### 75512 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules

conditions, the C-series airplanes must comply with the fuel vent and exhaust emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34 and the noise certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36, and the FAA must issue a finding of regulatory adequacy under section 611 of Public Law 92–574, the ‘‘Noise Control Act of 1972.’’

The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in accordance with § 11.38, and they become part of the type-certification basis under § 21.17(a)(2). Novel or Unusual Design Features

The C-series airplanes will incorporate the following novel or unusual design features: A fly-by-wire electronic flight control system (EFCS) and no direct coupling from the flightdeck controller to the control surface. As a result, the pilot is not aware of the actual control surface position as envisioned under current airworthiness standards.

Discussion

These special conditions propose that the flightcrew receive a suitable flight control position annunciation when a flight condition exists in which nearlyfull surface authority (not crewcommanded) is being used. Suitability of such a display must take into account that some pilot-demanded maneuvers (e.g., rapid roll) are necessarily associated with intended full performance, which may saturate the surface. Therefore, simple alerting systems function in both intended and unexpected control-limiting situations. As a result, they must be properly balanced between providing necessary crew awareness and being a potential nuisance to the flightcrew. A monitoring system that compares airplane motion and surface deflection with the demand of the pilot side stick controller could help reduce nuisance alerting.

These special conditions also address flight control system mode annunciation. It proposes suitable mode annunciation be provided to the flightcrew for events that significantly change the operating mode of the system but do not merit the classic ‘‘failure warning.’’

These special conditions establish a level of safety equivalent to that provided by a conventional flight control system and existing regulations. Applicability

As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the Models BD–500–1A10 and BD–500–1A11 series airplanes. Should Bombardier Inc. apply at a later date for a change to the type certificate to include another model incorporating the same novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would apply to that model as well.

Conclusion

This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features on two model series of airplanes. It is not a rule of general applicability.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701,
44702, 44704. The Proposed Special Conditions

Accordingly, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) proposes the following special conditions as part of the type certification basis for the Bombardier Inc. Models BD–500–1A10 and BD–500–1A11 series airplanes.

1. Electronic Flight Control System: Control Surface Awareness and Mode Annunciation. In addition to the requirements of §§ 25.143, 25.671, and 25.672, the following requirements apply:

a. The system design must ensure that the flightcrew is made suitably aware whenever the primary control means nears the limit of control authority.

Note: The term ‘‘suitably aware’’ indicates annunciations provided to the flightcrew are appropriately balanced between nuisance and that necessary for

crew awareness.

b. If the design of the flight control system has multiple modes of operation, a means must be provided to indicate to the flightcrew any mode that significantly changes or degrades the normal handling or operational characteristics of the airplane.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 27, 2013. John Piccola, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–29685 Filed 12–11–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION** 

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2013–1027; Directorate Identifier 2013–NM–121–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 737–600, –700, 700C, –800, –900, and –900ER series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report of installation of incorrect wire support clamps within the left and right Environmental Control Systems (ECS) bay area during production, which is a flammable leakage zone. Use of incorrect wire support clamps that are not fully cushioned could allow electrical power wiring to come in contact with the exposed metal of the improper clamp, causing a short circuit and subsequent electrical arcing. This proposed AD would require inspecting to identify the part number of the wire support clamp, and related investigative and corrective actions if necessary. We are proposing this AD to prevent electrical arcing and a potential ignition source, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank explosion, and consequent loss of the airplane.

**DATES :**  We must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 27, 2014.

**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 proposed AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, Seattle, Washington 98124–


### 75513 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules

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, 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 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 :**  Georgios Roussos, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM– 130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6482; fax: 425–917–6590; email: georgios.roussos@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– 2013–1027; Directorate Identifier 2013– NM–121–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 We received a report of the installation of incorrect wire support clamps within the left and right Environmental Control Systems (ECS) bay area during production, which is a flammable leakage zone. Use of incorrect wire support clamps that are not fully cushioned could allow electrical power wiring to come in contact with the exposed metal of the improper clamp, causing a short circuit and subsequent electrical arcing. We are proposing this AD to prevent electrical arcing and a potential ignition source, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank explosion, and consequent loss of the airplane. Related Rulemaking

On November 18, 2010, we issued AD 2010–24–11, Amendment 39–16530 (75 FR 74616, December 1, 2010) for certain The Boeing Company Model 737–600, –700, –800, and –900 series airplanes. That AD required sealing the fasteners on the front end rear spars inside the main fuel tank and on the lower panel of the center fuel tank, inspecting the wire bundle support installation in the equipment cooling system bays to identify the type of clamp installed, and determine whether the Teflon sleeve was installed, and doing related corrective actions if necessary.

On February 20, 2013, we issued AD 2013–04–11, Amendment 39–17369 (78 FR 14644, March 7, 2013) for certain The Boeing Company Model 737–600, –700, –800, and –900ER series airplanes. That AD required inspections to identify the part number of the wire support clamp, related investigative actions, and corrective actions if
necessary.
Relevant Service Information

We reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–28– 1312, dated April 19, 2013. For information on the procedures and compliance times, see this service information at http://www.regulations.
gov by searching for Docket No. FAA– 2013–1027. The related investigative actions include an eddy current inspection of the wing front spar for cracking and a detailed inspection of the bolt forward of the wing front spar upper chord for cracking or missing bolts. The corrective actions include repairing cracking and replacing bolts with new bolts.

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

In addition, the phrase ‘‘corrective actions’’ is used in this proposed AD. ‘‘Corrective actions’’ are those actions that are on-condition actions that correct or address any condition found. Corrective actions could include, for example, repairs, removal and replacement, and modifications. Clarification of Applicability in Paragraph (c) of This Proposed AD

The NOTE specified in Paragraph 1.A., ‘‘Effectivity,’’ of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–28– 1312, dated April 19, 2013, is in error. It does not impact the Variable Number list in paragraph 1.A.1. of that section. Therefore, for the applicability of this proposed AD, we have referred to the Variable Number list in paragraph 1.A.1., ‘‘Effectivity,’’ in paragraph (c) of this proposed AD. Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this proposed AD affects 519 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

Inspection ...................................... 6 work-hours × $85 per hour = $510 .................................................. $0 $510 $264,690


### 75514 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules

We estimate the following costs to do any necessary related investigative and corrective actions that would be required based on the results of the proposed inspection. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these actions.



### O N 

### -CONDITION 

### C OSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product

Related investigative and corrective actions. 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 ...................................................................... $3 $88

According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this proposed AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost estimate.

We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide cost estimates for the on-condition repair of chafed or damaged wiring 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.

**§ 39.13 [Amended]**

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 2013–1027; Directorate Identifier 2013– NM–121–AD.
(a) Comments Due Date

We must receive comments by January 27,
2014.
(b) Affected ADs

None. (c) Applicability

This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 737–600, –700, 700C, –800, –900, and –900ER series airplanes; certificated in any category; having a Variable Number identified in paragraph 1.A.1., Effectivity, of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–28–1312, dated April 19, 2013.
(d) Subject

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28, Fuel System.
(e) Unsafe Condition

This AD was prompted by a report of installation of incorrect wire support clamps within the left and right Environmental Control Systems (ECS) bay area during production, which is a flammable leakage zone. Use of incorrect wire support clamps that are not fully cushioned could allow electrical power wiring to come in contact with the exposed metal of the improper clamp, causing a short circuit and subsequent electrical arcing. We are issuing this AD to prevent electrical arcing and a potential ignition source, which, in combination with flammable fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank explosion, and consequent loss of the airplane.
(f) Compliance

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

Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD: Do a detailed inspection to determine if a wire support clamp having part number (P/N) TA0930034–10, TA0930034–10P, TA0930034–11, or TA0930034–12P is installed, and do all applicable related investigative and corrective actions before further flight, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–28–1312, dated April 19, 2013.
(h) Parts Installation Prohibition

As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a wire support clamp on any airplane within the ECS area defined in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–28– 1312, dated April 19, 2013, unless the clamp has P/N TA0930034–10, TA0930034–10P, TA0930034–11, or TA0930034–12P. (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 paragraph (j)(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


### 75515 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 239 / Thursday, December 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules

of the local flight standards district office/ certificate holding district office.
(j) Related Information

(1) For more information about this AD, contact Georgios Roussos, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM–130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917– 6482; fax: 425–917–6590; email: georgios.roussos@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; Internet https:// www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this 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 December 4, 2013. John P. Piccola, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–29593 Filed 12–11–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES** 

**Food and Drug Administration**

**21 CFR Parts 514 and 558**

**[Docket No. FDA–2010–N–0155]**

**RIN 0910–AG95**

**Veterinary Feed Directive**

**AGENCY :**  Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is proposing to amend its animal drug regulations regarding veterinary feed directive (VFD) drugs. FDA’s VFD regulation, which became effective on January 8, 2001, established requirements relating to the distribution and use of VFD drugs and animal feeds containing such drugs. This proposed amendment is intended to improve the efficiency of FDA’s VFD
program.
**DATES :**  Submit either electronic or written comments on the proposed rule by March 12, 2014. Submit comments on information collection issues under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA) by January 13, 2014, (see the ‘‘Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995’’ section). **ADDRESSES :**  You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FDA–2010–N– 0155, by any of the following methods, except that comments on information collection issues under the PRA must be submitted to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) (see the ‘‘Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995’’ section).

Electronic Submissions

Submit electronic comments in the following way

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

Written Submissions

Submit written submissions in the following way:

• Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for paper or CD–ROM submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA– 305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

Instructions: All submissions received must include the Agency name and Docket No. FDA–2010–N–0155 for this rulemaking. All comments received may be posted without change to http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For additional information on submitting comments, see the ‘‘Comments’’ heading of the **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION** section.

Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to http:// www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the ‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Sharon Benz, Center for Veterinary Medicine (HFV–220), Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 240–453–6864, email: Sharon.Benz@fda.hhs.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 
Table of Contents

I. Background

A. History B. Judicious Use Policy for Medically

Important Antimicrobials II. Highlights of the Proposed Rule

A. User-Friendly Reorganization of the

VFD Regulation B. Increased Flexibility for Licensed

Veterinarians Issuing VFDs C. Continued Access to Category I Type A

Medicated Articles by Unlicensed Feed Mills D. Increased Flexibility for Food Animal Producers Purchasing VFD Feeds E. Lower Recordkeeping Burden for All

Involved Parties III. Proposed Regulations

A. Conforming Changes (Proposed

§ 514.1(b)(9) B. Definitions (Proposed § 558.3(b)) C. General Requirements Related to VFD

Drugs (Proposed § 558.6(a)) D. Responsibilities of the Veterinarian

Issuing the VFD (Proposed § 558.6(b)) E. Responsibilities of the Medicated Feed

Distributor (Proposed § 558.6(c)) IV. Legal Authority V. Preliminary Regulatory Impact Analysis VI. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 VII. Environmental Impact VIII. Federalism IX. Comments

Executive Summary Purpose of Proposed Rule

The purpose of this rulemaking is to revise FDA’s VFD regulations to improve the efficiency of the VFD
program.

In 1996, Congress enacted the Animal Drug Availability Act (ADAA) (Pub. L. 104–250) to facilitate the approval and marketing of new animal drugs and medicated feeds. In passing the ADAA, Congress created a new regulatory category for certain animal drugs used in animal feed called veterinary feed directive drugs or VFD drugs. VFD drugs are new animal drugs intended for use in or on animal feed which are limited to use under the professional supervision of a licensed veterinarian in the course of the veterinarian’s professional practice. FDA publishedfinal regulations implementing the VFDrelated provisions of the ADAA in 2000 (see § 558.6 (21 CFR 558.6)). In the decade since those regulations were issued, stakeholders informed FDA that the VFD process is overly burdensome. In response to those concerns, FDA published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking in March 2010, and a draft proposed regulation in April
2012.

As FDA begins to implement the judicious use principles for medically important antimicrobial new animaldrugs approved for use in foodproducing animals, based on the framework set forth in Guidance for Industry (GFI) #209 (published April 13, 2012), it is critical that the Agency makes the VFD program as efficient as possible for stakeholders while maintaining adequate protection for human and animal health. The provisions included in this proposed rule are based on stakeholder input received in response to multiple opportunities for public comment, including an advance notice of