Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 242 / Wednesday, December 16, 2020 / Proposed Rules 81427 

would provide enough funds for the 

Board’s administrative obligations and 

decrease the funding for research and 

promotion activities to reflect the 

significant reduction in the 2020–21 

crop. 

Prior to arriving at this budget and 

assessment rate, the Board considered 

production history, crop estimates, its 

financial statements, and the need to 

meet its administrative obligations and 

maintain some marketing efforts to 

increase demand for tart cherries. The 

Board discussed alternatives, including 

raising the assessment rate and 

borrowing funds; however, they were 

rejected due to the burden of increasing 

assessments on handlers and the cost of 

debt due to financing. The Board 

determined that 2020–21 expenditures 

of $795,000 were appropriate, and the 

recommended assessment rate and 

allocation, along with funds from 

interest income, and funds from 

reserves, would be adequate to cover the 

budgeted expenses. 

A review of historical information and 

preliminary information pertaining to 

the upcoming fiscal year indicates that 

the average grower price for the 2020– 

21 season should be approximately 

$0.19 per pound of tart cherries. 

According to NASS statistics, this price 

is the average of the past three years. 

Therefore, the estimated assessment 

revenue for the 2020–21 crop year as a 

percentage of total grower revenue 

would be approximately 3.0 percent. 

This proposed rule would not 

increase the assessment obligation 

imposed on handlers. Assessments are 

applied uniformly on all handlers, and 

some of the costs may be passed on to 

producers. However, these costs would 

be offset by the benefits derived by the 

operation of the marketing order. 

The Board’s meeting was widely 

publicized throughout the tart cherry 

industry. All interested persons were 

invited to attend the meeting and 

participate in Board deliberations on all 

issues. Like all Board meetings, the 

September 10, 2020, meeting was a 

public meeting, and all entities, both 

large and small, were able to express 

views on this issue. Finally, interested 

persons are invited to submit comments 

on this proposed rule, including the 

regulatory and informational impacts of 

this action on small businesses. 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 

Chapter 35), the Order’s information 

collection requirements have been 

previously approved by the OMB and 

assigned OMB No. 0581–0177, Tart 

Cherries Grown in the States of 

Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, 

Oregon, Utah, Washington, and 

Wisconsin. No changes in those 

requirements would be necessary as a 

result of this proposed rule. Should any 

changes become necessary, they would 

be submitted to OMB for approval. 

This proposed rule would not impose 

any additional reporting or 

recordkeeping requirements on either 

small or large tart cherry handlers. As 

with all Federal marketing order 

programs, reports and forms are 

periodically reviewed to reduce 

information requirements and 

duplication by industry and public 

sector agencies. 

AMS is committed to complying with 

the E-Government Act, to promote the 

use of the internet and other 

information technologies to provide 

increased opportunities for citizen 

access to Government information and 

services, and for other purposes. 

USDA has not identified any relevant 

Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with this proposed rule. 

A small business guide on complying 

with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop 

marketing agreements and orders may 

be viewed at: https://

www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/ 

moa/small-businesses. Any questions 

about the compliance guide should be 

sent to Richard Lower at the previously 

mentioned address in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

A 30-day comment period is provided 

to allow interested persons to respond 

to this proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 930 

Marketing agreements, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Tart 

cherries. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 930 is proposed to 

be amended as follows: 

PART 930—TART CHERRIES GROWN 

IN THE STATES OF MICHIGAN, NEW 

YORK, PENNSYLVANIA, OREGON, 

UTAH, WASHINGTON, AND 

WISCONSIN 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 930 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

■ 2. Section 930.200 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 930.200 Assessment rate. 

On and after October 1, 2020, the 

assessment rate imposed on handlers 

shall be $0.00575 per pound of tart 

cherries grown in the production area 

and utilized in the production of tart 

cherry products. Included in this rate is 

$0.00275 per pound of tart cherries to 

cover the cost of the research and 

promotion program and $0.003 per 

pound of tart cherries to cover 

administrative expenses. 

Bruce Summers, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2020–27563 Filed 12–15–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2020–1132; Project 

Identifier MCAI–2020–01386–R] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus 

Helicopters 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to 

supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 

2018–15–02, which applies to certain 

Airbus Helicopters Model AS350B, 

AS350B1, AS350B2, AS350B3, 

AS350BA, AS355E, AS355F, AS355F1, 

AS355F2, AS355N, and AS355NP 

helicopters. AD 2018–15–02 requires 

repetitively inspecting the tail rotor (TR) 

pitch rod for a damaged elastomeric ball 

joint, and corrective action if necessary. 

Since the FAA issued AD 2018–15–02, 

the FAA determined that the 

manufacturer had developed improved 

inspection procedures and identified 

conditions that would allow the 

repetitive inspection intervals specified 

in AD 2018–15–02 to be extended to 

correspond with the intervals for the 

inspection of the TR pitch rod specified 

in the airworthiness limitation section 

of the applicable helicopter 

maintenance manual. This proposed AD 

would retain the requirements of AD 

2018–15–02 and allow the repetitive 

inspection interval to be extended under 

certain conditions, as specified in a 

European Union Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA) AD, which is proposed for 

incorporation by reference. 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 February 1, 

2021. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
81428 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 242 / Wednesday, December 16, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

https://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: 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 

the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 

50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 

221 89990 000; email ADs@

easa.europa.eu; internet 

www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this 

IBR material on the EASA website at 

https://ad.easa.europa.eu.You may view 

this IBR material at the FAA, Office of 

the Regional Counsel, Southwest 

Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 

6N–321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 817–222–5110. 

It is also available in the AD docket on 

the internet at https://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2020– 

1132. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the internet at https://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2020– 

1132; 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. 

Comments will be available in the AD 

docket shortly after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Katherine Venegas, Aviation Safety 

Engineer, Cabin Safety, Mechanical and 

Environmental Systems Section, Los 

Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, 3960 

Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 

90712–4137; phone: 562–627–5353; fax: 

562–627–5210; email: 

Katherine.Venegas@faa.gov. 

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–2020–1132; Project Identifier 

MCAI–2020–01386–R’’ 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 proposal. 

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 Katherine Venegas, 

Aviation Safety Engineer, Cabin Safety, 

Mechanical and Environmental Systems 

Section, Los Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, 

3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, 

CA 90712–4137; phone: 562–627–5353; 

fax: 562–627–5210; email: 

Katherine.Venegas@faa.gov. Any 

commentary that the FAA receives that 

is not specifically designated as CBI will 

be placed in the public docket for this 

rulemaking. 

Discussion 

The FAA issued AD 2018–15–02, 

Amendment 39–19334 (83 FR 34029, 

July 19, 2018) (AD 2018–15–02), which 

applies to certain Airbus Helicopters 

Model AS350B, AS350B1, AS350B2, 

AS350B3, AS350BA, AS355E, AS355F, 

AS355F1, AS355F2, AS355N, and 

AS355NP helicopters. AD 2018–15–02 

requires repetitively inspecting the TR 

pitch rod for a damaged elastomeric ball 

joint, and corrective action if necessary. 

The FAA issued AD 2018–15–02 to 

address damage to the elastomeric ball 

joint on the TR pitch change rod. This 

condition could result in failure of the 

TR pitch change rod and subsequent 

loss of control of the helicopter. 

Actions Since AD 2018–15–02 Was 

Issued 

Since the FAA issued AD 2018–15– 

02, the FAA determined that the 

manufacturer had developed improved 

inspection procedures and identified 

conditions that would allow the 

repetitive inspection intervals specified 

in AD 2018–15–02 to be expanded to 

correspond with the intervals for the 

inspection of the TR pitch rod specified 

in the airworthiness limitation section 

of the applicable helicopter 

maintenance manual. 

The EASA, which is the Technical 

Agent for the Member States of the 

European Union, has issued EASA AD 

2017–0020R1, dated May 22, 2019 

(EASA AD 2017–0020R1) (also referred 

to as the Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information, or the 

MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition 

for certain Airbus Helicopters Model 

AS350B, AS350BA, AS350BB, 

AS350B1, AS350B2, AS350B3, AS355E, 

AS355F, AS355 F1, AS355F2, AS355N 

and AS355NP helicopters. Model 

AS350BB helicopters are not certificated 

by the FAA and are not included on the 

U.S. type certificate data sheet; this 

proposed AD therefore does not include 

those helicopters in the applicability. 

This proposed AD was prompted by 

a report of several cases of damaged TR 

pitch rod ball joints. The FAA is 

proposing this AD to address damage to 

the elastomeric ball joint on the TR 

pitch change rod. This condition could 

result in failure of the TR pitch change 

rod and subsequent loss of control of the 

helicopter. See the MCAI for additional 

background information. 

Comments on AD 2018–15–02 

The FAA gave the public the 

opportunity to comment on AD 2018– 

15–02. The following presents the 

comments received on AD 2018–15–02 

and the FAA’s response to those 

comments. 

Request To Allow Pilots To Do the 

Inspection 

Four commenters requested that the 

FAA allow pilots to do the inspection 

specified in the required action 

paragraph of AD 2018–15–02. The 

commenters observed that the Airbus 

Helicopters service information 

specified in AD 2018–15–02 identified 

qualified personnel as a mechanical 

engineer technician or a pilot. Three of 

those commenters also noted that the 

repetitive inspection required by AD 

2018–15–02 is required at intervals not 

to exceed 10 hours time-in-service (TIS). 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 242 / Wednesday, December 16, 2020 / Proposed Rules 81429 

These commenters explained that 

because many of the affected helicopters 

are utilized for firefighting, law 

enforcement, and utility applications, 

operators might not have access to a 

mechanic to do the inspection every 10 

hours TIS, therefore a pilot should be 

allowed to perform the inspection. 

The FAA disagrees. Per 14 CFR 43.3, 

the persons listed as authorized to 

perform maintenance do not include 

pilots. In addition, AD 2018–15–02 

requires actions where a device to 

measure degrees of rotation is needed. 

Because this precision measuring 

equipment must be used, a pilot is not 

allowed to perform the inspection. The 

FAA did not make any changes to AD 

2018–15–02 regarding this issue. 

However, the FAA reviewed these 

comments again in light of this NPRM, 

which proposes to supersede AD 2018– 

15–02, and to incorporate EASA AD 

2017–0020R1 by reference. EASA AD 

2017–0020R1 identifies conditions 

where operators can revert to the 

original repetitive inspection intervals 

specified in the applicable 

airworthiness limitations section for the 

affected helicopters. The intervals 

specified in the airworthiness 

limitations section are every 50 flight 

hours, and for the purposes of this 

proposed AD, every 50 hours TIS. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

EASA AD 2017–0020R1 describes 

procedures for repetitively inspecting 

the TR pitch rod for a damaged 

(debonding, extrusion, or cracking) 

elastomeric ball joint and corrective 

action. The corrective action includes 

replacing an affected TR pitch rod with 

a serviceable TR pitch rod. 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 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 the 

bilateral agreement with the State of 

Design Authority, the FAA has been 

notified of the unsafe condition 

described in the MCAI referenced 

above. The FAA is proposing this AD 

because the FAA evaluated all the 

relevant information and determined 

the unsafe condition described 

previously is likely to exist or develop 

in other products of the same type 

design. 

Explanation of Retained Requirements 

Although this proposed AD does not 

explicitly restate the requirements of AD 

2018–15–02, this proposed AD would 

retain all of the requirements of AD 

2018–15–02, except this proposed AD 

would allow for extended repetitive 

intervals. Those requirements are 

referenced in EASA AD 2017–0020R1, 

which, in turn, is referenced in 

paragraph (g) of this proposed AD. 

Proposed AD Requirements 

This proposed AD would require 

accomplishing the actions specified in 

EASA AD 2017–0020R1 described 

previously, as incorporated by 

reference, except for any differences 

identified as exceptions in the 

regulatory text of this AD. 

Explanation of Required Compliance 

Information 

In the FAA’s ongoing efforts to 

improve the efficiency of the AD 

process, the FAA initially worked with 

Airbus and EASA to develop a process 

to use certain EASA ADs as the primary 

source of information for compliance 

with requirements for corresponding 

FAA ADs. The FAA has since 

coordinated with other manufacturers 

and civil aviation authorities (CAAs) to 

use this process. As a result, EASA AD 

2017–0020R1 will be incorporated by 

reference in the FAA final rule. This 

proposed AD would, therefore, require 

compliance with EASA AD 2017– 

0020R1 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 

the EASA AD 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 the EASA AD. Service 

information specified in EASA AD 

2017–0020R1 that is required for 

compliance with EASA AD 2017– 

0020R1 will be available on the internet 

at https://www.regulations.gov by 

searching for and locating Docket No. 

FAA–2020–1132 after the FAA final 

rule is published. 

Costs of Compliance 

The FAA estimates that this proposed 

AD affects 955 helicopters of U.S. 

registry. The FAA estimates the 

following costs to comply with this 

proposed AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS FOR REQUIRED ACTIONS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

Cost on U.S. 

operators 

Retained actions from AD 2018–15–02 ......... 0.5 work-hour × $85 per hour = $42.50 ......... $0 $42.50 $40,587.50 

This new proposed AD adds no new 

costs to affected operators. 

The FAA estimates the following 

costs to do any necessary on-condition 

actions that would be required based on 

the results of any required actions. The 

FAA has no way of determining the 

number of helicopters that might need 

these on-condition actions: 

ESTIMATED COSTS OF ON-CONDITION ACTIONS

Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 .......................................................................................................................... $3,358 $3,443 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
81430 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 242 / Wednesday, December 16, 2020 / Proposed Rules 

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) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska, and 

(3) Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

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 

removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 

2018–15–02, Amendment 39–19334 (83 

FR 34029, July 19, 2018), and adding the 

following new AD: 

Airbus Helicopters: Docket No. FAA–2020– 

1132; Project Identifier MCAI–2020– 

01386–R. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

The FAA must receive comments by 

February 1, 2021. 

(b) Affected Airworthiness Directive (ADs) 

This AD replaces AD 2018–15–02, 

Amendment 39–19334 (83 FR 34029, July 19, 

2018) (AD 2018–15–02). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Airbus Helicopters 

Model AS350B, AS350B1, AS350B2, 

AS350B3, AS350BA, AS355E, AS355F, 

AS355F1, AS355F2, AS355N, and AS355NP 

helicopters, certificated in any category, as 

identified in European Union Aviation Safety 

Agency (EASA) AD 2017–0020R1, dated May 

22, 2019 (EASA AD 2017–0020R1). 

(d) Subject 

Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) 

Code 6720, Tail Rotor Control System. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by a report of 

several cases of damaged tail rotor (TR) pitch 

rod ball joints. The FAA is issuing this AD 

to address damage to the elastomeric ball 

joint on the TR pitch change rod. This 

condition could result in failure of the TR 

pitch change rod and subsequent loss of 

control of the helicopter. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) New Requirements 

Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this 

AD: Comply with all required actions and 

compliance times specified in, and in 

accordance with, EASA AD 2017–0020R1. 

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2017–0020R1 

(1) Where EASA AD 2017–0020R1 refers to 

its effective date, this AD requires using the 

effective date of this AD. 

(2) Where EASA AD 2017–0020R1 refers to 

February 9, 2017 (the effective date of EASA 

AD 2017–0020–E, dated February 9, 2017), 

this AD required using August 3, 2018 (the 

effective date of AD 2018–15–02). 

(3) The ‘‘Remarks’’ section of EASA AD 

2017–0020R1 does not apply to this AD. 

(4) Although the service information 

referenced in EASA AD 2017–0020R1 

specifies to discard certain parts, this AD 

does not include that requirement. 

(5) Where EASA AD 2017–0020R1 refers to 

flight hours (FH), this AD requires using 

hours time-in-service. 

(6) Where paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2017– 

0020R1 specifies an initial compliance time 

of ‘‘Before exceeding 50 FH [flight hours] 

since the last inspection per ALS 

[airworthiness limitations] chapter 04–20–00, 

or within 10 FH or 7 days, whichever occurs 

first,’’ for this AD, the initial compliance time 

is within 10 hours time-in-service (TIS). 

(7) For the inspections specified in 

paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2017–0020R1: 

Accomplishing the actions specified in 

paragraphs (h)(7)(i) and (ii) of this AD before 

the effective date of this AD are acceptable 

for compliance with the inspections specified 

in in paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2017– 

0020R1. On or after the effective date of this 

AD comply with the inspections as specified 

in paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2017–0020R1. 

(i) Manually induce a flapping movement 

in the TR blade until the pitch change rod 

rotates a minimum of 10 degrees. 

(ii) Inspect both faces of the blade side of 

the ball joint elastomer for debonding, 

extrusion, and cracks. 

(8) Although the service information 

referenced in EASA AD 2017–0020R1 

permits certain actions to be performed by a 

mechanical engineering technician or pilot, 

this AD requires that the actions be 

performed by a qualified mechanic. 

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

The Manager, 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 local 

Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the International Validation Branch, send 

it to the attention of the person identified in 

paragraph (j)(2) of this AD. Information may 

be emailed to: 9-AVS-AIR-730-AMOC@

faa.gov. 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 EASA AD 2017–0020R1, contact the 

EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 

Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 89990 

000; email ADs@easa.europa.eu; 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, Office of the Regional 

Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood 

Pkwy., Room 6N–321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. 

For information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 817–222–5110. This 

material may be found in the AD docket on 

the internet at https://www.regulations.gov 

by searching for and locating Docket No. 

FAA–2020–1132. 

(2) For more information about this AD, 

contact: Katherine Venegas, Aviation Safety 

Engineer, Cabin Safety, Mechanical and 

Environmental Systems Section, Los Angeles 

ACO Branch, FAA, 3960 Paramount 

Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712–4137; 

phone: 562–627–5353; fax: 562–627–5210; 

email: Katherine.Venegas@faa.gov. 

Issued on December 11, 2020. 

Lance T. Gant, 

Director, Compliance & Airworthiness 

Division, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2020–27660 Filed 12–15–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS