38408 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 128 / Monday, July 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

to which the AMOC applies, notify your 

appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the 

FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), 

or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(h) Related Information 

Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety 

Agency (EASA) AD No.: 2015–0071, dated 

April 30, 2015; Piaggio Aero Industries S.p.A. 

Service Bulletin 80–0081, Original Issue, 

dated: April 28, 1997; Piaggio Aero Industries 

S.p.A. Service Bulletin 80–0081, Revision 

No. 1, dated: May 11, 2010; or Piaggio Aero 

Industries S.p.A. Service Bulletin 80–0081, 

Revision No. 2, dated: July 19, 2010, for 

related information. You may examine the 

MCAI on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for and 

locating Docket No. FAA–2015–2466. For 

service information related to this AD, 

contact Piaggio Aero Industries S.p.A, 

Airworthiness Office, Viale Generale 

Disegna, 1–17038 Villanova d’Albenga, 

Savona, Italy; telephone: +39 010 6481800; 

fax: +39 010 6481374; email: 

technicalsupport@piaggioaerospace.it; 

Internet: www.piaggioaerospace.it/en/

customer-support#care. You may review this 

referenced service information at the FAA, 

Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, 

Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information 

on the availability of this material at the 

FAA, call (816) 329–4148. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on June 

25, 2015. 

Earl Lawrence, 

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–16293 Filed 7–2–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–2456; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–NM–032–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 all The 

Boeing Company Model 767 airplanes. 

This proposed AD was prompted by 

reports of cracking at a central part of 

the structure. This proposed AD would 

require repetitive inspections of the skin 

hidden by the upper and lower splice 

fittings on both sides of the fuselage, 

and corrective action if necessary. We 

are proposing this AD to detect and 

correct fatigue cracking of the hidden 

fuselage skin and cracking, corrosion, 

and other damage to the splice fittings 

and adjacent visible fuselage skin and 

structure that could lead to loss of a 

primary load path between the fuselage 

and the wing box, and consequent 

reduced structural integrity of the 

airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by August 20, 2015. 

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 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–2015– 

2456. 

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–2015– 

2456; 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– 

2015–2456; Directorate Identifier 2015– 

NM–032–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 

While replacing a cracked underwing 

longeron fitting, a crack indication was 

found in the STA 786 ring chord at the 

tension bolt hole common to the wing 

front spar lower chord and the internal 

bathtub fittings. There were two similar 

reports of these findings from two 

separate operators. The airplanes in 

these reports had 14,367 and 18,354 

flight cycles and 90,389 and 96,826 

flight hours, respectively. The current 

inspections in the Model 767 

Maintenance Planning Document are 

not sufficient to detect any possible 

fuselage skin crack in the area adjacent 

to the ring chord at STA 786 before the 

crack extends to a critical length. The 

fuselage skin in this area is hidden 

between the splice fittings on the 

external side of the fuselage and the 

bathtub fittings on the internal side. 

This condition, if not corrected, could 

result in loss of a primary load path 

between the fuselage and the wing box, 

and consequent reduced structural 

integrity of the airplane. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 767–53A0263, dated January 


Lhorne on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 128 / Monday, July 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules 38409 

12, 2015. The service information 

describes procedures for repetitive 

inspections of the skin and splice 

fittings at stringer 29, body station 786 

ring chord. 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 of this NPRM. 

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 

‘‘Differences Between this Proposed AD 

and the Service Information.’’ Refer to 

this service information for details on 

the procedures and compliance times. 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767– 

53A0263, dated January 12, 2015, 

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. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 430 airplanes of U.S. registry. We 

estimate the following costs to comply 

with this proposed AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS

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

Inspection ................. 9 work-hours × $85 per hour = $765 per 

inspection cycle.

$0 $765 per inspection cycle ....... $328,950 per inspection cycle. 

We have received no definitive data 

that would enable us to provide cost 

estimates for the on-condition actions 

specified in this proposed AD. 

Explanation of ‘‘RC (Required for 

Compliance)’’ Steps in Service 

Information 

The FAA worked in conjunction with 

industry, under the Airworthiness 

Directive Implementation Aviation 

Rulemaking Committee (ARC), to 

enhance the AD system. One 

enhancement was a new process for 

annotating which steps in the service 

information are required for compliance 

with an AD. Differentiating these steps 

from other tasks in the service 

information is expected to improve an 

owner’s/operator’s understanding of 

crucial AD requirements and help 

provide consistent judgment in AD 

compliance. The steps identified as RC 

(required for compliance) in any service 

information identified previously have a 

direct effect on detecting, preventing, 

resolving, or eliminating an identified 

unsafe condition. 

For service information that contains 

steps that are labeled as Required for 

Compliance (RC), the following 

provisions apply: (1) 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, and an AMOC is required for any 

deviations to RC steps, including 

substeps and identified figures; and (2) 

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. 

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– 

2015–2456; Directorate Identifier 2015– 

NM–032–AD. 


Lhorne on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38410 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 128 / Monday, July 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by August 20, 

2015. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to all The Boeing 

Company Model 767–200, –300, –300F, and 

–400ER series airplanes, certificated in any 

category. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by reports of 

cracking at the station (STA 786) ring chord 

at the tension bolt hole common to the wing 

front spar lower chord and the internal 

bathtub fittings. We are issuing this AD to 

detect and correct fatigue cracking of the 

hidden fuselage skin and cracking, corrosion, 

and other damage to the splice fittings and 

adjacent visible fuselage skin and structure 

that could lead to loss of a primary load path 

between the fuselage and the wing box, and 

consequent reduced structural integrity of the 

airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Inspection 

At the applicable time specified in 

paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0263, dated 

January 12, 2015, except as required by 

paragraph (h) of this AD, do external 

ultrasonic and detailed inspections to detect 

cracking, corrosion, or other damage at the 

splice fitting location, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 767–53A0263, dated January 

12, 2015. 

(1) If cracking, corrosion, or other damage 

is not found, repeat the inspections at 

intervals not to exceed 6,000 flight cycles or 

18,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first. 

Accomplishing a repair as specified in 

paragraph (g)(2) of this AD terminates the 

repetitive inspections in the repaired area 

only. 

(2) If any cracking, corrosion, or other 

damage is found, before further flight, repair 

using a method approved in accordance with 

the procedures specified in paragraph (i) of 

this AD. The repetitive inspections of 

paragraph (g)(1) are terminated in the 

repaired area only. 

(h) Exceptions to Service Information 

Specifications 

Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767– 

53A0263, dated January 12, 2015, specifies a 

compliance time ‘‘after the original issue date 

of this Service Bulletin,’’ this AD requires 

compliance within the specified compliance 

time after the effective date of this AD. 

(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 

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 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 must meet 

the certification basis of the airplane, and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

(4) For service information that contains 

steps that are labeled as Required for 

Compliance (RC), the provisions of 

paragraphs (i)(4)(i) and (i)(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. 

(j) 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 June 24, 

2015. 

Dionne Palermo, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–16296 Filed 7–2–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

16 CFR Part 313 

RIN 3084–AB42 

Amendment to the Privacy of 

Consumer Financial Information Rule 

Under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act 

Correction 

In proposed rule document 2015– 

14328 beginning on page 36267 in the 

issue of Wednesday, June 24, 2015, 

make the following correction: 

On page 36268, in the first column, in 

the second full paragraph, in the second 

line, ‘‘August 17, 2015’’ should read 

‘‘August 31, 2015’’. 

[FR Doc. C1 2015–14328 Filed 7–2–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND 

URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

24 CFR Part 203 

[Docket No. FR–5742–P–01] 

RIN 2502–AJ23 

Federal Housing Administration (FHA): 

Single Family Mortgage Insurance 

Maximum Time Period for Filing 

Insurance Claims, Curtailment of 

Interest and Disallowance of Operating 

Expenses Incurred Beyond Certain 

Established Timeframes 

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant 

Secretary for Housing—Federal Housing 

Commissioner, HUD. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would 

establish the maximum time period 

within which an FHA-approved 

mortgagee must file a claim with FHA 

for insurance benefits. HUD’s current 

regulations are silent with respect to a 

deadline by which a claim for insurance 

benefits must be filed with FHA. Due to 

the downturn in the housing market, 

which resulted in a significant increase 

in mortgage defaults, some mortgagees 

have refrained from promptly filing 

claims for insurance benefits and 

instead have opted to wait and file 

multiple claims with FHA at a single 

point in time. The uncertainty regarding 

a deadline by which a claim must be 


Lhorne on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS