13502 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 9, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

30See, 85 FR 22930 (Apr. 23, 2020). 

subject to a two-quarter grace period if 

they do not meet any of the eligibility 

criteria and may remain under the CBLR 

framework, provided that their leverage 

ratio is above seven percent during the 

grace period. Beginning in 2021, the 

CBLR requirement will be 8.5 percent or 

greater and the minimum requirement 

during the grace period will be 7.5 

percent.30 Beginning in 2022, the CBLR 

requirement will return to nine percent 

and the minimum requirement during 

the grace period will return to eight 

percent. 

In the preamble to the 2019 

Supplemental Rule, the Board explained 

that it might consider a capital standard 

analog to the CBLR framework 

developed by the other banking 

agencies—referred to in this ANPR as 

CCULR. The CCULR approach would be 

based on the principles of the CBLR 

framework and, for complex credit 

unions that meet specified qualifying 

criteria and have opted into the 

approach, would provide relief from the 

requirement to calculate a risk-based 

capital ratio, as implemented by the 

2015 Final Rule. In exchange, the 

qualifying complex credit union would 

be required to maintain a higher net 

worth ratio than is otherwise required 

for the well-capitalized classification. 

This is a similar trade-off to the one 

made by qualifying community banking 

organizations under the CBLR. 

As noted above, the 2015 Final Rule 

is scheduled to take effect on January 1, 

2022. Accordingly, a CCULR approach 

would be parallel to the 2015 Final Rule 

and would not take effect until January 

1, 2022. Qualifying complex credit 

unions would not be able to opt into the 

proposed CCULR approach prior to this 

effective date. 

In designing the CCULR, the Board 

would seek to further the goal of the 

FCUA’s PCA requirements by requiring 

that complex credit unions continue to 

hold capital commensurate with their 

risks, while minimizing the burden 

associated with complying with the 

NCUA’s risk-based capital requirement. 

The Board welcomes comments on a 

possible adoption of the CCULR and, in 

particular, seeks input on the following 

issues: 

Question 5: The Board invites 

comments on the merits of 

incorporating the CCULR in its capital 

adequacy regulations. Should the NCUA 

capital framework be amended to adopt 

an ‘‘off-ramp’’ such as the CCULR to the 

risk-based capital requirements of the 

2015 Final Rule? 

Question 6: The Board invites 

comment on the criteria for CCULR 

eligibility. Should the Board adopt the 

same qualifying criteria as established 

by the other banking agencies for the 

CBLR? In recommending qualifying 

criteria regarding a credit union’s risk 

profile, please provide information on 

how the qualifying criteria should be 

considered in conjunction with the 

calibration of the CCULR level under 

question 7, below. 

Question 7: What assets and liabilities 

on a FICU’s Call Report should the 

Board consider in determining the net 

worth threshold? How should each of 

these items be weighted? 

Question 8: What are the advantages 

and disadvantages of using the net 

worth ratio as the measure of capital 

adequacy under the CCULR? Should the 

Board consider alternative measures for 

the CCULR? For example, instead of the 

existing net worth definition, the CCULR 

could use the risk-based capital ratio 

numerator from the 2015 Final Rule, 

similar to the ‘‘Tier 1 Capital’’ measure 

used for banking institutions. 

Question 9: Should all complex credit 

unions be eligible for the CCULR, or 

should the Board limit eligibility to a 

subset of these credit unions? For 

example, the Board could consider 

limiting eligibility to the CCULR 

approach to only complex credit unions 

with less than $10 billion in total assets. 

Question 10: The Board invites 

comment on the procedures a qualifying 

complex credit union would use to opt 

into or out of the CCULR approach. 

What are commenters’ views on the 

frequency with which a qualifying 

complex credit union may opt into or 

out of the CCULR approach? What are 

the operational or other challenges 

associated with switching between 

frameworks? 

Question 11: The Board invites 

comment on the treatment for a 

complex credit union that no longer 

meets the definition of a qualifying 

complex credit union after opting into 

the CCULR approach. Should the Board 

consider requiring complex credit 

unions that no longer meet the 

qualifying criteria to begin to calculate 

their assets immediately according to 

the risk-based capital ratio? Should the 

Board provide a grace period for these 

credit unions to come back into 

compliance with the CCULR and, if so, 

how long of a grace period is 

appropriate? What other alternatives 

should the Board consider with respect 

to a complex credit union that no longer 

meets the definition of a qualifying 

complex credit union and why? Is 

notification that a credit union will not 

meet the qualifying criteria necessary? 

VI. Timeline 

As discussed above, the 2015 Final 

Rule will be effective January 1, 2022. 

The Board expects that any final rule 

developed in response to this ANPR 

would be issued before the effective 

date of the 2015 Final Rule. 

Accordingly, the Board expects that any 

notice of proposed rulemaking issued in 

response to this ANPR would be issued 

by midyear of 2021. Once comments are 

received, the Board will evaluate the 

comments and direct NCUA staff to 

move forward in drafting any proposed 

rule to meet this timeline. 

VII. Conclusion 

The Board is committed to tailoring 

its capital requirements to the unique 

features of credit unions. The two 

approaches outlined in this ANPR are 

designed to accomplish this goal 

without reducing the effectiveness of 

the Board’s capital standards. The RBLR 

approach would replace the 2015 Final 

Rule risk-based capital requirements 

using relevant risk attribute thresholds 

that would require additional capital 

buffers. The CCULR would enable 

eligible complex FICUs to opt-into a 

framework to meet all regulatory capital 

requirements. The Board invites 

comments on these two options, as well 

as on any other recommendations that 

might similarly accomplish the goals 

outlined in this ANPR. All comments 

will be considered in the development 

of a future proposed rule. 

By the National Credit Union 

Administration Board, this 14th day of 

January, 2021. 

Melane Conyers Ausbrooks, 

Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. 2021–01397 Filed 3–8–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2020–0991; Project 

Identifier AD–2020–00539–A] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Mooney 

International Corporation 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 

certain Mooney International 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 9, 2021 / Proposed Rules 13503 

Corporation (Mooney) Model M20V 

airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by reports of short circuit and 

arcing of the alternator main power 

cable in the engine compartment. This 

condition, if unaddressed, could result 

in a fire hazard, loss of engine thrust 

control, and reduced control of the 

airplane. This proposed AD would 

require inspecting the alternator main 

power cable and the exhaust crossover 

tube for damage, replacing damaged 

parts as necessary, and installing an 

additional alternator cable clamp. 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 April 23, 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: (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 service information identified in 

this NPRM, contact Mooney 

International Corporation, 165 Al 

Mooney Road, North Kerrville, TX 

78028; phone: (800) 456–3033; email: 

support@mooney.com. You may view 

this service information at the FAA, 

Airworthiness Products Section, 

Operational Safety Branch, 901 Locust, 

Kansas City, MO 64106. For information 

on the availability of this material at the 

FAA, call (816) 329–4148. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket at 

https://www.regulations.gov by 

searching for and locating Docket No. 

FAA–2020–0991; or in person at Docket 

Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. The AD docket contains this 

NPRM, any comments received, and 

other information. The street address for 

Docket Operations is listed above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jacob Fitch, Aviation Safety Engineer, 

Fort Worth ACO Branch, FAA, 10101 

Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; 

phone: (817) 222–4130; fax: (817) 222– 

5245; email: jacob.fitch@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–2020–0991; Project Identifier AD– 

2020–00539–A’’ at the beginning of your 

comments. The most helpful comments 

reference a specific portion of the 

proposal, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. The FAA will consider 

all comments received by the closing 

date and may amend this proposal 

because of those comments. 

Except for Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) as described in the 

following paragraph, and other 

information as described in 14 CFR 

11.35, the FAA will post all comments 

received, without change, to https://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. The 

agency will also post a report 

summarizing each substantive verbal 

contact received about this NPRM. 

Confidential Business Information 

CBI is commercial or financial 

information that is both customarily and 

actually treated as private by its owner. 

Under the Freedom of Information Act 

(FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt 

from public disclosure. If your 

comments responsive to this NPRM 

contain commercial or financial 

information that is customarily treated 

as private, that you actually treat as 

private, and that is relevant or 

responsive to this NPRM, it is important 

that you clearly designate the submitted 

comments as CBI. Please mark each 

page of your submission containing CBI 

as ‘‘PROPIN.’’ The FAA will treat such 

marked submissions as confidential 

under the FOIA, and they will not be 

placed in the public docket of this 

NPRM. Submissions containing CBI 

should be sent to Jacob Fitch, Aviation 

Safety Engineer, Fort Worth ACO 

Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., 

Fort Worth, TX 76177. Any commentary 

that the FAA receives which is not 

specifically designated as CBI will be 

placed in the public docket for this 

rulemaking. 

Background 

The FAA received a report that two 

Mooney Model M20V airplanes had 

short circuit arcing of the alternator 

main power cable in the engine 

compartment. Mooney determined the 

alternator main power cable was 

incorrectly positioned with slack in the 

cable and allowed contact between the 

alternator main power cable and 

turbocharger right-hand (RH) exhaust 

crossover tube. In one instance, this 

contact caused arcing of the alternator 

main power cable and created a hole in 

the RH exhaust crossover tube, which 

may result in a fire hazard. A damaged 

crossover tube may also decrease 

effectiveness of the turbochargers and 

cause complete loss of engine power at 

higher altitudes (above 9,000 ft. above 

sea level). This condition, if not 

addressed, could result in an inflight 

fire and loss of engine thrust control, 

which may lead to reduced control of 

the airplane. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

The FAA reviewed Mooney 

International Corporation Service 

Bulletin M20–340C, dated February 14, 

2020 (SB M20–340C). The service 

information specifies inspecting the 

alternator main power cable and the 

exhaust crossover tube for damage and 

replacing damaged parts as necessary. 

The service information also contains 

procedures for modifying the alternator 

main power cable routing by installing 

an additional alternator cable clamp, 

part number MS21919WCJ6. 

This service information is reasonably 

available because the interested parties 

have access to it through their normal 

course of business or by the means 

identified in the ADDRESSES section. 

FAA’s Determination 

The FAA is issuing this NPRM after 

determining the unsafe condition 

described previously is likely to exist or 

develop in other products of the same 

type design. 

Proposed AD Requirements in This 

NPRM 

This proposed AD would require 

accomplishing the actions specified in 

the service information described 

previously, except as discussed under 

‘‘Differences Between this Proposed AD 

and the Service Information.’’ 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

SB M20–340C specifies sending a 

compliance card to Mooney upon 

completing the actions in the service 

information. This proposed AD would 

not require that action. 

Costs of Compliance 

The FAA estimates that this AD, if 

adopted as proposed, would affect 18 

airplanes of U.S. registry. 

The FAA estimates the following 

costs to comply with this proposed AD: 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
13504 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 9, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

Cost on U.S. 

operators 

Inspect the cable and exhaust crossover tube 

for damage.

.5 work-hour × $85 per hour = $42.50 ........... $0 $42.50 $765 

Install additional cable clamp .......................... .5 work-hour × $85 per hour = $42.50 ........... 10 52.50 945 

The FAA estimates the following 

costs to do any necessary repairs/ 

replacements that would be required 

based on the results of the proposed 

inspection. The agency has no way of 

determining the number of aircraft that 

might need these repairs/replacements: 

ON-CONDITION COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

Replace alternator main power cable .......................... 8 work-hours × $85 per hour = $680 ........................... $1,000 $1,680 

Replace exhaust crossover tube .................................. 8 work-hours × $85.00 per hour = $680 ...................... 2,500 3,180 

The FAA has included all known 

costs in its cost estimate. According to 

the manufacturer, however, some of the 

costs of this proposed AD may be 

covered under warranty, thereby 

reducing the cost impact on affected 

operators. 

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 proposing 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 

■ 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 airworthiness 

directive: 

Mooney International Corporation: Docket 

No. FAA–2020–0991; Project Identifier 

AD–2020–00539–A. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

The FAA must receive comments on this 

airworthiness directive (AD) by April 23, 

2021. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Mooney International 

Corporation Model M20V airplanes, serial 

numbers 33–0001 through 33–0018, 

certificated in any category. 

(d) Subject 

Joint Aircraft System Component Code 

2400, Electrical Power System. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by reports of short 

circuit and arcing of the alternator main 

power cable in the engine compartment. The 

FAA is issuing this AD to prevent arcing of 

the alternator main power cable in the engine 

compartment. This condition, if not 

addressed, could result in an inflight fire and 

loss of engine thrust control, which may lead 

to reduced control of the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD before further flight 

after the effective date of this AD, unless 

already done. 

(g) Required Actions 

(1) Inspect the alternator main power cable 

and the exhaust crossover tube for burn 

marks, chafing, holes, and cracks, and 

replace any cable and crossover tube that has 

a burn mark, chafing, a hole, or a crack. 

(2) Install an additional alternator cable 

clamp part number MS21919WCJ6 and 

ensure correct routing of the alternator main 

power cable by following steps 1.5. through 

1.9. of the Instructions in Mooney 

International Corporation Service Bulletin 

M20–340C, dated February 14, 2020. 

(h) Special Flight Permit 

A special flight permit may be issued with 

the following limitations: 

(1) Flights must not carry passengers; 

(2) Operation in daytime visual 

meteorological conditions only; 

(3) Straight and level flight must be 

maintained; 

(4) Operation in areas of known turbulence 

prohibited; and 

(5) Altitude limited to 9,000 ft. above sea 

level. 

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Fort Worth ACO Branch, 

FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs 

for this AD, if requested using the procedures 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 9, 2021 / Proposed Rules 13505 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 

14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your 

principal inspector or local Flight Standards 

District Office, as appropriate. If sending 

information directly to the manager of the 

certification office, send it to the attention of 

the person identified in Related Information. 

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 

of the local flight standards district office/ 

certificate holding district office. 

(j) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Jacob Fitch, Aviation Safety Engineer, 

Fort Worth ACO Branch, FAA, 10101 

Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; 

phone: (817) 222–4130; fax: (817) 222–5245; 

email: jacob.fitch@faa.gov. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Mooney International 

Corporation, 165 Al Mooney Road, North 

Kerrville, TX 78028; phone: (800) 456–3033; 

email: support@mooney.com. You may view 

this referenced service information at the 

FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, 

Operational Safety Branch, 901 Locust, 

Kansas City, MO 64106. For information on 

the availability of this material at the FAA, 

call (816) 329–4148. 

Issued on March 1, 2021. 

Ross Landes, 

Deputy Director for Regulatory Operations, 

Compliance & Airworthiness Division, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2021–04591 Filed 3–8–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–0449; Project 

Identifier AD–2020–01464–R] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bell 

Helicopter Textron Canada Helicopters 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is withdrawing a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

that proposed to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) that would 

have applied to certain Bell Helicopter 

Textron Canada Model 206A, 206B, and 

206B3 helicopters. The NPRM was 

prompted by the need for corresponding 

operating limitations prohibiting flight, 

including hover, with the litter doorpost 

removed when certain litter kits are 

installed. The NPRM would have 

required revising the Operating 

Limitations, Section 1, of the existing 

Rotorcraft Flight Manual (RFM) for your 

helicopter to add an operating limitation 

when a litter kit is installed to prohibit 

flight with the doorpost removed to 

prevent loss of structural integrity of the 

fuselage. Since issuance of the NPRM, 

the FAA has determined that an unsafe 

condition no longer exists. Accordingly, 

the NPRM is withdrawn. 

DATES: The FAA is withdrawing the 

proposed rule published May 13, 2011 

(76 FR 27958), as of March 9, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: 

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–2011– 

0449; 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 AD action, 

any comments received, and other 

information. The street address for 

Docket Operations is 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: 

Kristi Bradley, Aviation Safety Engineer, 

General Aviation & Rotorcraft Section, 

International Validation Branch, FAA, 

10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 

76177; telephone (817) 222–5110; email 

kristin.bradley@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

The FAA has issued an NPRM that 

proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 by 

adding an AD that would apply to the 

specified products. The NPRM was 

published in the Federal Register on 

May 13, 2011 (76 FR 27958). The NPRM 

was prompted by the need for 

corresponding operating limitations 

prohibiting flight, including hover, with 

the litter doorpost removed when 

certain litter kits are installed. 

The NPRM proposed to require 

revising the existing RFM for your 

helicopter by inserting into the 

Operating Limitations, Section 1, of the 

existing RFM for your helicopter the 

following statement: ‘‘Flight, including 

hover, with litter doorpost removed is 

prohibited.’’ This revision would have 

been made by pen and ink changes, 

inserting a copy of this AD into the 

existing RFM for your helicopter, or 

inserting a copy of the RFM Supplement 

(RFMS) dealing with Litter Kits into the 

existing RFM for your helicopter as 

follows: For Model 206A helicopters— 

inserting RFMS BHT–206A–FMS–8, 

dated December 30, 2009, into RFM 

BHT–206A–FM–1, dated July 2, 2009; 

for Model 206B helicopters—inserting 

RFMS BHT–206B–FMS–8, dated 

December 30, 2009, into RFM BHT– 

206B–FM–1, dated July 2, 2009; and for 

Model 206B3 helicopters—inserting 

RFMS BHT–206B3–FMS–2, dated 

December 30, 2009, into RFM BHT– 

206B3–FM–1, dated March 24, 2010. 

The proposed actions were intended to 

add an operating limitation when a litter 

kit is installed to prohibit flight with the 

doorpost removed to prevent loss of 

structural integrity of the fuselage. 

Actions Since the NPRM Was Issued 

Since issuance of the NPRM, 

reevaluation of current fleet safety data 

indicates that there is not an unsafe 

condition and AD action is no longer 

necessary. There are no recent records 

of safety issues related to the unsafe 

condition previously described. 

Therefore, the FAA has determined that 

AD action is not required. Withdrawal 

of the NPRM constitutes only such 

action and does not preclude the agency 

from issuing future rulemaking on this 

issue, nor does it commit the agency to 

any course of action in the future. 

The FAA’s Aircraft Certification 

Service has also changed its 

organizational structure. The new 

structure replaces product directorates 

with functional divisions. We have 

revised some of the office titles and 

nomenclature throughout this proposed 

AD to reflect the new organizational 

changes. Additional information about 

the new structure can be found in the 

Notice published on July 25, 2017 (82 

FR 34564). 

Lastly, the identification of 

‘‘Directorate Identifier 2010–SW–021– 

AD’’ has been changed to ‘‘Project 

Identifier AD 2020–01464–R.’’ 

Comments 

The FAA gave the public the 

opportunity to comment on the NPRM. 

The FAA received no comments on the 

NPRM or on the determination of the 

cost to the public. 

FAA’s Conclusions 

Upon further consideration, the FAA 

has determined that the NPRM is 

unnecessary. Accordingly, the NPRM is 

withdrawn. 

Regulatory Findings 

Since this action only withdraws an 

NPRM, it is neither a proposed nor a 

final rule. This action therefore is not 

covered under Executive Order 12866, 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act, or DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 

FR 11034, February 26, 1979). 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS