Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 14 / Monday, January 23, 2012 / Proposed Rules 3189 

(2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

767–53A0228, dated July 28, 2011, specifies 

that the sequence of steps to do the actions 

can be changed, this AD does not allow the 

sequence of steps to be changed. 

(3) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

767–53A0228, dated July 28, 2011, specifies 

a compliance time ‘‘after the original issue 

date of this service bulletin,’’ this AD 

requires compliance within the specified 

compliance time ‘‘after the effective date of 

this AD.’’ 

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested using the procedures found in 14 

CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, 

send your request to your principal inspector 

or local Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the manager of the ACO, send it to the 

attention of the person identified in the 

Related Information section of this AD. 

Information may be e-mailed to: 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov. 

(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, Seattle ACO 

to make those findings. For a repair method 

to be approved, the repair must meet the 

certification basis of the airplane and 14 CFR 

25.571, Amendment 45, and the approval 

must specifically refer to this AD. 

(j) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Berhane Alazar, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057– 

3356; phone: (425) 917–6577; fax: (425) 917– 

6590; e-mail: berhane.alazar@faa.gov. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 

Management, P. O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, 

Seattle, Washington 98124–2207; telephone 

(206) 544–5000, extension 1; fax (206) 766– 

5680; email me.boecom@boeing.com; Internet 

https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may 

review copies of the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

(425) 227–1221. 

Issued in Renton, Washington on January 

13, 2012. 

John Piccola, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–1202 Filed 1–20–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–0036; Directorate 

Identifier 2011–NM–142–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, 

Inc. 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 

Bombardier, Inc. Model DHC–8–400 

series airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by test reports showing that 

failure of a retract port flexible hose of 

a main landing gear (MLG) retraction 

actuator could cause excessive 

hydraulic fluid leakage. This proposed 

AD would require a detailed inspection 

for defects and damage of the retract 

port flexible hose on the left and right 

MLG retraction actuator, and 

replacement of the flexible hose if 

needed. We are proposing this AD to 

detect and correct defects and damage of 

the retract port flexible hose which 

could lead to an undamped extension of 

the MLG and could result in MLG 

structural failure, leading to an unsafe 

asymmetric landing configuration. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by March 8, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Bombardier, 

Inc., Q–Series Technical Help Desk, 123 

Garratt Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario 

M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone (416) 375– 

4000; fax (416) 375–4539; email 

thd.qseries@aero.bombardier.com; 

Internet http://www.bombardier.com. 

You may review copies of the 

referenced service information at the 

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, 

call (425) 227–1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Operations 

office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is in 

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Cesar Gomez, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe and Mechanical Systems 

Branch, ANE–171, FAA, New York 

Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 

Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, 

New York 11590; telephone (516) 228– 

7318; fax (516) 794–5531. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2012–0036; Directorate Identifier 

2011–NM–142–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD 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 proposed AD. 

Discussion 

Transport Canada Civil Aviation 

(TCCA), which is the aviation authority 

for Canada, has issued Canadian 

Airworthiness Directive CF–2011–14, 

dated June 17, 2011 (referred to after 

this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe 

condition for the specified products. 

The MCAI states: 

Testing has shown that in the event of a 

main landing gear (MLG) retraction actuator 

retract port flexible hose failure, in-flight 

vibrations may cause excessive hydraulic 

fluid leakage. This could potentially lead to 

an undamped extension of the MLG, which 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
3190 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 14 / Monday, January 23, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

may result in MLG structural failure, leading 

to an unsafe asymmetric landing 

configuration. 

This [TCCA] directive mandates the 

[detailed] inspection of the retract port 

flexible hose [for defects and damage] and its 

replacement [installing a new retract port 

flexible hose], when required, to prevent 

damage to the MLG caused by undamped 

gear extensions. 

You may obtain further information 

by examining the MCAI in the AD 

docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

Bombardier, Inc. has issued Service 

Bulletin 84–32–89, dated March 22, 

2011. The actions described in this 

service information are intended to 

correct the unsafe condition identified 

in the MCAI. 

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 the same 

type design. 

Costs of Compliance 

Based on the service information, we 

estimate that this proposed AD would 

affect about 81 products of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it would take 

about 1 work-hour per product to 

comply with the basic requirements of 

this proposed AD. The average labor 

rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on 

these figures, we estimate the cost of the 

proposed AD on U.S. operators to be 

$6,885, or $85 per product. 

In addition, we estimate that any 

necessary follow-on actions would take 

about 4 work-hours and require parts 

costing $0, for a cost of $340 per 

product. We have no way of 

determining the number of products 

that may need these actions. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this proposed regulation: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 

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. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD and placed it in the 

AD docket. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new AD: 

Bombardier, Inc.: Docket No. FAA–2012– 

0036; Directorate Identifier 2011–NM– 

142–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by March 8, 

2012. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. Model 

DHC–8–400, -401, and -402 airplanes; 

certificated in any category; serial numbers 

4001 and subsequent. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 32: Landing Gear. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by test reports 

showing that failure of a retract port flexible 

hose of a main landing gear (MLG) retraction 

actuator could cause excessive hydraulic 

fluid leakage. We are issuing this AD to 

detect and correct defects and damage of the 

retract port flexible hose which could lead to 

an undamped extension of the MLG and 

could result in MLG structural failure, 

leading to an unsafe asymmetric landing 

configuration. 

(f) Compliance 

You are responsible for having the actions 

required by this AD performed within the 

compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

(g) Actions 

Within 600 flight hours after the effective 

date of this AD, do a detailed inspection for 

defects and damage of the retract port flexible 

hose of the left and right MLG retraction 

actuators, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier 

Service Bulletin 84–32–89, dated March 22, 

2011. Repeat the inspection thereafter at 

intervals not to exceed 600 flight hours. If 

any defect or damage is found, before further 

flight, replace the retract port flexible hose 

with a new or serviceable retract port flexible 

hose in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier 

Service Bulletin 84–32–89, dated March 22, 

2011. 

(h) Other FAA AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, New York Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), ANE–170, FAA, 

has the authority to approve AMOCs for this 

AD, if requested using the procedures found 

in 14 CFR 39.19. 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 ACO, send it to Attn: Program 

Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, 

FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart Avenue, 

Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; 

telephone (516) 228–7300; fax (516) 794– 

5531. 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. The AMOC 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 14 / Monday, January 23, 2012 / Proposed Rules 3191 

1See, e.g., 74 FR 1828 (Jan. 13, 2009). 

approval letter must specifically reference 

this AD. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(i) Related Information 

Refer to MCAI Canadian Airworthiness 

Directive CF–2011–14, dated June 17, 2011; 

and Bombardier Service Bulletin 84–32–89, 

dated March 22, 2011; for related 

information. 

Issued in Renton, Washington on January 

13, 2012. 

John Piccola, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–1210 Filed 1–20–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

16 CFR Parts 2 and 4 

Rules of Practice 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘FTC’’). 

ACTION: Proposed rule amendments; 

request for public comment. 

SUMMARY: The FTC is proposing to 

amend parts of its regulations. The 

proposed amendments would make 

changes to the FTC’s investigatory 

procedures in the interest of fairness, 

efficiency, and openness in all FTC 

investigations. The amendments would 

also revise the Commission’s rules 

governing reprimand, suspension, and 

disbarment of attorneys practicing 

before the Commission. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before March 23, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may file a 

comment online or on paper, by 

following the instructions in the 

Request for Comment part (subsection 

III) of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section below. Write ‘‘Parts 2 and 4 

Rules of Practice Rulemaking (16 CFR 

Parts 2 and 4) (Project No. P112103)’’ on 

your comment, and file your comment 

online at https:// 

ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ 

rulespart2and4.1nprm, by following the 

instructions on the Web-based form. If 

you prefer to file your comment on 

paper, mail or deliver your comment to 

the following address: Federal Trade 

Commission, Office of the Secretary, 

Room H–113 (Annex Y), 600 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20580. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information on the proposed 

revisions to the investigatory 

procedures, contact Lisa M. Harrison, 

Assistant General Counsel, (202) 326– 

3204, or W. Ashley Gum, Attorney, 

(202) 326–3006, Office of the General 

Counsel, Federal Trade Commission, 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20580. For information 

on the proposed revisions to the rule 

governing attorney discipline, contact 

Peter J. Levitas, Deputy Director, Bureau 

of Competition, (202) 326–2030, Federal 

Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

discussion contains the following 

sections: 

I. Introduction 

II. Section-by-Section Analysis of Proposed 

Rule Revisions 

III. Invitation To Comment 

IV. Proposed Rule Revisions 

I. Introduction 

1. Need for Reform of the Commission’s 

Investigatory Process 

The Commission has periodically 

examined and revised its Rules of 

Practice in the interest of clarifying the 

Rules and making the Commission’s 

procedures more efficient and less 

burdensome for all parties.1 Especially 

in response to growing reliance upon 

and use of electronic media in 

document discovery, the Commission 

has reviewed its current rules governing 

the process of nonadjudicative 

investigations (‘‘Part 2 Rules’’). 

Document discovery today is 

markedly different than it was only a 

decade ago. The growing prevalence of 

business files in electronic form—email, 

voicemail, text messages, blogs, word 

processing documents, PowerPoint 

presentations, videos, spreadsheets, and 

data files—has changed document 

discovery in several ways. First, 

information is no longer accurately 

measured in pages, but instead in 

megabytes, gigabytes, terabytes, and 

more. Second, because electronically 

stored information (‘‘ESI’’) is widely 

dispersed throughout organizations, 

parties can no longer complete searches 

by merely looking in file cabinets and 

desk drawers. While searchers must still 

reach into file cabinets and desk 

drawers, they must also—and 

primarily—seek and retrieve 

information from mainframe computers, 

shared servers, computers, cell phones, 

smart phones, portable devices, and 

other media, as well as from third-party 

service providers. Third, because ESI is 

broadly dispersed and not always 

consistently organized by its custodians, 

searches, identification, and collection 

all require special skills and, if done 

properly, may utilize one or more search 

tools such as advanced key word 

searches, Boolean connectors, Bayesian 

logic, concept searches, predictive 

coding, and other advanced analytics. 

Fourth, because ESI may be readily 

altered, it must be preserved early in 

any discovery process—or even before 

discovery, when litigation is 

anticipated—and handled carefully at 

all stages to preserve its accuracy, 

authenticity, and ultimate admissibility. 

Fifth, even when investigations are 

conducted cooperatively, and are both 

well organized and well managed, there 

remains a substantial risk that mistakes 

and delays will occur as the responding 

party collects responsive materials, 

analyzes them for relevance and 

privilege, and prepares them for 

production. 

The need to reform Part 2 Rules is 

also based in part on concerns that 

modern document discovery and its 

attendant complexities have become a 

source of delay in the Commission’s 

securing the information it needs to 

complete its investigations. Thus, the 

Commission views its reexamination of 

the rules as an opportunity not only to 

account for the widespread use of ESI, 

but also to improve the efficiency of 

investigations, and the willingness of 

targets and third parties to cooperate. 

2. Overview of Proposed Rule Revisions 

The proposed changes to the Part 2 

Rules would expedite Commission 

investigations by: (1) Conditioning any 

extensions of time to comply with 

Commission processes on a party’s 

continued progress in achieving 

compliance; (2) conditioning the filing 

of any petition to quash or limit 

Commission process on a party having 

engaged in meaningful ‘‘meet and 

confer’’ sessions with Commission staff; 

and (3) removing the two-step process 

for resolving petitions to quash and 

establishing tighter deadlines for the 

Commission to rule on petitions. 

The proposed revisions are also 

intended to streamline the rules and add 

structure to the agency’s investigatory 

process by consolidating related 

provisions that are currently scattered 

throughout Part 2. The rules also update 

investigatory practices, especially in 

light of the ubiquity of ESI, by including 

express references to ESI in the rules. 

Finally, they facilitate the enforcement 

of Commission compulsory process by 

clarifying the rights and obligations both 

of agency staff and compulsory process 

recipients. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS