Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules 10093 

to express views on this issue. Finally, 

interested persons are invited to submit 

information on the regulatory and 

informational impacts of this action on 

small businesses. 

This proposed rule would impose no 

additional reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements on either small or large 

California olive 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. 

The 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 rule. 

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/ 

fv/moab/html. Any questions about the 

compliance guide should be sent to Jay 

Guerber at the previously mentioned 

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 

2007 fiscal year began on January 1, 

2007, and the marketing order requires 

that the rate of assessment for each 

fiscal year apply to all assessable olives 

handled during such fiscal year; (2) the 

committee needs sufficient funds to pay 

its expenses, which are incurred on a 

continuous basis; and (3) handlers are 

aware of this action, which was 

discussed by the committee and 

unanimously recommended at a public 

meeting, and is similar to other 

assessment rate actions issued in past 

years. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 932 

Marketing agreements, Olives, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 932 is proposed to 

be amended as follows: 

PART 932—OLIVES GROWN IN 

CALIFORNIA 

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 932 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

2. Section 932.230 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 932.230 Assessment rate. 

On and after January 1, 2007, an 

assessment rate of $47.84 per ton is 

established for California olives. 

Dated: March 1, 2007. 

Lloyd C. Day, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–3936 Filed 3–6–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2006–26598; Directorate 

Identifier 2006–CE–87–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Empresa 

Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. 

(EMBRAER) Models EMB–110P1 and 

EMB–110P2 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM); 

reopening of the comment period. 

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier 

NPRM for the products listed above. 

This proposed AD results from 

mandatory continuing airworthiness 

information (MCAI) originated by an 

aviation authority of another country to 

identify and correct an unsafe condition 

on an aviation product. The MCAI 

describes the unsafe condition as: 

It has been found cases of corrosion at 

regions of Wings-to-Fuselage attachments, 

Vertical Stabilizer to Fuselage attachments, 

Rib 1 Half-wing and Passenger Seat Tracks. 

Such corrosion may lead to subsequent 

fatigue cracking of the parts affected, 

reducing the aircraft structural integrity, 

which may in turn lead to structural failure 

and/or loss of some control surface. 

The proposed AD would require 

actions that are intended to address the 

unsafe condition described in the MCAI. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by April 6, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• DOT Docket Web Site: 

Go to http://dms.dot.gov and follow the 

instructions for sending your comments 

electronically. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, 

Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590–

0001. 

• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on 

the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://dms.dot.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 (telephone (800) 647–

5227) is in the ADDRESSES section. 

Comments will be available in the AD 

docket shortly after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karl 

Schletzbaum, Aerospace Engineer, 901 

Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, 

Missouri, 64106; telephone: (816) 329–

4146; fax: (816) 329–4090. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Streamlined Issuance of AD 

The FAA is implementing a new 

process for streamlining the issuance of 

ADs related to MCAI. This streamlined 

process will allow us to adopt MCAI 

safety requirements in a more efficient 

manner and will reduce safety risks to 

the public. This process continues to 

follow all FAA AD issuance processes to 

meet legal, economic, Administrative 

Procedure Act, and Federal Register 

requirements. We also continue to meet 

our technical decision-making 

responsibilities to identify and correct 

unsafe conditions on U.S.-certificated 

products. 

This proposed AD references the 

MCAI and related service information 

that we considered in forming the 

engineering basis to correct the unsafe 

condition. The proposed AD contains 

text copied from the MCAI and for this 

reason might not follow our plain 

language principles. 

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–2006–26598; Directorate Identifier 

2006–CE–87–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 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
10094 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

proposed AD because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

dms.dot.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 proposed to amend 14 CFR part 

39 with an earlier NPRM for the 

specified products, which was 

published in the Federal Register on 

January 8, 2007 (72 FR 678). That earlier 

NPRM proposed to require actions 

intended to address the unsafe 

condition for the products listed above. 

Since that NPRM was issued, the FAA 

has received three verbal comments 

requesting additional time to comment 

on the proposed rule. Since the NPRM 

comment period has already closed, the 

FAA is granting this extension by 

reopening the comment period instead 

of extending the comment period. 

Relevant Service Information 

Embraer—Empresa Brasileira de 

Aeronutica S.A. (EMBRAER) has issued 

Service Bulletin S.B. No.: 110–00–0007, 

dated May 10, 2006. The actions 

described in this service information are 

intended to correct the unsafe condition 

identified in the MCAI. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

received no written comments on the 

NPRM or on the determination of the 

cost to the public. We did receive three 

verbal comments requesting additional 

time to comment on the proposed rule. 

Since others may want additional time 

to comment who did not contact the 

FAA, we are reopening the comment 

period for an additional 30 days. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of the Proposed AD 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of another 

country, and is approved for operation 

in the United States. Pursuant to our 

bilateral agreement with this State of 

Design Authority, they have notified us 

of the unsafe condition described in the 

MCAI and service information 

referenced above. We are proposing this 

AD because we evaluated all 

information and determined the unsafe 

condition exists and is likely to exist or 

develop on other products of the same 

type design. 

We have since determined that the 

scope of the earlier NPRM made it 

difficult for the public to comment 

within the original comment period. As 

a result, we have determined that it is 

necessary to reopen the comment period 

to provide additional opportunity for 

the public to comment on the proposed 

AD. 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the MCAI or Service Information 

We have reviewed the MCAI and 

related service information and, in 

general, agree with their substance. But 

we might have found it necessary to use 

different words from those in the MCAI 

to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. 

operators and is enforceable. In making 

these changes, we do not intend to differ 

substantively from the information 

provided in the MCAI and related 

service information. 

We might also have proposed 

different actions in this AD from those 

in the MCAI in order to follow FAA 

policies. Any such differences are 

highlighted in a NOTE within the 

proposed AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

Based on the service information, we 

estimate that this proposed AD would 

affect about 42 products of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it would take 

about 942 work-hours per product to 

comply with the basic requirements of 

this proposed AD. The average labor 

rate is $80 per work-hour. Based on 

these figures, we estimate the cost of the 

proposed AD on U.S. operators to be 

$3,165,120 or $75,360 per product. 

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); and 

3. 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. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD and placed it in the 

AD docket. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, 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 AD: 

Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. 

(EMBRAER): Docket No. FAA–2006–

26598; Directorate Identifier 2006–CE–

87–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by April 6, 

2007. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Models EMB–110P1 

and EMB–110P2 airplanes, all serial 

numbers, certificated in any category. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association of America 

(ATA) Code 51: Structures. 

Reason 

(e) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states: 

It has been found cases of corrosion at 

regions of Wings-to-Fuselage attachments, 

Vertical Stabilizer to Fuselage attachments, 

Rib 1 Half-wing and Passenger Seat Tracks. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 7, 2007 / Proposed Rules 10095 

Such corrosion may lead to subsequent 

fatigue cracking of the parts affected, 

reducing the aircraft structural integrity, 

which may in turn lead to structural failure 

and/or loss of some control surface. 

Actions and Compliance 

(f) Unless already done, do the following 

actions. 

(1) Within the next 30 days or 100 hours 

time-in-service after the effective date of this 

AD, whichever occurs first, carry out a 

general visual inspection (GVI) for corrosion 

at the regions of the Wings-to-Fuselage 

attachments, Vertical Stabilizer to Fuselage 

attachments, Rib 1 Half-wing, and Passenger 

Seat Tracks, according to Parts I, II, and III 

of the Embraer—Empresa Brasileira de 

Aeronutica S.A. (EMBRAER) Service Bulletin 

S.B. No.: 110–00–0007, dated May 10, 2006. 

(i) All structures found corroded or cracked 

as a result of the inspections conducted 

above, must be addressed prior to further 

flight in accordance with detailed 

instructions and procedures described in 

EMBRAER Service Bulletin S.B. No.: 110–

00–0007, dated May 10, 2006. 

(ii) Previous accomplishment of the 

EMBRAER Alert Service Bulletin S.B. No.: 

110–00–A007, dated March 6, 2006, or the 

implementation of the tasks above, required 

by section VI of the Maintenance Planning 

Guides TP 110P2/145, PM 110/652, or PM 

110/165, are considered acceptable methods 

of compliance with the requirements of (f)(1) 

of this AD. 

(2) Within the next 30 days after the 

effective date of this AD, accomplish Part IV 

of the EMBRAER Service Bulletin S.B. No.: 

110–00–0007, dated May 10, 2006. All 

structures found corroded or cracked as a 

result of the inspections conducted above, 

must be addressed prior to further flight in 

accordance with detailed instructions and 

procedures described in EMBRAER Service 

Bulletin S.B. No.: 110–00–0007, dated May 

10, 2006. 

(3) Within the next 12 months after the 

effective date of this AD, accomplish Part V 

of the EMBRAER Service Bulletin S.B. No.: 

110–00–0007, dated May 10, 2006. All 

structures found corroded or cracked as a 

result of the inspections conducted above, 

must be addressed prior to further flight in 

accordance with detailed instructions and 

procedures described in EMBRAER Service 

Bulletin S.B. No.: 110–00–0007, dated May 

10, 2006. 

Note 1: For the purpose of this AD a GVI 

is: ‘‘A visual examination of an interior or 

exterior area, installation or assembly to 

detect obvious damage, failure, or 

irregularity. This level of inspection is made 

from within touching distance, unless 

otherwise specified. A mirror may be 

necessary to enhance visual access to all 

exposed surfaces in the inspection area. This 

level of inspection is made under normally 

available lighting conditions such as 

daylight, hangar lighting, flashlight, or droplight; and may require removal or opening of 

access panels or doors. Stands, ladders, or 

platforms may be required to gain proximity 

to the area being checked.’’

FAA AD Differences 

Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: No 

differences. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(g) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Staff, 

FAA, ATTN: Karl Schletzbaum, Aerospace 

Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 

901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 

64106; telephone: (816) 329–4146; fax: (816) 

329–4090, has the authority to approve 

AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the 

procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

(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. 

(3) Reporting Requirements: For any 

reporting requirement in this AD, under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et.seq.), the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved the information collection 

requirements and has assigned OMB Control 

Number 2120–0056. 

Related Information 

(h) Refer to MCAI National Agency of Civil 

Aviation (ANAC) AD No.: 2006–10–01, dated 

October 25, 2006, EMBRAER Service Bulletin 

S.B. No.: 110–00–0007, dated May 10, 2006, 

and EMBRAER Alert Service Bulletin S.B. 

No.: 110–00–A007, dated March 6, 2006 for 

related information. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on March 

1, 2007. 

Kim Smith, 

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–3987 Filed 3–6–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

22 CFR Part 51 

[Public Notice 5712] 

RIN 1400–AC28 

Passports 

AGENCY: Department of State. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The proposed rule would 

reorganize, restructure, and update the 

passport regulations contained in 22 

CFR part 51 in order to make them 

easier for the users to access the 

information, to better reflect current 

practices and changes in statutory 

authority, and to remove outdated 

provisions. 

DATE: The Department will accept 

comments on this proposed regulation 

until May 7, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by the following methods (no 

duplicates, please): 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov/index.cfm. Follow 

the instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Electronically: You may submit 

electronic comments to: 

Comments.22.CFR.Part_51.

update@state.gov. Attachments must be 

in Microsoft Word. 

• Mail (paper, disk, or CD–ROM 

submissions): Comments by mail should 

be addressed to: Director, Office of 

Passport Policy, Planning and Advisory 

Services, Bureau of Consular Affairs, 

2100 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 3rd 

Floor, Washington, DC 20037, fax (202) 

663–2654. 

Instructions: All submissions must 

include the Regulatory Identification 

Number (RIN). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Consuelo Pachon, Office of Passport 

Policy, (202) 663–2662. Hearing or 

speech-impaired persons may use the 

Telecommunications Devices for the 

Deaf (TDD) by contacting the Federal 

Information Relay Service at 1–800–

877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Department’s Bureau of Consular Affairs 

is proposing to update and amend its 

passport regulations in 22 CFR Part 51. 

Most of the current passport regulations 

in Part 51 of 22 CFR were issued in 

1966, although significant modifications 

have been made as needed. For 

example, in recent years the passport 

regulations have been amended to 

improve our ability to combat 

international parental child abduction 

by requiring that both parents consent to 

passport issuance to minors under age 

14 (with specified exceptions) and to 

enhance the security of the passport by 

introducing the electronic passport and 

eliminating passport amendments. Still, 

many of the current provisions in Part 

51 have not been revised in many years, 

and the Department believes it useful 

for them to be modernized and 

restructured in their entirety. 

Accordingly, this proposed rule 

reorganizes and updates existing 

passport regulations in order to make 

them easier for users to access the 

information, to better reflect current 

practice and changes in statutory 

authority, and to remove outdated 

provisions. In general, the proposed 

revisions do not mark a departure from 

current policy. Rather the Department’s 

intent is to bring greater clarity to 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS