### 43322 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules

may occur a few times when considering the total operational life of all airplanes of one type. Extremely remote conditions are those having an average probability per flight hour on the order of 1 × 10

¥ 7 or less, but greater than on the order of 1 × 10

¥ 9

.

(e) Extremely Improbable. Conditions that are so unlikely that they are not anticipated to occur during the entire operational life of all airplanes of one type. Extremely improbable conditions are those having an average probability per flight hour of the order of 1 × 10

¥ 9 or less.

2. Alternative Fuel Tank Structural Lightning Protection Requirements

For lightning protection features that are integral to fuel tank basic airframe structure or permanent systems supporting structure, as defined in Special Condition No. 1, ‘‘Definitions,’’ for which Bombardier shows and the FAA finds compliance with § 25.981(a)(3) to be impractical, the following requirements may be applied in lieu of the requirements of § 25.981(a)(3):

(a) Bombardier must show that the airplane design meets the requirements of part 25, appendix M, as amended by Amendment 25–125, for all fuel tanks installed on the airplane.

(b) Bombardier must show that the design includes at least two independent, effective, and reliable lightning protection features (or sets of features) such that fault tolerance to prevent lightning-related ignition sources is provided for each area of the structural design proposed to be shown compliant with these special conditions in lieu of compliance with the requirements of § 25.981(a)(3). Fault tolerance is not required for any specific design feature if:

(1) For that feature, providing fault tolerance is shown to be impractical, and

(2) Fuel tank vapor ignition due tothat feature and all other non-faulttolerant features, when their fuel tank vapor ignition event probabilities are summed, is shown to be extremely improbable.

(c) Bombardier must perform an analysis to show that the design, manufacturing processes, and the airworthiness limitations section of the instructions for continued airworthiness include all practical measures to prevent, and detect and correct, failures of structural lightning protection features due to manufacturing variability, aging, wear, corrosion, and likely damage. Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 6,

2014. Jeffrey E. Duven, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 2014–17517 Filed 7–24–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2014–0483; Directorate Identifier 2014–NM–082–AD]** 

**RIN 2120–AA64**

**Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes** 

**AGENCY :**  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

**ACTION :**  Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

**SUMMARY :**  We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2013–16– 08 for certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL–600–2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702) airplanes, Model CL–600– 2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) airplanes, and Model CL–600–2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes. Since we issued AD 2013–16–08, we have determined that a certain part was incorrectly identified in a certain section of that AD. This proposed AD would continue to require inspection of the MLG retraction actuator components; corrective actions if necessary; and, for certain retraction actuators, installation of a new jam nut. We are proposing this AD to prevent disconnection of the MLG retraction actuator, which could result in extension of the MLG without damping, and consequent structural damage and collapse of the MLG during landing.

**DATES :**  We must receive comments on this proposed AD by September 8, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may send comments 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: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. For Bombardier service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Co ˆ te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Que  ́bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone 514–855–5000; fax 514–855– 7401; email thd.crj@ aero.bombardier.com; Internet http:// www.bombardier.com.

For Goodrich service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Goodrich Corporation, Landing Gear, 1400 South Service Road, West Oakville L6L 5Y7, Ontario, Canada; telephone 905–825–1568; email jean.breed@ goodrich.com; Internet http:// www.goodrich.com/TechPubs.

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.

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–2014– 0483; 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 Operations office (telephone 800–647–5527) is in the **ADDRESSES** section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Cesar Gomez, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE–171, FAA, New York Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516–228–7318; fax

516–794–5531.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 

Comments Invited

We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the

**ADDRESSES** section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2014–0483; Directorate Identifier 2014–NM–082–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 based on those comments.

We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http:// www.regulations.gov, including any


### 43323 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules

personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

On July 31, 2013, we issued AD 2013– 16–08, Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, August 20, 2013). AD 2013–16– 08 requires actions intended to address an unsafe condition on certain Bombardier, Inc. Model CL–600–2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702) airplanes, Model CL–600–2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) airplanes, and Model CL–600–2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes.

Since we issued AD 2013–16–08, Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, August 20, 2013), we have determined that the MLG dressed shock strut was incorrectly identified as an MLG retraction actuator assembly in paragraph (k)(2) of the ‘‘Parts Installation Limitations’’ section in AD 2013–16–08. We have revised paragraph (k)(2) of this proposed AD accordingly.

In addition, we corrected a typographical error in the service bulletin number specified in paragraph (j)(1)(iii) of AD 2013–16–08, Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, August 20, 2013), under ‘‘Credit for Previous Actions.’’ Bombardier Service Bulletin ‘‘769BA–32–031’’ was changed to Bombardier Service Bulletin
‘‘670BA–32–031.’’
FAA’s Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

‘‘Contacting the Manufacturer’’ Paragraph in This Proposed AD

Since late 2006, we have included a standard paragraph titled ‘‘Airworthy Product’’ in all MCAI ADs in which the FAA develops an AD based on a foreign authority’s AD.

The MCAI or referenced service information in an FAA AD often directs the owner/operator to contact the manufacturer for corrective actions, such as a repair. Briefly, the Airworthy Product paragraph allowed owners/ operators to use corrective actions provided by the manufacturer if those actions were FAA-approved. In addition, the paragraph stated that any actions approved by the State of Design Authority (or its delegated agent) are considered to be FAA-approved.

In an NPRM having Directorate Identifier 2012–NM–101–AD (78 FR 78285, December 26, 2013), we proposed to prevent the use of repairs that were not specifically developed to correct the unsafe condition, by requiring that the repair approval provided by the State of Design Authority or its delegated agent specifically refer to the FAA AD. This change was intended to clarify the method of compliance and to provide operators with better visibility of repairs that are specifically developed and approved to correct the unsafe condition. In addition, we proposed to change the phrase ‘‘its delegated agent’’ to include a design approval holder (DAH) with State of Design Authority design organization approval (DOA), as applicable, to refer to a DAH authorized to approve required repairs for the proposed AD.

One commenter to the NPRM having Directorate Identifier 2012–NM–101–AD (78 FR 78285, December 26, 2013) stated the following: ‘‘The proposed wording, being specific to repairs, eliminates the interpretation that Airbus messages are acceptable for approving minor deviations (corrective actions) needed during accomplishment of an AD mandated Airbus service bulletin.’’

This comment has made the FAA aware that some operators have misunderstood or misinterpreted the Airworthy Product paragraph to allow the owner/operator to use messages provided by the manufacturer as approval of deviations during the accomplishment of an AD-mandated action. The Airworthy Product paragraph does not approve messages or other information provided by the manufacturer for deviations to the requirements of the AD-mandated actions. The Airworthy Product paragraph only addresses the requirement to contact the manufacturer for corrective actions for the identified unsafe condition and does not cover deviations from other AD requirements. However, deviations to AD-required actions are addressed in 14 CFR 39.17, and anyone may request the approval for an alternative method of compliance to the AD-required actions using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

To address this misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the Airworthy Product paragraph, we have changed the paragraph and retitled it ‘‘Contacting the Manufacturer.’’ This paragraph now clarifies that for any requirement in this proposed AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the FAA, Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), or Bombardier’s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO).

The Contacting the Manufacturer paragraph also clarifies that, if approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature. The DAO signature indicates that the data and information contained in the documentare TCCA-approved, which is also FAAapproved. Messages and other information provided by the manufacturer that do not contain the DAO-authorized signature approval are not TCCA-approved, unless TCCA directly approves the manufacturer’s message or other information.

This clarification does not remove flexibility previously afforded by the Airworthy Product paragraph. Consistent with long-standing FAA policy, such flexibility was never intended for required actions. This is also consistent with the recommendation of the Airworthiness Directive Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee to increase flexibility in complying with ADs by identifying those actions in manufacturers’ service instructions that are ‘‘Required for Compliance’’ with ADs. We continue to work with manufacturers to implement this recommendation. But once we determine that an action is required, any deviation from the requirement must be approved as an alternative method of compliance.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this proposed AD affects 391 airplanes of U.S. registry.

The actions that were required by AD 2013–16–08, Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, August 20, 2013), that are retained in this proposed AD take up to 16 work-hours per product, at an average labor rate of $85 per work-hour. Required parts cost about $1,018 per product. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the actions that are required by AD 2013–16–08 is $2,378 per product.

The new requirements of this AD add no additional economic burden.

According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this proposed AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our
cost estimate.


### 43324 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules

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 removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2013–16–08, Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, August 20, 2013), and adding the following new AD:

Bombardier, Inc.: Docket No. FAA–2014– 0483; Directorate Identifier 2014–NM–

082–AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

We must receive comments by September
8, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

This AD replaces AD 2013–16–08, Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, August 20, 2013).

(c) Applicability

This AD applies to the airplanes specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, certificated in any category.

(1) Bombardier, Inc. Model CL–600–2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702) airplanes, serial numbers 10002 and subsequent.

(2) Bombardier, Inc. Model CL–600–2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) and CL–600–2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, serial numbers 15001 and subsequent.

(d) Subject

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32: Landing Gear.

(e) Reason

This AD was prompted by a report of corrosion of the components of the main landing gear (MLG) retraction actuator found in service; the corrosion was found at the interface of the rod end and the piston, and at the bracket and related pins. We are issuing this AD to prevent disconnection of the MLG retraction actuator, which could result in extension of the MLG without damping, and consequent structural damage and collapse of the MLG during landing.

(f) Compliance

Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.

(g) Retained Inspection of the MLG
Retraction Actuator and Corrective Actions With No Changes

This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (g) of AD 2013–16–08, Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, August 20, 2013), with no changes. For any airplane with an MLG retraction actuator assembly having any part number and serial number identified in paragraph 1.A., Effectivity, of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–32–031, Revision C, dated April 17, 2012, except airplanes on which modification status ‘‘32– 64’’ is marked on the identification plate: At the applicable time specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this AD, perform a detailed inspection of the retraction actuator assembly for evidence of corrosion and security of the jam nut, as applicable, in accordance with Part A of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–32–031, Revision C, dated April 17, 2012; and Goodrich Service Bulletin 49600–32–63 R1, dated May 17, 2011. If any corrosion or unsecured jam nut is found, before further flight, replace the retract actuator with a new or serviceable retract actuator; and install the
retract actuator in accordance with Part A of the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–32–031, Revision C, dated April 17, 2012. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,200 flight hours or 12 months,
whichever occurs first.

(1) For MLG retraction actuator assemblies on which, as of September 24, 2013 (the effective date of AD 2013–16–08, Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, August 20, 2013)), 8,000 or more total flight hours
have accumulated since new or since overhaul, or that have been in service for more than 4 years since new or since overhaul: Inspect within 1,200 flight hours or 12 months after September 24, 2013,
whichever occurs first.

(2) For MLG retraction actuator assemblies on which, as of September 24, 2013 (the effective date of AD 2013–16–08, Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, August 20, 2013)), less than 8,000 total flight hours
have accumulated since new or since overhaul, and that have been in service for 4 years or less since new or since overhaul: Inspect before the accumulation of 9,200 total flight hours on the MLG retraction actuator assembly since new or since overhaul or within 5 years in service since new or since overhaul, whichever occurs first.

(h) Retained Inspection of MLG Retraction Actuator Bracket and Related Pins, and Corrective Actions With No Changes

This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (h) of AD 2013–16–08, Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, August 20, 2013), with no changes. For any airplane with an MLG dressed shock strut having any part number and serial number identified in paragraph 1.A., Effectivity, of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–32–033, Revision B, dated June 26, 2012: Within 4,400 flight hours or 24 months after September 24, 2013 (the effective date of AD 2013–16–08), whichever occurs first, perform a detailed inspection of the retract actuator bracket assembly, associated pins, and the mating lugs on the outer cylinder for evidence of corrosion, in accordance with Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–32–033, Revision B, dated June 26, 2012; and Goodrich Service Bulletin 49000–32–46 R2, dated November 11, 2011. Do all applicable corrective actions before further flight (i.e., replace retract actuator bracket assembly and pins, or outer cylinder lugs, as applicable).

(i) Retained Installation of New Jam Nut With No Changes

This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (i) of AD 2013–16–08, Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, August 20, 2013), with no changes. For any airplane with an MLG retraction actuator assembly having any part number and serial number identified in paragraph 1.A., Effectivity, of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–32–031, Revision C, dated April 17, 2012, except airplanes on
which modification status ‘‘32–64’’ is marked


### 43325 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules

on the identification plate: Within 20,000 flight hours or 10 years after September 24, 2013 (the effective date of AD 2013–16–08), whichever occurs first, install a new jam nut having part number 49606–5, in accordance with Part B of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–32–031, Revision C, dated April 17, 2012; and Goodrich Service Bulletin 49600– 32–64 R3, dated December 15, 2011.

(j) Retained Credit for Previous Actions With Change to Paragraph (j)(1)(iii) of This AD

(1) This paragraph restates the credit provided by paragraph (j)(1) of AD 2013–16– 08, Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, August 20, 2013), with a change to the service information citation in paragraph (j)(1)(iii) of this AD. This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD, if those actions were performed before September 24, 2013 (the effective date of AD 2013–16–08), using the service information specified in paragraph (j)(1)(i), (j)(1)(ii), or (j)(1)(iii) of this AD, which is not incorporated by reference in this

AD.

(i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–32– 031, dated March 14, 2011.

(ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA– 32–031, Revision A, dated June 9, 2011.

(iii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA– 32–031, Revision B, dated July 29, 2011.

(2) This paragraph restates the credit provided by paragraph (j)(2) of AD 2013–16– 08, Amendment 39–17546 (78 FR 51055, August 20, 2013), with no changes. This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by paragraph (h) of this AD, if those actions were performed before September 24, 2013 (the effective date of AD 2013–16–08), using the service information specified in paragraph (j)(2)(i) or (j)(2)(ii) of this AD, which is not incorporated by reference in this

AD.

(i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–32– 033, dated March 14, 2011.

(ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA– 32–033, Revision A, dated July 29, 2011.

(k) Retained Parts Installation Limitations With Change to Paragraph (k)(2) of This AD

(1) This paragraph restates the parts installation limitation specified in paragraph (k)(1) of AD 2013–16–08, Amendment 39– 17546 (78 FR 51055, August 20, 2013), with no changes. As of September 24, 2013 (the effective date of AD 2013–16–08), no person may install on any airplane an MLG retraction actuator assembly having any part
number and serial number identified in paragraph 1.A., Effectivity, of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–32–031, Revision C, dated April 17, 2012, unless that retraction actuator assembly has been inspected as specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, and all applicable corrective actions (i.e., replacement of the retract actuator) specified in paragraph (g) of this AD have been done. Repeat the inspection specified in paragraph (g) of this AD thereafter at the intervals specified in paragraph (g) of this AD.

(2) This paragraph restates the parts installation limitation specified in paragraph (k)(2) of AD 2013–16–08, Amendment 39– 17546 (78 FR 51055, August 20, 2013), with a revised part name. As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install on any airplane an MLG dressed shock strut having any part number and serial number identified in paragraph 1.A., Effectivity, of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–32–033, Revision B, dated June 26, 2012, unless that retraction actuator assembly has been inspected and all applicable corrective actions have been done, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–32–033, Revision B, dated June 26,

2012.

(l) Other FAA AD Provisions

The following provisions also apply to this

AD:

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE–170, 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 ACO, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516–228–7300; fax 516–794–5531. 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. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference
this AD.

(2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO, ANE–170, Engine and Propeller Directorate, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or Bombardier’s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO,the approval must include the DAOauthorized signature.

(m) Related Information

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF–2011–36R1, dated October 3, 2012, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the
AD docket on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA–2014–0483.

(2) For Bombardier service information identified in this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Co ˆ te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Que  ́bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone 514– 855–5000; fax 514–855–7401; email thd.crj@ aero.bombardier.com; Internet http://
www.bombardier.com.

(3) For Goodrich service information identified in this AD, contact Goodrich Corporation, Landing Gear, 1400 South Service Road, West Oakville L6L 5Y7, Ontario, Canada; telephone 905–825–1568;
email jean.breed@goodrich.com; Internet http://www.goodrich.com/TechPubs. Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 13,

2014. Jeffrey E. Duven, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 2014–17550 Filed 7–24–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES** 

**Food and Drug Administration**

**21 CFR Part 573**

**[Docket No. FDA–2014–F–0988]**

**BASF Corp.; Filing of Food Additive Petition (Animal Use)** 

**AGENCY :**  Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.

**ACTION :**  Notice of petition.

**SUMMARY :**  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that BASF Corp. has filed a petition proposing that the food additive regulations be amended to provide for the safe use of sodium formate as an acidifier in swine feed.

**DATES :**  Submit either electronic or written comments on the petitioner’s request for categorical exclusion from preparing an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement by August 25, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit electronic

comments to: http:// www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA–305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Isabel W. Pocurull, Center for Veterinary Medicine (HFV–226), Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl. Rockville, MD 20855, 240–453–6853.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (section 409(b)(5) (21 U.S.C. 348(b)(5)), notice is given that a food additive petition (FAP 2286) has been filed by BASF Corp., 100 Park Ave. Florham Park, NJ 07932. The petition proposes to amend Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in part 573 Food Additives Permitted in Feed and Drinking Water of Animals (21 CFR part 573) to provide for the safe use of sodium formate as an acidifier in swine feed.

The petitioner has requested a categorical exclusion from preparing an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement under 21 CFR 25.32(r). Interested persons may