### 8668 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 34 / Monday, February 22, 2016 / Proposed Rules

5 Regulation C covers loans secured by a ‘‘dwelling,’’ which is defined as any residential structure, whether or not it is attached to real property, which would include mobile homes or manufactured homes. 12 CFR 1003.2. Under the Bureau’s 2015 final rule, however, recreational vehicles used as a residence are not covered as dwellings for purposes of HMDA. See 80 FR 66128, 66145 (Oct. 28, 2015).

6 Section 1029(b)(1) of the Dodd-Frank Act states: Subsection (a) shall not apply to any person, to the extent such person (1) provides consumers with any services related to residential or commercial mortgages or self-financing transaction involving real property. . . .’’ 12 U.S.C. 5519(b). loan activities (i.e., mortgage loan applications). HMDA’s requirements concerning mortgage loans were implemented in Regulation C to apply to home purchase loans secured by a dwelling (or refinancings) and home improvement loans. 5

As noted above, the Dodd-Frank Act transferred the Board’s rulemaking authority under HMDA and other enumerated consumer protection laws to the Bureau, but Section 1029 of the Dodd-Frank Act also preserved the Board’s rulemaking authority over certain motor vehicle dealers, with some exceptions. The rulemaking authority retained by the Board under Section 1029 does not extend to residential or commercial mortgages or self-financing transactions involving real property. 6 Thus, all rulemaking authority under HMDA, which pertains only to mortgage loan transactions, was transferred to the Bureau. Consequently, the Board is publishing a proposal to repeal the Board’s Regulation C, 12 CFR part 203.

The Board requests comment on any technical issues raised by the proposed repeal of the Board’s Regulation C. III. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. ) (RFA) generally requires an agency to perform an assessment of the impact a rule is expected to have on small entities. Based on its analysis, and for the reasons stated below, the Board believes that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. A final regulatory flexibility analysis will be conducted after consideration of comments received during the public comment period.

1. Statement of the need for, and objectives of, the proposed rule. Title X of the Dodd-Frank Act transferred rulemaking authority for HMDA and other enumerated consumer financial protection laws from the Board to the Bureau, effective July 21, 2011. In December 2011, the Bureau issued an Interim Final Rule to implement HMDA pursuant to the transfer of rulemaking authority. Although the Board retains authority to issue some consumer financial protection rules, all rulemaking authority under HMDA concerning mortgage loan transactions was transferred to the Bureau. Consequently, the Board is proposing to repeal the Board’s Regulation C, 12 CFR part 203.

2. Small entities affected by the proposed rule. Any entity that is currently covered by HMDA is subject to the rules issued by the Bureau, located in 12 CFR part 1003. Therefore the Board’s repeal of its Regulation C would not affect any entity, including small entities.

3. Recordkeeping, reporting, and compliance requirements. The proposed rule would repeal the Board’s Regulation C, 12 CFR part 203, and would therefore not impose any recordkeeping, reporting, or compliance requirements on any entities.

4. Other federal rules. The Board has not identified any federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the proposed repeal of the Board’s Regulation C, 12 CFR part 203.

5. Significant alternatives to the proposed revisions. The Board is not aware of any significant alternatives that would further minimize the impact on small entities of the proposed repeal, but solicits comment on this approach.
IV. Paperwork Reduction Act

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506; 5 CFR 1320 Appendix A.1), the Board reviewed the rule under the authority delegated to the Federal Reserve by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The proposed rule contains no collections of information under the PRA. See 44 U.S.C. 3502(3). Accordingly, there is no paperwork burden associated with the proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 203

Banks, Banking, Federal Reserve System, Mortgages, and Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority and Issuance

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Board proposes to amend Regulation C, 12 CFR part 203, and the Official Staff Commentary, as set forth below:

**PART 203—HOME MORTGAGE DISCLOSURE (REGULATION C)** 

■ 1. Part 203 is removed and reserved. By order of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, February 11, 2016. Robert deV. Frierson, Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2016–03229 Filed 2–19–16; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2016–3698; Directorate Identifier 2015–NM–138–AD]** 

**RIN 2120–AA64**

**Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company 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 The Boeing Company Model 767–200 and –300 series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design approval holder (DAH) indicating that the aft pressure bulkhead at a certain area is subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). This proposed AD would require replacing the aft pressure bulkhead with a new, improved aft pressure bulkhead, and doing related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. We are proposing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking in the radial web lap splices of the aft pressure bulkhead. Such cracking could result in rapid decompression and consequent reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

**DATES :**  We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 7, 2016.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

• Fax: 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 Boeing Commercial


### 8669 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 34 / Monday, February 22, 2016 / Proposed Rules

Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone 206–544–5000, extension 1; fax 206– 766–5680; Internet https://www.my boeingfleet.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 425–227– 1221. It is also available on the Internet
at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA–2016–3698.
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–2016– 3698; 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 proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is in the

**ADDRESSES** section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6447; fax: 425–917–6590; email: wayne.lockett@faa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 

Comments Invited

We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the **ADDRESSES** section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 2016–3698; Directorate Identifier 2015– NM–138–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 because of 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 Structural fatigue damage is progressive. It begins as minute cracks, and those cracks grow under the action of repeated stresses. This can happen because of normal operational conditions and design attributes, or because of isolated situations or incidents such as material defects, poor fabrication quality, or corrosion pits, dings, or scratches. Fatigue damage can occur locally, in small areas or structural design details, or globally. Global fatigue damage is general degradation of large areas of structure with similar structural details and stress levels. Multiple-site damage is global damage that occurs in a large structural element such as a single rivet line of a lap splice joining two large skin panels. Global damage can also occur in multiple elements such as adjacentframes or stringers. Multiple-sitedamage and multiple-element-damage cracks are typically too small initially to be reliably detected with normal inspection methods. Without intervention, these cracks will grow, and eventually compromise the structural integrity of the airplane, in a condition known as WFD. As an airplane ages, WFD will likely occur, and will certainly occur if the airplane is operated long enough without any intervention.

The FAA’s WFD final rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) became effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD rule requires certain actions to prevent structural failure due to WFD throughout the operational life of certain existing transport category airplanes and all of these airplanes that will be certificated in the future. For existing and future airplanes subject to the WFD rule, the rule requires that DAHs establish a limit of validity (LOV) of the engineering data that support the structural maintenance program. Operators affected by the WFD rule may not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, unless an extended LOV is approved.

The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) does not require identifying and developing maintenance actions if the DAHs can show that such actions are not necessary to prevent WFD before the airplane reaches the LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend on accomplishment of future maintenance actions. As stated in the WFD rule, any maintenance actions necessary to reach the LOV will be mandated by airworthiness directives through separate rulemaking actions.

In the context of WFD, this action is necessary to enable DAHs to propose LOVs that allow operators the longest operational lives for their airplanes, and still ensure that WFD will not occur. This approach allows for an implementation strategy that provides flexibility to DAHs in determining the timing of service information development (with FAA approval), while providing operators with certainty regarding the LOV applicable to their airplanes.

We have determined that the aft pressure bulkhead at Station 1582 is subject to WFD. If fatigue cracking in the radial web lap splices of the aft pressure bulkhead is not found and repaired, the cracks can rapidly link up and become large, which could result in rapid decompression and consequent reduced structural integrity of the airplane. Related Rulemaking

On February 25, 2004, we issued AD 2004–05–16, Amendment 39–13511 (69 FR 10917, March 9, 2004), applicable to certain Boeing Model 767–200 and –300 series airplanes. That AD requires repetitive inspections of the aft pressure bulkhead web, and corrective action, if necessary. The actions required by AD 2004–05–16 are intended to detect and correct fatigue cracks in the aft pressure bulkhead web, which could result in uncontrolled rapid decompression.

On July 1, 2004, we issued AD 2004– 14–19, Amendment 39–13728 (69 FR 42549, July 16, 2004), applicable to all Boeing Model 767 series airplanes. That AD requires repetitive detailed inspections of the aft pressure bulkhead for indications of ‘‘oil cans’’ and previous ‘‘oil can’’ repairs, and corrective actions if necessary. The actions required by AD 2004–14–19 are intended to detect and correct the propagation of fatigue cracks in the vicinity of ‘‘oil cans’’ on the web of the aft pressure bulkhead, which could result in rapid decompression of the passenger cabin, possible damage or interference with the airplane control systems that pass through the bulkhead, and consequent loss of control of the airplane.

On March 12, 2009, we issued AD 2009–06–19, Amendment 39–15856 (74 FR 12243, March 24, 2009), applicable to certain Boeing Model 767–200 and 767–300 series airplanes. That AD requires detailed inspections of the aftpressure bulkhead for damage, midfrequency eddy current (MFEC) and low frequency eddy current (LFEC) inspections of radial web lap splices, tear strap splices, and super tear strap splices for cracking, and corrective actions if necessary. The actions required by AD 2009–06–19 are intended to detect and correct fatigue


### 8670 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 34 / Monday, February 22, 2016 / Proposed Rules

cracks of the aft pressure bulkhead, which could result in rapid decompression of the passenger compartment and possible damage or interference with airplane control systems that penetrate the bulkhead, and consequent loss of controllability of the airplane.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0267, dated August 13, 2015. The service information describes procedures for replacing the aft pressure bulkhead at Station 1582 of Section 48 with a new, improved aft pressure bulkhead, including all applicable related investigative and corrective actions. 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

We are proposing this AD because we 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. Proposed AD Requirements This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously, except as discussed under ‘‘Difference Between this Proposed AD and the Service Information.’’ For information on the procedures and compliance times, see this service information at http:// www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA–2016–
3698.

The phrase ‘‘related investigative actions’’ is used in this proposed AD. ‘‘Related investigative actions’’ are follow-on actions that (1) are related to the primary action, and (2) further investigate the nature of any condition found. Related investigative actions in an AD could include, for example, inspections.

The phrase ‘‘corrective actions’’ is used in this proposed AD. ‘‘Corrective actions’’ are actions that correct or address any condition found. Corrective actions in an AD could include, for example, repairs. Difference Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

The service bulletin specifies to contact the manufacturer for instructions on how to repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD would require repairing those conditions in one of the following ways:

• In accordance with a method that
we approve; or

• Using data that meet the certification basis of the airplane, and that have been approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) whom we have authorized to make those findings. Explanation of Compliance Time

The compliance time for the replacement specified in this proposed AD for addressing WFD was established to ensure that discrepant structure is replaced before WFD develops in airplanes. Standard inspection techniques cannot be relied on to detect WFD before it becomes a hazard to flight. We will not grant any extensions of the compliance time to complete any AD-mandated service bulletin related to WFD without extensive new data that would substantiate and clearly warrant such an extension. Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this proposed AD affects 86 airplanes of U.S. registry.

We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:



### E STIMATED 

### COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. operators

Replacement ................................................... 1,541 work-hours × $85 per hour = $130,985 $646,889 $777,874 $66,897,164

We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition investigative and corrective actions specified in this proposed 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

We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866,

(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment

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

**PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES** 

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

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


### 8671 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 34 / Monday, February 22, 2016 / Proposed Rules

**§ 39.13 [Amended]**

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):
The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 2016–3698; Directorate Identifier 2015– NM–138–AD.
(a) Comments Due Date

We must receive comments by April 7,
2016.
(b) Affected ADs

This AD affects the ADs specified in paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3) of this AD.

(1) AD 2004–05–16, Amendment 39–13511 (69 FR 10917, March 9, 2004).

(2) AD 2004–14–19, Amendment 39–13728 (69 FR 42549, July 16, 2004).

(3) AD 2009–06–19, Amendment 39–15856 (74 FR 12243, March 24, 2009).
(c) Applicability

This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 767–200 and –300 series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0267, dated August 13, 2015.
(d) Subject

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

This AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design approval holder (DAH) indicating that the aft pressure bulkhead at Station 1582 is subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). We are issuing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking in the radial web lap splices of the aft pressure bulkhead. Such cracking could result in rapid decompression and consequent reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
(f) Compliance

Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
(g) Replacement and Related Investigative and Corrective Actions

Before the accumulation of 60,000 total flight cycles, or within 36 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, but not earlier than 37,500 total accumulated flight cycles: Replace the aft pressure bulkhead at Station 1582 of Section 48 with a new, improved aft pressure bulkhead, and perform all applicable related investigative and corrective actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0267, dated August 13, 2015; except as required by paragraph (h) of this AD. Do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight. Accomplishing the replacement in this paragraph terminates the repetitive inspections of the aft pressure bulkhead required by the ADs identified in paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD.

(1) Paragraphs (a) and (b) of AD 2004–05– 16, Amendment 39–13511 (69 FR 10917, March 9, 2004). (2) Paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of AD 2004– 14–19, Amendment 39–13728 (69 FR 42549, July 16, 2004).

(3) Paragraph (f) of AD 2009–06–19, Amendment 39–15856 (74 FR 12243, March 24, 2009).
(h) Corrective Actions

If any defect ( e.g. , rifling, gouging, nicks, or burrs, or excessive surface roughness) is found in any fastener hole (other than normally produced during a typical reaming operation), during accomplishment of any inspection (related investigative actions) required by this AD, and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0267, dated August 13, 2015, specifies to contact Boeing for repair instructions: Before further flight, repair in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD.
(i) Exception to the Service Information

Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767– 53A0267, dated August 13, 2015, specifies a compliance time ‘‘after the original issue date of this service bulletin,’’ this AD requires compliance within the specified time after the effective date of this AD.
(j) 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 paragraph (k)(1) of this AD. Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOCRequests@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, modification, or alteration 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 method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.

(4) Except as required by paragraph (h) of this AD: For service information that contains steps that are labeled as Required for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs (j)(4)(i) and (j)(4)(ii) apply.

(i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply with the AD. An AMOC is required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and identified figures.

(ii) Steps not labeled 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 RC steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition.

(k) Related Information

(1) For more information about this AD, contact Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6447; fax: 425–917–6590; email: wayne.lockett@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, WA 98124–2207; telephone 206– 544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766–5680; 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 425–227–1221.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 9, 2016. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 2016–03466 Filed 2–19–16; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION** 

**14 CFR Part 1274**

**[NASA Case 2015–N014]**

**RIN 2700–AE25**

**Cooperative Agreements With Commercial Firms** 

**AGENCY :**  National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  NASA is proposing to amend its regulations to implement section 872 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009, as the statute applies to grants and cooperative agreements. The revision is part of NASA’s retrospective plan under Executive Order (EO) 13563 completed in August 2011.

**DATES :**  Comments on the proposed rule should be submitted in writing to the address shown below on or before April 22, 2016, to be considered in the formation of a final rule.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit comments identified by NASA Case 2015–N014, using any of the following methods:

Æ Regulations.gov: http:// www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by entering ‘‘NASA Case 2015–N014’’ under the heading ‘‘Enter keyword or