Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 95 / Thursday, May 16, 2013 / Proposed Rules 28767 

28A1212, Revision 1, dated August 27, 2010 

was done): Within 60 months after the 

effective date of this AD, change the GFI 

relay position and do certain bonding 

resistance measurements, in accordance with 

Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–28A1212, 

Revision 2, dated October 18, 2012. 

(j) Maintenance Program Revision 

Concurrently with accomplishing the 

actions required by paragraph (g), (h), or (i) 

of this AD, or within 30 days after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 

later: Revise the maintenance program by 

incorporating Airworthiness Limitation 28– 

AWL–22 of Boeing 737–100/200/200C/300/ 

400/500 AWL and Certification Maintenance 

Requirements (CMRs), Document D6–38278– 

CMR, Revision August 2012. The initial 

compliance time for the actions specified in 

AWL 28–AWL–22 of Boeing 737–100/200/ 

200C/300/400/500 AWL and Certification 

Maintenance Requirements (CMRs), 

Document D6–38278–CMR, Revision August 

2012, is within 1 year after accomplishing the 

installation required by paragraph (g), (h), or 

(i) of this AD, or within 1 year after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 

later. 

(k) No Alternative Actions, Intervals, and/or 

Critical Design Configuration Control 

Limitations (CDCCLs) 

After accomplishing the revision required 

by paragraph (j) of this AD, no alternative 

actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals may be 

used unless the actions or intervals are 

approved as an alternative method of 

compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the 

procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this 

AD. 

(l) 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 the 

Related Information section of this AD. 

Information may be emailed to: 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@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. 

(m) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Georgios Roussos, Aerospace 

Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, 

ANM–130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Renton, WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917– 

6482; fax: 425–917–6590; email: 

georgios.roussos@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 May 8, 

2013. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–11694 Filed 5–15–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0420; Directorate 

Identifier 2011–NM–241–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 747–100, 

747–100B, 747–100B SUD, 747–200B, 

747–200C, 747–200F, 747–300, 747– 

400, 747–400D, 747–400F, 747SR, and 

747SP series airplanes. This proposed 

AD was prompted by a report of a 

disbonded doubler and a skin crack in 

section 41 of the fuselage, and multiple 

reports of cracked or missing fastener 

heads. This proposed AD would require 

repetitive inspections for cracking of the 

fuselage skin, discrepant fasteners, and 

for disbonds at the doublers; and related 

investigative and corrective actions if 

necessary. For certain airplanes, this 

proposed AD would also require a 

terminating repair for repair doublers. 

We are proposing this AD to prevent 

rapid decompression and loss of 

structural integrity of the airplane due 

to such disbonding and subsequent 

cracking of the skin panels. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by July 1, 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: 

Nathan Weigand, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office 

(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6428; 

fax: 425–917–6590; email: 

Nathan.P.Weigand@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– 

2013–0420; Directorate Identifier 2011– 

NM–241–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 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
28768 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 95 / Thursday, May 16, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

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 

disbonded doubler and a 10-inch crack 

found at 21,800 total flight cycles in the 

skin in section 41 of the fuselage; and 

two reports of cracked or missing 

fastener heads found on four airplanes. 

Cracked and/or missing fastener heads 

were found at station (STA) 480 and 

STA 520 between stringers S–8 and S– 

10 on airplanes with 10,529 and 10,531 

total flight cycles. Also, missing fastener 

heads were found between STA 400 and 

420 at stringer S–24AL on airplanes 

with 28,153 and 28,319 total flight 

cycles. 

Fatigue cracks can start in the body 

skin at fastener holes where internal 

doublers have disbonded from the skin 

panel. Fatigue cracks that are not found 

and repaired could extend with 

continued use of the airplane and could 

cause a rapid decompression and loss of 

structural integrity. 

Relevant Service Information 

We reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 

747–53A2747, Revision 2, dated 

February 22, 2012. For information on 

the procedures and compliance times, 

see this service information at http:// 

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

Docket No. FAA–2013–0420. 

Terminating Action for Other ADs 

• Accomplishing the requirements of 

this proposed AD terminates the 

requirements of paragraphs (f), (g), and 

(h) of AD 2006–20–02, Amendment 39– 

14771 (71 FR 56861, September 28, 

2006). 

• Accomplishing the requirements of 

this proposed AD terminates the 

requirements of paragraphs (f), (k), and 

(l) of AD 2006–24–02, Amendment 39– 

14831 (71 FR 67445, November 22, 

2006). 

• Accomplishing the requirements of 

this proposed AD terminates the 

requirements of paragraphs (f) and (i) of 

AD 2006–24–05, Amendment 39–14834 

(71 FR 68434, November 27, 2006). 

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 the Proposed AD 

and the Service Information’’. 

The phrase ‘‘related investigative 

actions’’ might be used in this proposed 

AD. ‘‘Related investigative actions’’ are 

follow-on actions that: (1) Are related to 

the primary actions, and (2) are actions 

that further investigate the nature of any 

condition found. Related investigative 

actions in an AD could include, for 

example, inspections. 

In addition, the phrase ‘‘corrective 

actions’’ might be used in this proposed 

AD. ‘‘Corrective actions’’ are actions 

that correct or address any condition 

found. Corrective actions in an AD 

could include, for example, repairs. 

Differences Between the Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

The service bulletin 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 98 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 

Inspections ...... 878 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

$74,630 per inspection cycle.

$0 $74,630 per inspection cycle ......... $7,313,740 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. 

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, 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 95 / Thursday, May 16, 2013 / Proposed Rules 28769 

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– 

2013–0420; Directorate Identifier 2011– 

NM–241–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by July 1, 2013. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD affects AD 2006–20–02, 

Amendment 39–14771 (71 FR 56861, 

September 28, 2006); AD 2006–24–02, 

Amendment 39–14831 (71 FR 67445, 

November 22, 2006); and AD 2006–24–05, 

Amendment 39–14834 (71 FR 68434, 

November 27, 2006). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to The Boeing Company 

Model 747–100, 747–100B, 747–100B SUD, 

747–200B, 747–200C, 747–200F, 747–300, 

747–400, 747–400D, 747–400F, 747SR, and 

747SP series airplanes; certificated in any 

category; as identified in Boeing Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2747, Revision 2, dated 

February 22, 2012. 

(d) Subject 

Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/ 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America 

Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by a disbonded 

doubler and a skin crack in section 41 of the 

fuselage, and multiple reports of cracked or 

missing fastener heads. We are issuing this 

AD to prevent rapid decompression and loss 

of structural integrity of the airplane due to 

such disbonding and subsequent cracking of 

the skin panels. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Repetitive Skin Panel, Fastener, and 

Doubler Inspection 

At the applicable time specified in 

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

Service Bulletin 747–53A2747, Revision 2, 

dated February 22, 2012, except as required 

by paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(3) of this AD: Do 

the applicable inspections (including 

detailed, high frequency eddy current 

(HFEC), and low frequency eddy current 

(LFEC)) for any cracking of the fuselage skin, 

for discrepant fasteners, and for disbonds at 

the doublers; and do all applicable related 

investigative and corrective actions in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2747, Revision 2, dated February 22, 

2012, except as provided by paragraph (i)(2) 

of this AD. Repeat the applicable inspections 

thereafter at intervals not to exceed those 

specified in paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53A2747, 

Revision 2, dated February 22, 2012. Do all 

applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions at the applicable time 

specified in paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53A2747, 

Revision 2, dated February 22, 2012. Options 

provided in Boeing Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2747, Revision 2, dated February 22, 

2011, for accomplishing the disbond 

inspection are acceptable for the 

corresponding requirements of this paragraph 

provided that the inspection is done at the 

applicable times in paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Service Bulletin 

747–53A2747, Revision 2, dated February 22, 

2011. 

(1) Replacing a skin panel, in accordance 

with the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53A2747, 

Revision 2, dated February 22, 2012, is an 

acceptable alternative to doing the service 

repair manual (SRM) skin panel repairs and 

the repetitive skin panel inspections 

specified in tables 1, 2, and 3 of paragraph 

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

Bulletin 747–53A2747, Revision 2, dated 

February 22, 2012, for only the skin panel 

that has been replaced. 

(2) Accomplishment of the terminating 

repair identified in tables 4 and 5 of 

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

Service Bulletin 747–53A2747, Revision 2, 

dated February 22, 2012, terminates the 

repetitive inspections identified in tables 4 

and 5 of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53A2747, 

Revision 2, dated February 22, 2012, for only 

the area on which the terminating repair has 

been done. 

(h) Terminating Action for Repairs 

For airplanes identified in tables 4 and 5 

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

Service Bulletin 747–53A2747, Revision 2, 

dated February 22, 2012: At the applicable 

compliance time specified in paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Service Bulletin 

747–53A2747, Revision 2, dated February 22, 

2012, do the terminating action for the repair 

doubler, including doing an open hole HFEC 

inspection for skin cracks at the fastener 

holes common to the inspection area and an 

inspection for disbond of the internal 

doubler; and as applicable, replacing the 

existing external repair doubler with a new 

extended external repair doubler, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2747, Revision 2, dated February 22, 

2012, except as provided by paragraph (i)(2) 

of this AD. Accomplishment of the 

terminating action identified in tables 4 and 

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

Service Bulletin 747–53A2747, Revision 2, 

dated February 22, 2012, terminates the 

repetitive inspections identified in tables 4 

and 5 of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53A2747, 

Revision 2, dated February 22, 2012, for only 

areas on which the terminating action has 

been done. 

(i) Exceptions to Certain Service Information 

Instructions 

This paragraph specifies exceptions to 

certain instructions in Boeing Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2747, Revision 2, dated 

February 22, 2012. 

(1) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2747, Revision 2, dated February 22, 

2012, 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. 

(2) Where Boeing Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2747, Revision 2, dated February 22, 

2012, specifies to contact Boeing for special 

repair instructions, this AD requires using a 

method approved in accordance with the 

procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this 

AD. 

(3) The Condition column of paragraph 

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

Bulletin 747–53A2747, Revision 2, dated 

February 22, 2012, refers to certain 

conditions ‘‘as of the original issue date of 

this service bulletin.’’ This AD, however, 

applies to the airplanes with the specified 

condition as of the effective date of this AD. 

(j) Credit for Previous Actions 

This paragraph provides credit for the 

actions required by paragraphs (g) and (h) of 

this AD, if those actions were performed 

before the effective date of this AD using 

Boeing Service Bulletin 747–53A2747, 

Revision 1, dated October 12, 2011, which is 

not incorporated by reference in this AD. 

(k) Terminating Action for Other ADs 

(1) Accomplishing the requirements of this 

AD terminates the requirements of 

paragraphs (f), (g), and (h) of AD 2006–20– 

02, Amendment 39–14771 (71 FR 56861, 

September 28, 2006). 

(2) Accomplishing the requirements of this 

AD terminates the requirements of 

paragraphs (f), (k), and (l) of AD 2006–24–02, 

Amendment 39–14831 (71 FR 67445, 

November 22, 2006). 

(3) Accomplishing the requirements of this 

AD terminates the requirements of 

paragraphs (f) and (i) of AD 2006–24–05, 

Amendment 39–14834 (71 FR 68434, 

November 27, 2006). 

(l) 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 the 

Related Information section of this AD. 

Information may be emailed to: 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov. 

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
28770 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 95 / Thursday, May 16, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

1After the Memorandum Opinion was delivered, 

the CRJs noted an error in the second sentence of 

the last paragraph on the last page of the 

Memorandum Opinion. The Register clarified the 

error with the CRJs. 

The original sentence erroneously stated: 

‘‘As such, the proposed ‘‘detail requirements’’ do 

not encroach upon the Register’s authority with 

respect to statements of account as provided in 17 

U.S.C. 115(c)(5).’’ 

The corrected sentence, as it now appears in the 

Memorandum Opinion below, states: 

‘‘As such, the proposed ‘‘confidentiality 

requirement’’ does not encroach upon the Register’s 

authority with respect to statements of account as 

provided in 17 U.S.C. 115(c)(5).’’ 

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. 

(m) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Nathan Weigand, Aerospace 

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, 

FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office 

(ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6428; fax: 425– 

917–6590; email: 

Nathan.P.Weigand@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, WA, on May 8, 2013. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–11687 Filed 5–15–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

U.S. Copyright Office 

37 CFR Part 385 

[Docket No. 2011–3 CRB] 

Scope of the Register of Copyright’s 

Exclusive Authority Over Statements 

of Account Under the Section 115 

Compulsory License 

AGENCY: U.S. Copyright Office, Library 

of Congress. 

ACTION: Order. 

SUMMARY: The Copyright Royalty 

Judges, acting pursuant to statute, 

referred material questions of 

substantive law to the Register of 

Copyrights concerning the scope of the 

Register of Copyright’s exclusive 

authority over Statements of Account 

under the section 115 Compulsory 

License. Specifically, the Copyright 

Royalty Board requested a decision by 

the Register of Copyrights regarding 

‘‘whether the detail requirements set 

forth in 37 CFR as proposed § 385.12(e) 

(existing) and proposed § 385.22(d) 

(new) as well as the confidentiality 

requirement proposed for §§ 385.12(f) 

and 385.22(e) encroach upon the 

exclusive statutory domain of the 

Register under § 115 of the Act.’’ The 

Register of Copyrights responded in a 

timely fashion by delivering a 

Memorandum Opinion to the Copyright 

Royalty Board on May 1, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephen Ruwe, Attorney Advisor, 

Copyright GC/I&R, P.O. Box 70400, 

Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: 

(202) 707–8380. Telefax: (202) 707– 

8366. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Copyright Royalty and Distribution 

Reform Act of 2004, Congress amended 

Title 17 to replace the Copyright 

Arbitration Royalty Panel (‘‘CARP’’) 

with the Copyright Royalty Judges 

(‘‘CRJs’’). One of the functions of the 

CRJs is to make determinations and 

adjustments of reasonable terms and 

rates of royalty payments as provided in 

sections 112(e), 114, 115, 116, 118, 119 

and 1004 of the Copyright Act. The CRJs 

have the authority to request from the 

Register of Copyrights (‘‘Register’’) an 

interpretation of any material question 

of substantive law that relates to the 

construction of provisions of Title 17 

and arises out the course of the 

proceeding before the CRJs. See 17 

U.S.C. 802(f)(1)(A)(ii). 

On April 17, 2013, the CRJs delivered 

to the Register: (1) An Order referring 

material questions of substantive law; 

and (2) a brief filed with the CRJs by 

Settling Participants (identified below 

in the Register’s Memorandum 

Opinion). The CRJs’ delivery of the 

request for an interpretation triggered 

the 14-day response period prescribed 

in section 802 of the Copyright Act. This 

statutory provision states that the 

Register ‘‘shall deliver to the Copyright 

Royalty Judges a written response 

within 14 days after the receipt of all 

briefs and comments from the 

participants.’’ See 17 U.S.C. 

802(f)(1)(A)(ii). The statute also requires 

that ‘‘[t]he Copyright Royalty Judges 

shall apply the legal interpretation 

embodied in the response of the Register 

of Copyrights if it is timely delivered, 

and [that] the response shall be 

included in the record that accompanies 

the final determination.’’ Id. On May 1, 

2013 the Register responded in a 

Memorandum Opinion to the CRJs that 

addressed the material questions of law. 

To provide the public with notice of the 

decision rendered by the Register, the 

Memorandum Opinion is reproduced in 

its entirety, below.1

Dated: May 9, 2013. 

Maria A. Pallante, 

Register of Copyrights. 

Before the U.S. Copyright Office 

Library of Congress 

Washington, DC 20559 

In the Matter of) Mechanical and Digital 

Phonorecord 

Delivery Rate Adjustment Proceeding 

Docket No. 2011–3 CRB 

(Phonorecords II) 

MEMORANDUM OPINION ON MATERIAL 

QUESTIONS OF SUBSTANTIVE LAW 

I. Procedural Background 

On May 17, 2012, the Copyright Royalty 

Judges (‘‘CRJs’’) published for comment in 

the Federal Register proposed regulations for 

the section 115 compulsory license, which 

were the result of a settlement submitted to 

the CRJs on April 11, 2012. Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking, Mechanical and 

Digital Phonorecord Delivery Compulsory 

License, Docket No. 2011–3 CRB 

Phonorecords II, 77 FR 29259 (May 17, 2012). 

The proposed regulations included ‘‘detail 

requirements’’ for 37 CFR 385.12(e) and 

385.22(d), which would require statements of 

account filed by licensees to include each 

step of the royalty calculations, the type of 

licensed activity engaged in (in certain 

cases), and the number of plays or 

downloads. The proposed regulations also 

included a ‘‘confidentiality requirement’’ for 

37 CFR 385.12(f) and 385.22(e), which would 

require copyright owners to maintain 

statements of account that they receive under 

the license to be maintained in confidence. 

Id. 

The ‘‘detail requirements’’ provision 

proposed for § 385.12(e) states: 

Accounting. The calculations required by 

paragraph (b) of this section shall be made in 

good faith and on the basis of the best 

knowledge, information and belief of the 

licensee at the time payment is due, and 

subject to the additional accounting and 

certification requirements of 17 U.S.C. 

115(c)(5) and § 201.19 of this title. Without 

limitation, a licensee’s statements of account 

shall set forth each step of its calculations 

with sufficient information to allow the 

copyright owner to assess the accuracy and 

manner in which the licensee determined the 

payable royalty pool and per-play allocations 

(including information sufficient to 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1