### 63130 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 23, 2013 / Proposed Rules

Chapter 35), the order’s information collection requirements have been previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and assigned OMB No. 0581–0178. No changes in those requirements as a result of this action are necessary. Should any changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for approval.

This proposed rule would impose no additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small or large California prune 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 action.

A small business guide on complying with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and orders may be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/ AMSv1.0/MarketingOrdersSmall BusinessGuide. Any questions about the compliance guide should be sent toJeffrey Smutny at the previouslymentioned address in the **FOR FURTHER**
**INFORMATION CONTACT** section.

A 15-day comment period is provided to allow interested persons to respond to this proposed rule. Fifteen days is deemed appropriate because: (1) The 2013–14 crop year began on August 1, 2013, and the marketing order requires that the rate of assessment for each crop year apply to all assessable prunes to be handled during such crop year; (2) the Committee needs to have sufficient funds to pay its expenses, which are incurred on a continuous basis; and (3) handlers are aware of this action, which was unanimously recommended by the Committee at a public meeting and is similar to other assessment rate actions issued in past years.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 993

Marketing agreements, Plum, Prunes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 993 is proposed to be amended as follows: **PART 993—DRIED PRUNES PRODUCED IN CALIFORNIA** 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 993 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

■ 2. Section 993.347 is revised to read as follows:

**§ 993.347 Assessment rate.**

On and after August 1, 2013, an assessment rate of $0.28 per ton of salable dried prunes is established for California dried prunes.

Dated: October 17, 2013. Rex A. Barnes, Associate Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–24899 Filed 10–22–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3410–02–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2013–0864; Directorate Identifier 2013–NM–108–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 777F series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report of a fire that originated near the first officer’s seat and caused extensive damage to the flight deck. This proposed AD would require replacing the low-pressureoxygen hoses with non-conductive lowpressure oxygen hoses in the stowage box and supernumerary ceiling area. We are proposing this AD to prevent electrical current from passing through an internal, anti-collapse spring of the low-pressure oxygen hose, which can cause the low-pressure oxygen hose to melt or burn and lead to an oxygen-fed fire on the flight deck.

**DATES :**  We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 9, 2013.

**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, WA 98124–2207; telephone 206–544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766–5680; Internet https:// www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. 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 :**  Susan L. Monroe, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM–150S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; phone: 425– 917–6457; fax: 425–917–6590; email: susan.l.monroe@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– 2013–0864; Directorate Identifier 2013– NM–108–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.


### 63131 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 23, 2013 / Proposed Rules

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 have received a report of a fire that originated near the first officer’s seat and caused extensive damage to the flight deck. Electrical current passing through an internal, anti-collapse spring of the low-pressure oxygen hose can cause the low-pressure oxygen hose to melt or burn and lead to an oxygen-fed fire on the flight deck.

Relevant Service Information

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777–35A0029, Revision 1, dated April 29, 2013. For information on the procedures, see this service information at http:// www.regulations.gov by searching for Docket No. FAA–2013–0864.

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 identified previously. Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this proposed AD affects 18 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

Replace oxygen hoses ........... 7 work-hours × $85 per hour = $595 ..................................... $1,450 $2,045 $36,810

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.
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– 2013–0864; Directorate Identifier 2013– NM–108–AD. (a) Comments Due Date We must receive comments by December 9,
2013.
(b) Affected ADs

None.
(c) Applicability

This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 777F series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777–35A0029, Revision 1, dated April 29, 2013.
(d) Subject

Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/ Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 35, Oxygen.

(e) Unsafe Condition

This AD was prompted by a report of a fire that originated near the first officer’s seat and caused extensive damage to the flight deck. We are issuing this AD to prevent electrical current from passing through an internal, anti-collapse spring of the low-pressureoxygen hose, which can cause the lowpressure oxygen hose to melt or burn and lead to an oxygen-fed fire on the flight deck.
(f) Compliance

Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
(g) Oxygen Hose Replacement

Within 36 months after the effective date of this AD: Replace the low-pressure oxygen hoses in the stowage box and supernumeraryceiling area with new non-conductive lowpressure oxygen hoses, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777–35A0029, Revision 1, dated April 29, 2013.

(h) Parts Installation Prohibition

As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install a low-pressure oxygen hose, part number (P/N) 57034–08A050140,


### 63132 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 23, 2013 / Proposed Rules

P/N 57034–08A050215, or P/N 57034– 09A050270, on any airplane.
(i) Credit for Previous Actions

This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777–35A0029, dated June 6, 2012, provided that the low-pressure oxygen hoses described in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777–35A0029, Revision 1, datedApril 29, 2013, were replaced with new nonconductive low-pressure oxygen hoses. Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777–35A0029, dated June 6, 2012, is not incorporated by reference in 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) 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 required by this AD if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes ODA that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.
(k) Related Information

(1) For more information about this AD, Susan L. Monroe, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM–150S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6457; fax: 425–917–6590; email: susan.l.monroe@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 review copies of the 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 September 30, 2013. Jeffrey E. Duven, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–24794 Filed 10–22–13; 8:45 am]

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

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2013–0865; Directorate Identifier 2012–NM–199–AD]** 

**RIN 2120–AA64**

**Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Services B.V. 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 Fokker Services B.V. Model F.28 Mark 0070 and 0100 airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design approval holder (DAH) indicating that the butt-joints on the forward fuselage above the passenger door are subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). This proposed AD would require inspecting the forward fuselage butt-joints for cracking, repairing any crack, and eventually doing a terminating repair. We are proposing this AD to prevent fatigue cracking of such butt-joints, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane and in-flight decompression of the airplane.

**DATES :**  We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 9, 2013.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may send comments by any of the following methods:

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

• Fax: (202) 493–2251.

• Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Fokker Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O. Box 1357, 2130 EL Hoofddorp, the Netherlands; telephone +31 (0)88–6280– 350; fax +31 (0)88–6280–111; email technicalservices@fokker.com; Internet http://www.myfokkerfleet.com. You may review copies of the 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. Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the MCAI, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is in the **ADDRESSES** section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–1137; fax (425) 227–1149.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 
Comments Invited

We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the

**ADDRESSES** section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2013–0865; Directorate Identifier 2012–NM–199–AD’’ at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD based on those comments.

We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

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