12546 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 51 / Friday, March 16, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

1The FECA and Commission regulations also 

recognize the Commission’s authority to dismiss 

enforcement matters. See 2 U.S.C. 437g(a)(1); 11 

CFR 111.6(b) and 111.7(b). 

resources.1 As with other actions taken 

by the Commission, dismissal of a 

matter requires the vote of at least four 

Commissioners. 

Pursuant to the exercise of its 

prosecutorial discretion, the 

Commission will dismiss a matter when 

the matter does not merit further use of 

Commission resources, due to factors 

such as the small amount or significance 

of the alleged violation, the vagueness 

or weakness of the evidence, or likely 

difficulties with an investigation, or 

when the Commission lacks majority 

support for proceeding with a matter for 

other reasons. For example, a dismissal 

would be appropriate when: 

• The seriousness of the alleged 

conduct is not sufficient to justify the 

likely cost and difficulty of an 

investigation to determine whether a 

violation in fact occurred; or 

• The evidence is sufficient to 

support a ‘‘reason to believe’’ finding, 

but the violation is minor. 

The Commission may also dismiss 

when, based on the complaint, 

response, and publicly available 

information, the Commission concludes 

that a violation of the Act did or very 

probably did occur, but the size or 

significance of the apparent violation is 

not sufficient to warrant further pursuit 

by the Commission. In this latter 

circumstance, the Commission will send 

a letter admonishing the respondent. 

For example, a dismissal with 

admonishment would be appropriate 

when: 

• A respondent admits to a violation, 

but the amount of the violation is not 

sufficient to warrant any monetary 

penalty; or 

• A complaint convincingly alleges a 

violation, but the significance of the 

violation is not sufficient to warrant 

further pursuit by the Commission. 

C. ‘‘No Reason To Believe’’

The Commission will make a 

determination of ‘‘no reason to believe’’

a violation has occurred when the 

available information does not provide 

a basis for proceeding with the matter. 

The Commission finds ‘‘no reason to 

believe’’ when the complaint, any 

response filed by the respondent, and 

any publicly available information, 

when taken together, fail to give rise to 

a reasonable inference that a violation 

has occurred, or even if the allegations 

were true, would not constitute a 

violation of the law. For example, a ‘‘no 

reason to believe’’ finding would be 

appropriate when: 

• A violation has been alleged, but 

the respondent’s response or other 

evidence convincingly demonstrates 

that no violation has occurred; 

• A complaint alleges a violation but 

is either not credible or is so vague that 

an investigation would be effectively 

impossible; or 

• A complaint fails to describe a 

violation of the Act. 

If the Commission, with the vote of at 

least four Commissioners, finds that 

there is ‘‘no reason to believe’’ a 

violation has occurred or is about to 

occur with respect to the allegations in 

the complaint, the Commission will 

close the file and respondents and the 

complainant will be notified. 

D. Conclusion 

This policy enunciates and describes 

the Commission’s standards for actions 

at the point of determining whether or 

not to open an investigation or to enter 

into conciliation with respondents prior 

to a finding of probable cause to believe. 

The policy does not confer any rights on 

any person and does not in any way 

limit the right of the Commission to 

evaluate every case individually on its 

own facts and circumstances. 

This notice represents a general 

statement of policy announcing the 

general course of action that the 

Commission intends to follow. This 

policy statement does not constitute an 

agency regulation requiring notice of 

proposed rulemaking, opportunities for 

public participation, prior publication, 

and delay effective under 5 U.S.C. 553 

of the Administrative Procedures Act 

(‘‘APA’’). As such, it does not bind the 

Commission or any member of the 

general public. The provisions of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 

605(b), which apply when notice and 

comment are required by the APA or 

another statute, are not applicable. 

Dated: March 7, 2007. 

Robert D. Lenhard, 

Chairman, Federal Election Commission. 

[FR Doc. E7–4868 Filed 3–15–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6715–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2006–26166; Directorate 

Identifier 2006–CE–58–AD; Amendment 39–

14992; AD 2007–06–11] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; EADS 

SOCATA Model TBM 700 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. This AD results 

from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

issued 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: 

Cracks on a vertical stabilizer attachment 

fitting due to corrosion, have been found on 

an aircraft in service. 

We are issuing this AD to require 

actions to correct the unsafe condition 

on these products. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective April 

20, 2007. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in this AD 

as of April 20, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http:// 

dms.dot.gov or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility, U.S. Department 

of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, 

SW., Nassif Building, Room PL–401, 

Washington, DC. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Albert J. Mercado, Aerospace Engineer, 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 

Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, 

Missouri, 64106; telephone: (816) 329–

4119; 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. The 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 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 51 / Friday, March 16, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 12547 

our technical decision-making 

responsibilities to identify and correct 

unsafe conditions on U.S.-certificated 

products. 

This AD references the MCAI and 

related service information that we 

considered in forming the engineering 

basis to correct the unsafe condition. 

The AD contains text copied from the 

MCAI and for this reason might not 

follow our plain language principles. 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to include an AD that would 

apply to the specified products. That 

NPRM was published in the Federal 

Register on November 17, 2006 (71 FR 

66889). That NPRM proposed to correct 

an unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The MCAI states that: 

Cracks on a vertical stabilizer attachment 

fitting due to corrosion, have been found on 

an aircraft in service. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

considered the comments received. 

EADS SOCATA gave comments 

addressing the following: 

Comment Issue No. 1: Costs of 

Compliance 

EADS SOCATA comments that the 

proposed AD specifies it would take 4 

work-hours per product to comply with 

the proposed AD, but according to 

EADS SOCATA, it would take 3.5 workhours. 

The FAA agrees and will incorporate 

that change into the final rule Costs of 

Compliance section. 

Comment Issue No. 2: Service Bulletin 

Compliance 

Quest Diagnostics comments that as 

an operator of 4 TBM 700 aircraft with 

over 25,000 hours time-in-service (TIS) 

and more than 35,000 cycles of 

operating experience they have been 

performing the requirements of EADS 

SOCATA Service Bulletin (SB) 70–104 

since its publication in 2004. They have 

found in their experience that step 5 of 

the SB, which requires an additional 

step to perform a ‘‘penetrante 

inspection’’ to the bores of the fitting 

and attachment on the rear fitting, is 

impractical if not impossible to 

complete. They found that because this 

attachment area comprises a 

‘‘sandwich’’ of attachment lugs any 

penetrant applied to this area in situ is 

absorbed between the layers and 

becomes impossible to clean without 

removing the fin completely. Further, 

they found, since each assembly is 

nearly 1 inch thick, there is severely 

limited visual access to the entire bore, 

particularly in the middle section. They 

contracted the services of a Level 3 

Nondestructive Testing (NDT) inspector 

to perform a Rotary Gun Eddy Current 

Inspection of the fitting area. They 

discussed this situation with the EADS 

SOCATA Service Center in Pembroke 

Pines, Florida; came to the conclusion 

this is the only practical approach to 

completing this inspection without 

removal of the vertical fin; and feel the 

published procedure is inadequate for 

the purposes of detecting cracks in this 

area. 

EADS SOCATA has since released SB 

70–104 Amendment 2, dated January 

2007. The revised service bulletin 

allows crack detection by penetrant 

inspection or other equivalent process 

(eddy current* * *) on the bores of the 

vertical stabilizer fitting and 

attachments. The revised service 

bulletin Amendment 2 will be 

incorporated into the AD, and the FAA 

will give 100 percent credit for doing 

the action with Amendment 1 of the 

Service Bulletin. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the available data, 

including the comments received, and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting the AD 

with the changes described previously. 

We determined that these changes will 

not increase the economic burden on 

any operator or increase the scope of the 

AD. 

Differences Between This 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 required 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 AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD will affect 

205 products of U.S. registry. We also 

estimate that it will take about 3.5 workhours per product to comply with basic 

requirements of this AD. The average 

labor rate is $80 per work-hour. 

Required parts will cost about $3,000 

per product. Where the service 

information lists required parts costs 

that are covered under warranty, we 

have assumed that there will be no 

charge for these parts. As we do not 

control warranty coverage for affected 

parties, some parties may incur costs 

higher than estimated here. Based on 

these figures, we estimate the cost of 

this AD to the U.S. operators to be 

$672,400, or $3,280 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 AD will not 

have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD will 

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 AD: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under 

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 AD and placed it in the AD Docket. 

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 the 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
12548 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 51 / Friday, March 16, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

NPRM, 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. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

■ Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 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: 

2007–06–11 EADS SOCATA Model TBM 

700 Airplanes: Amendment 39–14992; 

Docket No. FAA–2006–26166; 

Directorate Identifier 2006–CE–58–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This airworthiness directive (AD) 

becomes effective April 20, 2007. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to SOCATA TBM 700 

airplanes, serial numbers 1 through 308, plus 

the serial number 310, certificated in any 

category. 

Note 1: This AD does not apply to 

airplanes in which both modifications No. 

MOD70–127–55 and MOD70–129–53 have 

been factory installed. 

Reason 

(d) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states that: 

Cracks on a vertical stabilizer attachment 

fitting due to corrosion have been found on 

an aircraft in service. 

Actions and Compliance 

(e) Unless already done, do the following 

actions. 

(1) Within the next 600 hours time-inservice (TIS) or the next 12 months, 

whichever occurs first, after the effective date 

of this AD, inspect the vertical stabilizer 

attachment fittings and bolts for cracks or 

corrosion, and, if necessary, repair or replace 

the damaged part and then apply a corrosion 

protection reinforcement, following EADS 

SOCATA Service Bulletin SB 70–104, 

Amendment 1, dated August 2004 or EADS 

SOCATA TBM Aircraft Mandatory Service 

Bulletin SB 70–104, Amendment 2, dated 

January 2007. 

(2) Repeat the actions of paragraph (e)(1) 

every 1,200 hours TIS or every 24 months, 

whichever occurs first, following EADS 

SOCATA Service Bulletin SB 70–104, 

Amendment 1, dated August 2004 or EADS 

SOCATA Service Bulletin SB 70–104, 

Amendment 2, dated January 2007. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: This 

AD permits Amendment 2 of the SB to be 

used. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(f) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Staff, 

FAA, ATTN: Albert J. Mercado, Aerospace 

Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 

901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 

64106; telephone: (816) 329–4119; fax: (816) 

329–4090, has the authority to approve 

AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the 

procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Before 

using any approved AMOC on any airplane 

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. 

(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 

(g) Refer to Direction ge ́ne ́rale de l’aviation 

civile (DGAC) AD No F–2003–366 R1, dated 

November 24, 2004; EADS SOCATA TBM 

Aircraft Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 70–

104, Amendment 1, dated August 2004; and 

EADS SOCATA TBM Aircraft Mandatory 

Service Bulletin SB 70–104, Amendment 2, 

dated January 2007 for related information. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(h) You must use EADS SOCATA TBM 

Aircraft Mandatory Service Bulletin No. SB 

70–104, Amendment 1, dated August 2004, 

or EADS SOCATA TBM Aircraft Mandatory 

Service Bulletin No. SB 70–104, Amendment 

2, dated January 2007 to do the actions 

required by this AD, unless the AD specifies 

otherwise. 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference of 

this service information under 5 U.S.C. 

552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact EADS SOCATA, Direction 

des Services, 65921 Tarbes Cedex 9, France. 

(4) You may review copies at the FAA, 

Central Region, Office of the Regional 

Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, 

Missouri 64106; or at the National Archives 

and Records Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go 

to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/ 

cfr/ibr-locations.html. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on March 

7, 2007. 

David R. Showers, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–4724 Filed 3–15–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2006–26180; Directorate 

Identifier 2006–CE–59–AD; Amendment 39–

14995; AD 2007–06–14] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; EADS 

SOCATA Model TBM 700 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. This AD results 

from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

issued 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 the discovery of propeller 

control cables with a defective 

crimping. Two cable ends were found 

uncrimped at the factory after an engine 

run-up test, and one cable end was also 

found uncrimped on the first 100-hour 

aircraft maintenance check. We are 

issuing this AD to require actions to 

correct the unsafe condition on these 

products. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective April 

20, 2007. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in this AD 

as of April 20, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http:// 

dms.dot.gov or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility, U.S. Department 

of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, 

SW., Nassif Building, Room PL–401, 

Washington, DC. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Albert J. Mercado, Aerospace Engineer, 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES