50230 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 160 / Wednesday, August 19, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

Justice Reform. Under this rule: (1) All 

State and local laws and regulations that 

are inconsistent with this rule will be 

preempted; (2) no retroactive effect will 

be given to this rule; and (3) no 

administrative proceedings will be 

required before parties may file suit in 

court challenging this rule. 

Executive Order 13175 

This proposed rule has been reviewed 

in accordance with the requirements of 

Executive Order 13175, Consultation 

and Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments. The review reveals that 

this proposed regulation will not have 

substantial and direct effects on Tribal 

governments and will not have 

significant Tribal implications. 

USDA Non-Discrimination Statement 

No agency, officer, or employee of the 

USDA shall, on the grounds of race, 

color, national origin, religion, sex, 

gender identity, sexual orientation, 

disability, age, marital status, family/

parental status, income derived from a 

public assistance program, or political 

beliefs, exclude from participation in, 

deny the benefits of, or subject to 

discrimination any person in the United 

States under any program or activity 

conducted by the USDA. 

How To File a Complaint of 

Discrimination 

To file a complaint of discrimination, 

complete the USDA Program 

Discrimination Complaint Form, which 

may be accessed online at http://

www.ocio.usda.gov/sites/default/files/

docs/2012/Complain_combined_6_8_

12.pdf, or write a letter signed by you 

or your authorized representative. 

Send your completed complaint form 

or letter to USDA by mail, fax, or email: 

Mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Director, Office of Adjudication, 1400 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20250–9410, Fax: (202) 

690–7442, Email: program.intake@

usda.gov. 

Persons with disabilities who require 

alternative means for communication 

(Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.), 

should contact USDA’s TARGET Center 

at (202) 720–2600 (voice and TDD). 

Additional Public Notification 

Public awareness of all segments of 

rulemaking and policy development is 

important. Consequently, FSIS will 

announce this Federal Register 

publication on-line through the FSIS 

Web page located at: http://

www.fsis.usda.gov/federal-register. 

FSIS also will make copies of this 

publication available through the FSIS 

Constituent Update, which is used to 

provide information regarding FSIS 

policies, procedures, regulations, 

Federal Register notices, FSIS public 

meetings, and other types of information 

that could affect or would be of interest 

to our constituents and stakeholders. 

The Update is available on the FSIS 

Web page. Through the Web page, FSIS 

is able to provide information to a much 

broader, more diverse audience. In 

addition, FSIS offers an email 

subscription service which provides 

automatic and customized access to 

selected food safety news and 

information. This service is available at: 

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/subscribe. 

Options range from recalls to export 

information, regulations, directives, and 

notices. Customers can add or delete 

subscriptions themselves, and have the 

option to password protect their 

accounts. 

List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 381 

Food grades and standards, Poultry 

and poultry products. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, FSIS proposes to amend 9 

CFR part 381, as follows: 

PART 381—POULTRY PRODUCTS 

INSPECTION REGULATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 381 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 138f; 7 U.S.C. 450; 21 

U.S.C. 451–470; 7 CFR 2.18, 2.53. 

■ 2. Section 381.170 is amended by 

revising paragraph (a)(1)(iii) to read as 

follows: 

§ 381.170 Standards for kinds and classes, 

and for cuts of raw poultry. 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(iii) Roaster or roasting chicken. A 

‘‘roaster’’ or ‘‘roasting chicken’’ is a 

young chicken (less than 12 weeks of 

age) of either sex, with a ready-to-cook 

carcass weight of 5.5 pounds or more, 

that is tender-meated with soft, pliable, 

smooth-textured skin and breastbone 

cartilage that is somewhat less flexible 

than that of a broiler or fryer. 

* * * * * 

Done at Washington, DC, on August 12, 

2015. 

Alfred V. Almanza, 

Acting Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2015–20433 Filed 8–18–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–3141; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–NM–242–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 757 airplanes. 

This proposed AD was prompted by a 

report of cracking in the fuselage frame 

at a certain location. This proposed AD 

would require inspections for cracking 

in the fuselage frame, left and right 

sides, and repair if necessary. We are 

proposing this AD to detect and correct 

fuselage frame fatigue cracking that 

could result in loss of structural 

integrity and the inability to sustain 

loading conditions. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by October 5, 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– 

3141. 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 160 / Wednesday, August 19, 2015 / Proposed Rules 50231 

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– 

3141; 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: 

Roger Durbin, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los 

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office 

(ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 

Lakewood, CA 90712–4137; phone: 

562–627–5233; fax: 562–627–5210; 

email: roger.durbin@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– 

2015–3141; Directorate Identifier 2014– 

NM–242–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 have received reports of cracking 

in the fuselage frame at Station (STA) 

1440, stringer S–24L. The airplane had 

36,890 total flight cycles and 78,922 

total flight hours. The cracking was 

discovered during unrelated local 

repairs. An investigation has 

determined the cracking may have been 

caused by fatigue. The cracking initiated 

in the fuselage frame at the corner 

radius of the fuselage frame opening for 

the stringer. It continued to the fastener 

hole common to the fuselage frame, 

splice plate, and fail safe chord. The 

cracking was not visible because it was 

completely hidden by the splice plate 

on one side and the fail safe chord on 

the other side. 

Fuselage frame fatigue cracking could 

result in loss of structural integrity and 

the inability to sustain loading 

conditions. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR part 51 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 757–53A0099, dated September 

18, 2014. The service information 

describes procedures for detailed and 

high frequency eddy current (HFEC) 

inspections for cracking in the fuselage 

frame at stringer 24 and stringer 25, left 

and right sides. 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 

‘‘Difference Between this Proposed AD 

and the Service Information.’’ Refer to 

his service information for details on the 

procedures and compliance times. 

Difference Between this Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757– 

53A0099, dated September 18, 2014, 

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. 

Explanation of ‘‘RC’’ 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 

Required for Compliance (RC) 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 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. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 652 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 ........... 68 to 83 work-hours × $85 per 

hour = Up to $7,055 per inspection cycle.

$0 Up to $7,055 per inspection cycle Up to $4,599,860 per inspection 

cycle. 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
50232 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 160 / Wednesday, August 19, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

We have received no definitive data 

that would enable us to provide cost 

estimates for the on-condition actions 

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– 

2015–3141; Directorate Identifier 2014– 

NM–242–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by October 5, 

2015. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to all The Boeing 

Company Model 757–200, –200CB, –200PF, 

and –300 airplanes, certificated in any 

category. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by a report of 

cracking in the fuselage frame at Station 

(STA) 1440, stringer S–24L. We are issuing 

this AD to detect and correct fuselage frame 

fatigue cracking that could result in loss of 

structural integrity and the inability to 

sustain loading conditions. 

(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 757–53A0099, dated 

September 18, 2014, except as required by 

paragraph (h) of this AD, do detailed and 

high frequency eddy current (HFEC) 

inspections for cracking in the fuselage 

frames at stringers S–24 and S–25, left and 

right sides, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 757–53A0099, dated 

September 18, 2014. 

(1) If cracking is not found, repeat the 

inspections at intervals not to exceed 12,000 

flight cycles. 

(2) If any cracking is found, before further 

flight, repair using a method approved in 

accordance with the procedures specified in 

paragraph (i) of this AD. Repeat the 

inspections at intervals not to exceed 12,000 

flight cycles in unrepaired areas. 

(h) Exception to Service Information 

Specifications 

Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757– 

53A0099, dated September 18, 2014, 

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, Los Angeles 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. 

(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 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) that has 

been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles 

Aircraft Certification Office (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) Except as required by paragraph (h) of 

this AD: 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 Roger Durbin, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los 

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 

3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 

90712–4137; phone: 562–627–5233; fax: 562– 

627–5210; email: roger.durbin@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. 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 160 / Wednesday, August 19, 2015 / Proposed Rules 50233 

Issued in Renton, Washington on August 

10, 2015. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2015–20265 Filed 8–18–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2015–3142; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–NM–003–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 787–8 

airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by reports of hydraulic 

contamination of the power control unit 

(PCU) electro-hydraulic servo valves 

(EHSVs) used in the flight control 

system; this contamination caused a 

restriction in the EHSVs resulting in the 

display of status messages from the 

engine indication and crew alerting 

system (EICAS). This proposed AD 

would require installing markers to 

limit the hydraulic system fluid used to 

a specific brand, doing hydraulic fluid 

tests of the hydraulic systems, replacing 

hydraulic system fluid if necessary, and 

doing all applicable related investigative 

and corrective actions. We are 

proposing this AD to prevent the failure 

of flight control hydraulic PCUs, which 

could lead to reduced controllability of 

the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by October 5, 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– 

3142. 

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– 

3142; 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: Fnu 

Winarto, Aerospace Engineer, Systems 

and Equipment Branch, ANM–130S, 

FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification 

Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Renton, WA 98057–3356; phone: 425– 

917–6659; fax: 425–917–6590; email: 

fnu.winarto@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– 

2015–3142; Directorate Identifier 2015– 

NM–003–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 reports of the display of 

status messages from the engine 

indication and crew alerting system 

(EICAS). Boeing and the actuation 

system supplier determined these 

messages are displayed when electrohydraulic servo valves (EHSVs) of the 

power control units (PCUs) of the 

primary flight control system are 

restricted due to the accumulation of 

particle deposits. Failures have only 

occurred on airplanes operated with 

Skydrol LD–4 hydraulic fluid. Changing 

the hydraulic fluid to HyJet V would 

reduce the rate of particle deposit 

accumulation. This condition, if not 

corrected, could result in the eventual 

failure of flight control hydraulic PCUs, 

which could lead to reduced 

controllability of the airplane. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin B787–81205–SB270026–00, 

Issue 001, dated November 25, 2014. 

This service information describes 

procedures for installing markers to 

limit the hydraulic system fluid used to 

a specific brand, doing hydraulic fluid 

tests of the hydraulic systems, replacing 

the hydraulic system fluid if necessary, 

and related investigative and corrective 

actions. 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. Refer to this service 

information for details on the 

procedures and compliance times. 

The phrase ‘‘related investigative 

actions’’ is used in this proposed AD. 

‘‘Related investigative actions’’ are 

follow-on actions that (1) are related to 

the primary actions, and (2) further 

investigate the nature of any condition 

found. Related investigative actions in 

an AD could include, for example, 

inspections. 

The phrase ‘‘corrective actions’’ is 

used in this proposed AD. ‘‘Corrective 

actions’’ are actions that correct or 

address any condition found. Corrective 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS