Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 10533 

§ 1214.8 Fiscal period. 

Fiscal period means the period 

August 1 through July 31 or such other 

period as approved by the Secretary. 

■ 4. Subpart C—Rules and Regulations 

is added to read as follows: 

Subpart C—Provisions Implementing 

the Christmas Tree Promotion, 

Research, and Information Order 

§ 1214.520 Late payment and interest 

charges for past due assessments. 

(1) A late payment charge shall be 

imposed on any producer or importer 

who fails to make timely remittance to 

the Board of the total assessments for 

which such producer or importer is 

liable. The late payment charge will be 

imposed on any assessments not 

received within 30 calendar days of the 

date they are due. This one-time late 

payment charge shall be $250 and 

would be increased to $500 after 90 

days of delinquency. 

(2) In addition to the late payment 

charge, 1.5 percent per month interest 

on the outstanding balance, including 

any late payment charge and accrued 

interest, will be added to any accounts 

for which payment has not been 

received by the Board within 30 

calendar days after the date the 

assessments are due. Such interest will 

continue to accrue monthly until the 

outstanding balance is paid to the 

Board. 

Dated: February 25, 2016. 

Elanor Starmer, 

Acting Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2016–04469 Filed 2–29–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2016–3700; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–NM–171–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 757–200 and 

–200CB series airplanes. This proposed 

AD was prompted by an evaluation by 

the design approval holder (DAH) 

indicating that the lap splices at stringer 

(S)–14R, lower fastener row, are subject 

to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). 

This proposed AD would require 

repetitive external dual frequency eddy 

current (DFEC) or internal high 

frequency eddy current (HFEC) 

inspections of the lap splice, inner skin 

fasteners, at S–14R, station (STA) 440 

through STA 540, and corrective action 

if necessary. We are proposing this AD 

to detect and correct cracking of the 

fuselage skin lap splice. Such cracking 

could result in reduced structural 

integrity of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by April 15, 2016. 

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–2016– 

3700. 

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–2016– 

3700; 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: Eric 

Schrieber, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los 

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office 

(ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 

Lakewood, California 90712–4137; 

phone: 562–627–5348; fax: 562–627– 

5210; email: eric.schrieber@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– 

2016–3700; Directorate Identifier 2015– 

NM–171–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 

Structural fatigue damage is 

progressive. It begins as minute cracks, 

and those cracks grow under the action 

of repeated stresses. This can happen 

because of normal operational 

conditions and design attributes, or 

because of isolated situations or 

incidents such as material defects, poor 

fabrication quality, or corrosion pits, 

dings, or scratches. Fatigue damage can 

occur locally, in small areas or 

structural design details, or globally. 

Global fatigue damage is general 

degradation of large areas of structure 

with similar structural details and stress 

levels. Multiple-site damage is global 

damage that occurs in a large structural 

element such as a single rivet line of a 

lap splice joining two large skin panels. 

Global damage can also occur in 

multiple elements such as adjacent 

frames or stringers. Multiple-sitedamage and multiple-element-damage 

cracks are typically too small initially to 

be reliably detected with normal 

inspection methods. Without 

intervention, these cracks will grow, 

and eventually compromise the 

structural integrity of the airplane, in a 

condition known as WFD. As an 

airplane ages, WFD will likely occur, 

and will certainly occur if the airplane 

is operated long enough without any 

intervention. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
10534 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

The FAA’s WFD final rule (75 FR 

69746, November 15, 2010) became 

effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD 

rule requires certain actions to prevent 

structural failure due to WFD 

throughout the operational life of 

certain existing transport category 

airplanes and all of these airplanes that 

will be certificated in the future. For 

existing and future airplanes subject to 

the WFD rule, the rule requires that 

DAHs establish a limit of validity (LOV) 

of the engineering data that support the 

structural maintenance program. 

Operators affected by the WFD rule may 

not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, 

unless an extended LOV is approved. 

The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, 

November 15, 2010) does not require 

identifying and developing maintenance 

actions if the DAHs can show that such 

actions are not necessary to prevent 

WFD before the airplane reaches the 

LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend 

on accomplishment of future 

maintenance actions. As stated in the 

WFD rule, any maintenance actions 

necessary to reach the LOV will be 

mandated by airworthiness directives 

through separate rulemaking actions. 

In the context of WFD, this action is 

necessary to enable DAHs to propose 

LOVs that allow operators the longest 

operational lives for their airplanes, and 

still ensure that WFD will not occur. 

This approach allows for an 

implementation strategy that provides 

flexibility to DAHs in determining the 

timing of service information 

development (with FAA approval), 

while providing operators with certainty 

regarding the LOV applicable to their 

airplanes. 

We have received reports indicating 

that the lap splices at S–14R, lower 

fastener row, are subject to WFD. This 

condition, if not corrected, could result 

in cracking of the fuselage skin lap 

splice and potential reduced structural 

integrity of the airplane. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR Part 51 

The Boeing Company has issued 

Boeing Service Bulletin 757–53A0102, 

dated October 8, 2015. The service 

information describes procedures for 

performing repetitive external DFEC or 

HFEC inspections of the lap splice, 

inner skin fasteners, at S–14R, STA 

440—STA 540, and corrective action if 

necessary. 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. 

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 

accomplishment of the actions specified 

in the service information described 

previously, except as discussed under 

‘‘Differences Between this Proposed AD 

and the Service Information.’’ 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757– 

53A0102, dated October 8, 2015, 

specifies to contact the manufacturer for 

instructions on how to repair certain 

conditions, but this proposed AD would 

require repairing those conditions in 

one of the following ways: 

• In accordance with a method that 

we approve; or 

• Using data that meet the 

certification basis of the airplane, and 

that have been approved by the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) whom 

we have authorized to make those 

findings. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 572 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 

Option 1: External 

DFEC inspection.

4 work-hours × $85 per hour = $340 per inspection cycle.$0 $340 per inspection 

cycle.

$194,480 per inspection 

cycle. 

Option 2: Internal HFEC 

inspection.

10 work-hours × $85 per hour = $850 per inspection cycle.$0 $850 per inspection 

cycle.

$486,200 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, 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 2016 / Proposed Rules 10535 

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– 

2016–3700; Directorate Identifier 2015– 

NM–171–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by April 15, 

2016. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to all The Boeing 

Company Model 757–200 and –200CB, series 

airplanes, certificated in any category. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by an evaluation by 

the design approval holder (DAH) indicating 

that the lap splices at stringer (S)–14R, lower 

fastener row, are subject to widespread 

fatigue damage (WFD). We are issuing this 

AD to detect and correct cracking of the 

fuselage skin lap splice. Such cracking could 

result in reduced structural integrity of the 

airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Initial Inspection 

At the applicable time specified in 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 757–53A0102, dated 

October 8, 2015, except as required by 

paragraph (h) of this AD: Do an external dual 

frequency eddy current inspection or internal 

high frequency eddy current inspection for 

cracking of the lap splice, inner skin lower 

fastener row, at S–14R, station (STA) 440 

through STA 540, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 757–53A0102, dated October 

8, 2015. Repeat either inspection thereafter at 

the time specified in paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 757–53A0102, dated October 8, 

2015. 

(h) Service Information Exceptions 

(1) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

757–53A0102, dated October 8, 2015, 

specifies a compliance time ‘‘after the 

original issue date of this service bulletin,’’ 

this AD requires compliance within the 

specified compliance time after the effective 

date of this AD. 

(2) The Condition column of paragraph 

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

Bulletin 757–53A0102, dated October 8, 

2015, refers to total flight cycles and total 

flight hours ‘‘as of the original issue date of 

this service bulletin.’’ This AD, however, 

applies to the airplanes with the specified 

total flight cycles or total flight hours as of 

the effective date of this AD. 

(i) Repair 

If any crack is found during any inspection 

required by this AD, before further flight, 

repair using a method approved in 

accordance with the procedures specified in 

paragraph (j) of this AD. 

(j) 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 (k) of this AD. Information may be 

emailed to: 9-ANM-LAACO-AMOCRequests@faa.gov. 

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 

of the local flight standards district office/

certificate holding district office. 

(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair, 

modification, or alteration required by this 

AD if it is approved by the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes ODA that has been 

authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles 

ACO, to make those findings. To be 

approved, the repair method, modification 

deviation, or alteration deviation 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 (j)(4)(i) and (j)(4)(ii) of this AD 

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. 

(k) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Eric Schrieber, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los 

Angeles ACO, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 

Lakewood, California 90712–4137; phone: 

562–627–5348; fax: 562–627–5210; email: 

eric.schrieber@faa.gov. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 

Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, 

Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone: 206– 

544–5000, extension 1; fax: 206–766–5680; 

Internet: https://www.myboeingfleet.com. 

You may view this referenced service 

information at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

WA. For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 

15, 2016. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2016–03695 Filed 2–29–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2016–3987; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–NM–165–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Dassault 

Aviation 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 

Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 7X 

airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by a report of improperly 

drilled bores, located on upper and 

lower stiffener joints to the web at a 

certain frame. This proposed AD would 

require a one-time inspection of the 

bores, and repair if necessary. We are 

proposing this AD to detect and correct 

an unsatisfactory bore that can 

adversely affect the structural integrity 

of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by April 15, 2016. 

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. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS