i)(3), the initiating side
does not have priority over Public Customer orders on the BOX Book (the
initiating side does, however, have priority over non-Public Customer
orders on the BOX Book pursuant to BOX Rule 7600(i)(1)). As such, the
initiating side would sweep the Public Customer order on the BOX Book
up to the quantity of their first price (30) at $2.01. The initiating
side would then sweep the remaining 40 Market Maker contracts on the
BOX Book at $2.01. Because there are remaining Public Customer orders
on both sides of the bid and offer for the strategy, the Complex QOO
Order is rejected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The book sweep size is the number of contracts, if any, of
the initiating side of the QOO Order that the Floor Broker is
willing to relinquish to orders and quotes on the BOX Book that have
priority pursuant to Rule 7600(d)(1) and (2). If the number of
contracts on the BOX Book that have priority over the contra-side
order is greater than the book sweep size, then the QOO Order will
be rejected. If the number of contracts on the BOX Book that have
priority over the contra-side order is less than or equal to the
book sweep size, then the QOO Order will execute. See BOX Rule
7600(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes that if the width of the quote for a
series is $0.01, and both the bid and offer represent Implied Orders on
both sides of the BOX BBO, split-price priority pursuant to this rule
is not available until the Implied Orders on either side of the market
trades.
    For example, assume a Floor Broker is looking to execute a split
price Complex QOO Order at a price of 2.005 in strategy A+B for 100.
Assume there is a resting Public Customer order to buy leg A at 1.00
and a resting Public Customer order to sell leg A at 1.01. Leg B has a
resting Public Customer Order to buy at 1.00 and a resting Market Maker
Order to sell leg B at 1.01. The order would be split into 50 A+B at
2.01 and 50 A+B at 2.00 for a net price of 2.005 for the strategy. The
strategy order for 50 A+B at 2.00 is not permitted because there is an
Implied Order to buy A+B at 2.00. Additionally, a strategy order for 50
A+B at 2.01 would also not be permitted because of the Implied Order to
sell A+B at 2.01. Therefore, the system will reject the Complex QOO
Order entered at 2.005.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \13\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \14\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest. In particular, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change
is appropriate as split-price functionality exists on another options
exchange with a physical trading floor.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \15\ See supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that allowing split-price priority pursuant
to BOX Rule 7600(i)(1)(i) and BOX Rule 7600(i)(3) is reasonable and
appropriate as the proposal is similar in operation to the current
Complex Order priority exception \16\ under the Exchange rules. This
exception (which is established in the rules of many options exchanges)
was intended to facilitate the trade of complex orders, which by virtue
of their multi-legged composition could be more difficult to trade
without a limited exception to the priority rule for one of the legs.
The purpose behind the proposed split price priority for Complex QOO
Orders and multi-leg QOO Orders is the same--to facilitate the
execution of large orders, which by virtue of their size, multi-legged
composition and the need to execute them at multiple prices may be
difficult to execute without a limited exception to the priority rules.
The proposed extension of the split-price priority rule to Complex QOO
Orders and multi-leg QOO Orders will operate in the same manner as the
complex order exception by allowing a Participant effecting a trade
that betters the market to have priority on the balance of that trade
at the next pricing increment even if there are orders in the book at
the same price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See BOX Rule 7240(b)(2). A Complex Order may be executed at
a net credit or debit price with one other Participant; provided,
however, that the price of at least one leg of the Complex Order
must trade at a price that is better than the corresponding bid or
offer in the market place by at least one minimum trading increment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed change is designed to induce Floor Participants to bid
(offer) at better prices for an order or offer (bid) that may require
execution at multiple prices (such as larger complex orders), which
will result in a better average price for the originating Floor
Participant (or its customer).
    The Exchange believes that the proposal should lead to more
aggressive quoting of Complex QOO Orders and multi-leg QOO Orders by
Floor Participants, which in turn could lead to better executions for
market participants. A Floor Participant might be willing to trade at a
better price for a portion of a Complex QOO Order or multi-leg QOO
Order if he were assured of trading with the balance of the order at
the next pricing increment. As a result, Floor Brokers representing
Complex QOO Orders or multi-leg QOO Orders in the trading crowd might
receive better-priced executions. As such, the Exchange believes that
the proposed rule change will encourage Participants on BOX's Trading
Floor to bid or offer better prices, thus creating more opportunities
for price improvement, which ultimately enhances competition.
    Lastly, as discussed above, the Exchange notes that the proposed
change is similar to functionality that exists at another options
exchange with an open outcry trading floor.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes that the
proposal will allow it to compete with other floor-based exchanges and
help the Exchange's Floor Brokers compete with floor brokers on other
options exchanges by accommodating another type of complicated order.
Further, the Exchange believes that the proposed changes will not
impose any burden on intramarket competition as the proposed
functionality is available to all Floor Participants who wish to
execute a split price Complex QOO Order or multi-leg QOO Order on the
BOX Trading Floor.

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-BOX-2019-24 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BOX-2019-24. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-BOX-2019-24 and should be submitted on
or before September 17, 2019.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-18380 Filed 8-26-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 75 (Monday, April 20, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21645-21649]
[FR Doc No: 2015-08407]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0475; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-199-AD;
Amendment 39-18137; AD 2015-08-01]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
The Boeing Company Model 757-200, -200PF, -200CB, and -300 series
airplanes. This AD was prompted by numerous reports of unintended
lateral oscillations during final approach, just before landing. This
AD requires, depending on airplane configuration, installing new relays
and bracket assemblies, inspecting to ensure that the new relays do not
contact adjacent wire bundles, torquing the bracket assembly
installation nuts and ground stud nuts, doing bond resistance tests
between the bracket assemblies and the terminal lugs on the ground
studs, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary.
We are issuing this AD to reduce the chance of unintended lateral
oscillations near touchdown, which could result in loss of lateral
control of the airplane, and consequent airplane damage or injury to
flightcrew and passengers.

DATES: This AD is effective May 26, 2015.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of May 26, 2015.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.
O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
You may view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,

Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA 2011-
0475.

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-2011-
0475; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-
5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Palmer, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130L, Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA
90712-4137; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to
amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain The
Boeing Company Model 757-200, -200PF, -200CB, and -300 series
airplanes. The SNPRM published in the Federal Register on July 1, 2014
(79 FR 37239). We preceded the SNPRM with a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) that published in the Federal Register on May 24,
2011 (76 FR 30043). The NPRM proposed to require, for certain
airplanes, installing new relays adjacent to two of the spoiler control
modules. For certain other airplanes, the NPRM proposed to require
torquing the bracket assembly installation nuts and ground stud nuts,
and doing bond resistance tests between the bracket assemblies and the
terminal lugs on the ground studs. The NPRM was prompted by numerous
reports of unintended lateral oscillations during final approach, just
before landing. In addition to the actions proposed in the NPRM, the
SNPRM proposed to require installing three new relays on the opposite
side of the same relay bracket assembly; and for certain airplanes,
doing an additional inspection to ensure that the three new relays do
not contact adjacent wire bundles, and related investigative and
corrective actions if necessary. We are issuing this AD to reduce the
chance of unintended lateral oscillations near touchdown, which could
result in loss of lateral control of the airplane, and consequent
airplane damage or injury to flightcrew and passengers.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the SNPRM (79
FR 37239, July 1, 2014) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Support for the SNPRM (79 FR 37239, July 1, 2014)

    American Airlines (AAL) stated that it agrees with the intent of
the SNPRM (79 FR 37239, July 1, 2014). Boeing stated that it agrees
with the NPRM (76 FR 30043, May 24, 2011). We infer that Boeing's
comment refers to the SNPRM.

Request To Withdraw the SNPRM (79 FR 37239, July 1, 2014)

    United Airlines (United Engineering) requested data to justify the
release of a new AD. United Engineering stated that it has not received
any reports of pilot-induced oscillations since implementation of AD
2006-23-15, Amendment 39-14827 (71 FR 66657, November 16, 2006). United
Engineering stated that AD 2006-23-15 requires, among other actions,
installing a control wheel damper assembly and vortex generators
(vortilons) on the leading edge of the outboard main flap. United
Engineering also stated that the required work is extensive and that
the impact to operations and the cost of this modification is
considerable.
    From these statements, we infer that United Engineering requested
we withdraw the SNPRM (79 FR 37239, July 1, 2014). We do not agree with
the commenter's request to withdraw the SNPRM. AD 2006-23-15, Amendment
39-14827 (71 FR 66657, November 16, 2006), was considered interim
action. To effectively manage the risk, the FAA determined an interim
action needed to be mandated to reduce the risk, while a solution that
fully addresses the unsafe condition was identified and could be
implemented.
    The manufacturer has identified an additional modification that is
needed to correct the unsafe condition identified in AD 2006-23-15. We
have determined that this design change not only corrects the unsafe
condition by removing excessive airplane roll authority during landing,
but it will also improve safety by making the Model 757 handling
characteristics more consistent with the other Boeing airplane models.
Also, even though there have only been 12 reports of unintended lateral
oscillations near touchdown, the FAA considers it likely that there may
have been other events that have been unrecognized and/or unreported.
    Finally, in developing the compliance time for this AD, we did
consider not only the safety implications of the identified unsafe
condition, but also the practical aspects of an orderly modification of
the fleet including the work required and the impact on operations. We
have determined that it is necessary to proceed with this AD action.

Request To Delay Final Rule Pending Revised Service Information

    AAL requested that we delay this final rule until Boeing releases
Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 4. AAL noted that Boeing
intended to release Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 4,
which would address its concerns regarding certain procedures and
figures in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 1, Dated June
30, 2010.
    Since the issuance of the SNPRM (79 FR 37239, July 1, 2014), Boeing
has issued Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 4, dated August 26,
2014. We have revised this AD to incorporate Boeing Service Bulletin
757-27A0152, Revision 4, dated August 26, 2014, as an appropriate
source of service information for accomplishing the actions required by
this AD. This service bulletin includes a change to a footnote listed
in Figures 15, 16, 17, 19, and 21; this footnote addresses AAL's
concerns regarding certain procedures and figures in Boeing Service
Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 1, dated June 30, 2010. Boeing Service
Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 4, dated August 26, 2014, states that no
more work is necessary on airplanes changed in accordance with Boeing
Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 2, dated May 25, 2012; or Boeing
Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013.
    We have changed paragraphs (c) and (g) of this AD to reference
Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28,
2013, as revised by Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 4,
dated August 26, 2014.

Effect of Winglets on AD

    Aviation Partners Boeing stated that the installation of winglets
per Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)

ST01518SE (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/
rgstc.nsf/0/312bc296830a925c86257c85006d1b1f/$FILE/ST01518SE.pdf) does
not affect the accomplishment of the manufacturer's service
instructions. No change is necessary to this AD in this regard.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated
October 28, 2013, which describes procedures for installing new relays;
inspecting to ensure that the new relays do not contact adjacent wire
bundles, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary;
torquing the bracket assembly installation nuts and ground stud nuts;
and doing bond resistance tests between the bracket assemblies and the
terminal lugs on the ground studs.
    We have also reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision
4, dated August 26, 2014, which provides some revised text in footnotes
of certain figures.
    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 of this
AD.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described and minor editorial changes. We have
determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
SNPRM (79 FR 37239, July 1, 2014) for correcting the unsafe condition;
and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the SNPRM (79 FR 37239, July 1, 2014).
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 676 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
             Action                      Labor cost         Parts cost    Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Installation Group 1,             36 work-hours x $85 per       $4,691  $7,751.............  $372,048.
 Configuration 1 (48 airplanes).   hour = $3,060.
Installation Group 2,             33 work-hours x $85 per        4,610  7,415..............  4,360,020.
 Configuration 1 (588 airplanes).  hour = $2,805.
Installation Group 3,             33 work-hours x $85 per        4,619  7,424..............  89,088.
 Configuration 1 (12 airplanes).   hour = $2,805.
Installation Group 4,             33 work-hours x $85 per        4,610  7,415..............  177,960.
 Configuration 1 (24 airplanes).   hour = $2,805.
Installation Group 5,             36 work-hours x $85 per        4,701  7,761..............  31,044.
 Configuration 1 (4 airplanes).    hour = $3,060.
Torque Bracket Assembly and Bond  12 work-hours x $85 per            0  Up to $1,020.......  Up to $689,520.
 Tests Groups 1-5, Configuration   hour = $1,020.
 2 (Up to 676 airplanes).
General Visual Inspection Groups  7 work-hours x $85 per             0  Up to $595.........  Up to $402,220.
 1-5, Configuration 3 (Up to 676   hour = $595.
 airplanes).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary repairs that
would be required based on the results of the inspection. We have no
way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these
repairs:

                           On-Condition Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Cost per
            Action                 Labor cost     Parts cost    product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjust Wire Bundle and Install  1 work-hour x             $0         $85
 Sleeve, Group 1-5,              $85 per hour =
 Configuration 1.                $85.
Inspection, Repair, and         1 work-hour x              0          85
 Installation Change, Group 1-   $85 per hour =
 5, Configuration 2.             $85.
Inspection, Repair,             5 work-hours x             0         425
 Installation Change, and        $85 per hour =
 Test, Group 1-5,                $425.
 Configuration 3.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2015-08-01 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-18137; Docket No. FAA-
2011-0475; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-199-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective May 26, 2015.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 757-200, -200PF, -
200CB, and -300 series airplanes; certificated in any category; as
identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated
October 28, 2013, as revised by Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152,
Revision 4, dated August 26, 2014.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by numerous reports of unintended lateral
oscillations during the final approach, just before landing. We are
issuing this AD to reduce the chance of unintended lateral
oscillations near touchdown, which could result in loss of lateral
control of the airplane, and consequent airplane damage or injury to
flightcrew and passengers.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Installation and Inspection

    Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD, do the
applicable actions specified in paragraph (g)(1), (g)(2), or (g)(3)
of this AD.
    (1) For Configuration 1 airplanes defined in Boeing Service
Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013, as revised
by Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 4, dated August 26,
2014: Install three bracket assemblies and three new relays, and
make changes to the wire bundles, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152,
Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013, as revised by Boeing Service
Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 4, dated August 26, 2014.
    (2) For Configuration 2 airplanes defined in Boeing Service
Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013, as revised
by Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 4, dated August 26,
2014: Torque the bracket assembly nuts and ground stud nuts, do bond
resistance tests to verify that bonding requirements are met, do a
general visual inspection to ensure that the three new relays do not
touch the adjacent wire bundles, and do all applicable related
investigative and corrective actions, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152,
Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013, as revised by Boeing Service
Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 4, dated August 26, 2014. Do all
applicable related investigative and corrective actions before
further flight.
    (3) For Configuration 3 airplanes defined in Boeing Service
Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013, as revised
by Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 4, dated August 26,
2014: Do a general visual inspection to ensure that the three new
relays do not touch the adjacent wire bundles, and do all applicable
related investigative and corrective actions, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152,
Revision 3, dated October 28, 2013, as revised by Boeing Service
Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 4, dated August 26, 2014. Do all
applicable related investigative and corrective actions before
further flight.

(h) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph
(g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective
date of this AD using Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision
2, dated May 25, 2012 (which is not incorporated by reference in
this AD); or Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated
October 28, 2013.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance
with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or
local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to
make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair
must meet the certification basis of the airplane and the approval
must specifically refer to this AD.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Jeffrey Palmer,
Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130L, Los
Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, 3960 Paramount
Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 562-
627-5210; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (k)(3) and (k)(4) of this AD.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 3, dated
October 28, 2013.
    (ii) Boeing Service Bulletin 757-27A0152, Revision 4, dated
August 26, 2014.
    (3) For Boeing service information identified in this AD,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, P. O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 3, 2015.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-08407 Filed 4-17-15; 08:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P