30238 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 22, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

(f) Additional Information 

The subject of this AD is addressed in 

European Aviation Safety Agency (Italy) AD 

No.: 2011–0140, dated July 20, 2011. 

(g) Subject 

Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) 

Code: 2397: Communications System Wiring. 

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on May 10, 

2012. 

Kim Smith, 

Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–12401 Filed 5–21–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Parts 91, 119, 120, 121, 135, 

and 136 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–0374 ] 

Living History Flight Experience 

(LHFE)—Exemptions for Passenger 

Carrying Operations Conducted for 

Compensation and Hire in Other Than 

Standard Category Aircraft 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of public meeting. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is announcing 

public meetings to gather additional 

technical input on the subject of 

exemptions relating to the LHFE. Input 

gathered will aid in developing future 

FAA guidance for evaluating LHFE 

petitions for exemption. Prior to the 

public meetings, the FAA is seeking 

public comment on the guidance. 

DATES: The public meetings will be held 

on June 26, 27, and 28, 2012, from 

8:00 a.m. until 4:30 p.m. Note that the 

meetings may be adjourned early if 

scheduled speakers complete their 

presentations early. The deadline to 

submit a request to make an oral 

statement is June 18, 2012. The written 

comment period will close on June 18, 

2012. 

ADDRESSES: The public meetings will be 

held in the FAA Headquarters building 

auditorium on the third floor, 800 

Independence Ave. SW., Washington, 

DC 20591. Due to limited space, 

attendees are required to please reply 

(RSVP) to 9-AFS-LHFE@faa.gov. Seating 

will be on a first-come-first-serve basis. 

If computer access is not possible, 

please RSVP via mail, fax or hand 

delivery via the methods listed directly 

below: 

• Mail or Hand Delivery: RSVP to 

Flight Standards Service, General 

Aviation and Commercial Division, 

AFS–800, ATTN: LHFE (RSVP), 800 

Independence Ave. SW., Washington, 

DC 20591. 

• Fax: RSVP to AFS–800, Attn: LHFE 

(RSVP) at 202–385–9597. 

Written comments (identified by 

docket number FAA–2012–0374) may 

be submitted using any of the following 

methods: 

Æ Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and follow 

the instructions for sending comments 

electronically. 

Æ Mail: Send comments to Docket 

Operations, M–30, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., West Building Ground 

Floor, Room W12–140, Washington, DC 

20590. 

Æ Fax: Fax comments to Docket 

Operations at 202–493–2251. 

Æ Hand Delivery: Docket Operations 

in Room W12–140 of the West Building 

Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 

9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

Written comments to the docket will 

receive the same consideration as 

statements made at the public meeting. 

For more information on the rulemaking 

process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section of this document. 

Privacy: The FAA will post all 

comments it receives, without change, 

to http://www.regulations.gov, including 

any personal information provided by 

the commenter. Using the search 

function of the FAA’s docket Web site, 

anyone can find and read the comments 

received into any of the agency’s 

dockets, including the name of the 

individual sending the comment (or 

signing the comment for an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). DOT’s 

complete Privacy Act Statement may be 

reviewed in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 

19477–19478) or at http:// 

DocketsInfo.dot.gov. 

Docket: Background documents or 

comments received may be read at 

http://www.regulations.gov at any time 

or in Docket Operations in Room W12– 

140 of the West Building Ground Floor 

at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 

5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Requests to present a statement at the 

public meetings and questions regarding 

the logistics of the meetings should be 

directed to Ms. Keira Jones, Office of 

Rulemaking (ARM–101), Federal 

Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 

267–4025, facsimile (202) 267–5075. 

Technical questions should be 

directed to the General Aviation and 

Commercial Division, AFS–800, Federal 

Aviation Administration, 800 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 

385–9600, facsimile (202) 385–9597; 

email 9-AFS-LHFE@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The FAA has historically found an 

overwhelming public interest in 

preserving United States (U.S.) aviation 

history, including former military 

aircraft transferred to private 

individuals or organizations for the 

purpose of restoring and flying these 

aircraft. The FAA has further 

determined that, with appropriate 

conditions and limitations imposed for 

public safety purposes, access to these 

aircraft can include allowing the public 

to experience flight. Because the 

regulations (14 CFR) do not otherwise 

allow such operations, the FAA 

established through its mid-1990s 

Living History Flight Experience (LHFE) 

policy that exemptions are an 

appropriate way to preserve aviation 

history and keep historic airplanes 

operational when comparable airplanes 

manufactured under a standard 

airworthiness certificate do not exist. 

The LHFE policy provided a way for the 

private owner/operators of historically 

significant, American-manufactured 

large, crew-served, piston-powered, 

multi-engine, World War II bomber 

aircraft to conduct limited passenger 

carrying flights, for compensation, as a 

way to generate funds needed to 

maintain and preserve these historically 

significant aircraft for future 

generations. 

Because this policy generated a 

number of petitions for exemption, the 

FAA affirmed that the regulatory 

scheme adopted in 14 CFR establishes 

appropriate safety standards for aircraft 

operators and crewmembers. Those 

requesting an exemption from a 

particular standard or set of standards 

must demonstrate that: (1) The flight 

cannot be performed in full compliance 

with regulations, (2) there is an 

overriding public interest in conducting 

passenger flights on the aircraft, and (3) 

the measures to be taken establish an 

appropriate level of safety for the flight. 

Because of this, the FAA limited the 

scope of its nostalgia flight exemption to 

World War II (WWII) or earlier vintage 

airplanes (i.e., manufactured before 

December 31, 1947). The reasoning 

behind this limitation addressed both 

public interest (e.g., the unique 

opportunity to experience flight in a B– 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 22, 2012 / Proposed Rules 30239 

17 or B–24 while such aircraft can still 

be safely maintained) and public safety 

(e.g., older and slower multi-engine 

which airplanes allow time for 

appropriate corrective measures in the 

event of an in-flight emergency, and 

crews must meet FAA qualification and 

training requirements). In addition, the 

FAA determined that it would not be 

prudent to grant exemptions from the 

FAA regulations to operators of 

supersonic jets because the speed of 

supersonic jets makes it likely that any 

in-flight emergency may result in 

serious injuries or fatalities. The recent 

crash of a supersonic jet at an air show 

that was piloted by two highly qualified 

and well-trained flight crewmembers 

clearly demonstrates the need to 

reevaluate LHFE. 

However, even after defining the 

guidelines for approving LHFE 

exemptions, the number of petitions for 

exemptions outside this scope—e.g., for 

former military turbojet-powered 

aircraft such as the L–29, L–39, TS–11, 

Alfa Jet, and others that remain in active 

military service—led the FAA to issue 

further guidance in 2006 on Exemptions 

for Passenger-Carrying Operations 

Conducted for Compensation and Hire 

in Other Than Standard Category 

Aircraft (71 FR 15087). However, the 

FAA also noted that in expanding 

requests beyond the original intent, i.e., 

going from a passenger in a B–17 to 

manipulating the controls of a fighter jet 

to conducting simulated aerial combat 

fights in the interest of ‘‘the historical 

experience,’’ requires the agency to 

reevaluate its policy. The FAA noted 

that the clear market orientation of these 

requests undermines arguments of a 

public interest goal in preserving unique 

historical aircraft. 

Nevertheless, the 2006 policy agreed 

to consider any request for exemption 

for passenger-carrying flights in nonstandard category aircraft, especially 

former military turbine-engine-powered 

aircraft, on a case-by-case basis, 

including consideration of nonAmerican manufactured aircraft. 

However, some petitioners are now 

creating business models (as indicated 

above) that, if authorized by the FAA, 

would offer civilians an opportunity to 

conduct such aerial combat flights with 

hands-on flight experience in these 

aircraft. The FAA did not contemplate 

or intend operations of this nature when 

it originally developed the LHFE policy 

and, since issuance of the original 

policy and its subsequent revisions, 

additional issues (e.g., airworthiness 

and maintenance concerns) continue to 

emerge. Because of the high risks 

associated with the industry’s expanded 

business model, the FAA has 

determined that a comprehensive 

evaluation of this policy is necessary 

and seeks public input. 

Purpose of the Public Meetings 

The purpose of the public meetings is 

for the FAA to hear the public’s views 

and obtain information relevant to the 

policy under consideration. The FAA 

will consider comments made at the 

public meetings (as well as comments 

submitted to the docket) before making 

a final decision on issuance of the 

policy. 

Persons wishing to attend this onetime meeting are required to register in 

advance. Your registration must detail 

whether you wish to make a statement 

during the public meeting. If you do 

wish to make a statement, your 

registration must indicate which of the 

following policy topics/questions you 

wish to speak about and what 

organization you represent. Due to 

limited space, attendees are required to 

reply (RSVP) to: 9-AFS-LHFE@faa.gov. If 

computer access is not possible, please 

RSVP via mail, fax or hand delivery via 

the methods listed above in the 

ADDRESSES section. 

In addition to the information sought 

during the public meeting, the FAA 

seeks information on the following 

questions. In order for the FAA to 

consider expansion of the policy, we 

must have sufficient data that provides 

an equivalent level of safety, address 

public interest, along with full 

background documentation. It is 

foreseen that additional limitations will 

be required for any expansion to the 

LHFE policy due to some additions that 

have been requested (i.e., replica, 

turbojet and supersonic aircraft), and 

not previous contemplated in the 

original LHFE policy. Again, the FAA 

requests that all comments be 

accompanied by full documentation. 

General Policy 

(a) If changes are made to the LHFE 

policy that excludes certain aircraft 

which are currently allowed in an 

exemption, how should the FAA 

possibly grandfather such operations? 

(b) If LHFE is not limited to original 

factor built aircraft with operational 

history or if replica, reproduction, or 

look a like aircraft are to be considered 

under an expanded LHFE, what are the 

safety mitigations and limitations that 

should be considered and why. 

(c) Should the operational history of 

the model be considered? Should the 

civil and public/military accident rate 

be considered when reviewing petitions 

for LHFE? 

(d) Should the LHFE policy be limited 

to U.S. manufactured aircraft (as 

originally intended) with significant 

U.S. aviation history? If the FAA is to 

expand the scope of LHFE, the 

following issues must be addressed: 

i. The operational history of former 

U.S. military aircraft is accessible to the 

FAA while that of foreign aircraft may 

not be accessible. 

ii. The FAA has little or no 

information on the ‘‘standard’’ to which 

the non-U.S. aircraft were built. 

(e) Should the FAA exclude jets, 

turbojets and/or supersonic aircraft? If 

not, the following issues must be 

addressed: 

i. High performance aircraft increase 

the level of complexity for the operation 

of these aircraft. 

ii. High performance aircraft add an 

increased level of complexity to the 

maintenance of these aircraft. 

iii. The FAA must consider the higher 

level of risk brought on by the higher 

energy aircraft and ejection seats. What 

are the industry standards for the FAA 

to evaluate on the inherent risks? 

iv. Should the FAA permit turboprop 

powered aircraft to hold LHFE status? 

(f) Should the FAA permit single 

engine aircraft to hold LHFE status 

considering policy was originally 

developed based on the operation of 

large, multi-engine, crew served 

aircraft? 

(g) Should the FAA permit aircraft 

that were once operated by the military 

as single seat aircraft LHFE status if a 

second seat has been added? Does this 

configuration still meet the intent of 

LHFE? 

(h) The original concept of the 

exemptions was to permit the public to 

experience something that could not be 

experienced in a ‘‘standard category’’ 

aircraft. With that in mind, should the 

FAA permit LHFE in aircraft for which 

a standard category aircraft is available 

and where comparable experience can 

be obtained. 

(i) The original concept of the 

exemptions was to permit the public to 

experience something that could not be 

experienced in a ‘‘standard’’ aircraft. 

With that in mind, should the FAA 

permit LHFE in aircraft for which there 

is a standard version of the same? How 

do we phase out or grandfather those 

that were inadvertently included as 

LHFE? 

(j) Should the FAA establish an 

Organizational Delegation Authoritylike process where an authorized 

industry entity evaluates an 

organization’s request (training, 

certification, airworthiness, etc.) and 

makes recommends to the FAA. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
30240 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 22, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

Issuance, General 

(k) Older aircraft require a rather large 

commitment on the part of the operator. 

Sometimes it may be more than the 

operator realizes. Should the FAA 

require a ‘‘fitness’’ standard that 

considers the following? 

i. Can the operator operate the 

aircraft? 

1. How much experience is enough to 

demonstrate the operator has the ability 

to operate the specific type? Or should 

the FAA consider their ability to operate 

a similar aircraft? 

ii. Can the operator maintain the 

aircraft? 

1. Have they satisfactorily maintained 

this or a similar aircraft? 

(l) The FAA feels that an operator’s 

compliance history should be 

considered. If the operator or its 

principals have a history of noncompliance, should the FAA deny the 

petition? 

i. Should the FAA require a ‘‘violation 

free’’ time period? If so, how long 

should it be? What about non-aviation 

history (i.e., convicted felon)? 

(m) In part 119 operations, a new 

operator or one proposing to conduct 

operations with a significantly different 

aircraft may be asked to conduct 

proving or validation flights/testing to 

demonstrate their ability to conduct the 

operations proposed. 

i. How much proving or validation 

flights/testing should be required if the 

petitioner does not have experience 

with the specific aircraft? 

ii. How much proving or validation 

flight/testing should be required if the 

petitioner does not have experience 

with a similar aircraft? 

(n) How can the FAA determine 

‘‘Operational Control’’? The exemptions 

are designed to permit not-for-profit 

organizations to support the continued 

operation of LHFE aircraft. Who owns 

the aircraft? Who operates the aircraft? 

Who is responsible for the operation of 

the aircraft? Who really benefits? 

(o) Should the FAA require that LHFE 

holders carry insurance? 

Issuance, Limitations 

(p) Should passengers be permitted to 

occupy a crew seat/position considering 

the following current policy? 

i. The current LHFE policy states: ‘‘No 

persons other than the assigned flight 

crew members may be permitted on the 

pilot station of the airplane during flight 

operations.’’ 

ii. The FAA has always interpreted 

this statement as prohibiting the 

passengers from manipulating the 

controls of a single pilot aircraft but 

several LHFE holders have complained 

that the FAA misapplied the meaning as 

applied to single pilot aircraft. 

(q) Formation flight is already 

prohibited by § 91.111(b) but the FAA 

feels that ‘‘air combat maneuvering’’ at 

any distance creates an unacceptable 

level of risk (formation is popularly 

defined as flight within 500 feet). 

Considering this, should such flights be 

prohibited or severely restricted to 

ensure the safety of the aircraft 

occupants and persons and property on 

the ground? 

(r) Should the FAA prohibit or 

severely restrict aerobatics in LHFE 

aircraft considering the following? 

i. Older aircraft, mitigation of risk 

requires that the aircraft be operated 

‘‘gently.’’ 

ii. Aerobatic training and rides are 

available in properly certificated 

aircraft. 

iii. Pilot qualification. The FAA has 

no clear way to qualify or evaluate 

aerobatic qualifications. Is an ICAS ACE 

evaluation adequate? 

iv. If the FAA permits aerobatics, are 

the current weather minimums adequate 

(1500 ft ceiling and three miles 

visibility) or are they too low? 

v. Many of the aircraft manuals 

restrict aerobatics to much higher 

altitudes such as those listed in the P– 

47 aircraft. 

(s) Should the FAA limit, restrict, or 

prohibit low passes while conducting 

LHFE flights? 

(t) Should the FAA require approved 

seats for the pilots and passengers? 

(u) What emergency equipment 

should the FAA require on LHFE 

aircraft? 

(v) Should the FAA require operators 

to have evacuation plans and drills? 

(w) If the FAA allows ‘‘high 

performance’’ jets, should the operator 

be required to have arresting gear? 

i. If the FAA requires the availability 

of arresting gear, will the military 

approve? 

(x) Considering the following, should 

the FAA include flight training 

requirements in the LHFE exemption? 

i. Flight training is available via 

deviation for experimental aircraft. 

ii. Flight training is available in 

limited aircraft via exemption. 

(y) In addition to the LHFE 

exemption, should the FAA require the 

operator to obtain a 14 CFR 91 

Sightseeing ride Letter of Authorization? 

(z) In nearly every flight operation 

where passengers are carried for 

compensation or hire, pilots are 

required to participate in a drug and 

alcohol testing program. Should the 

FAA require drug and alcohol training 

and testing for LHFE operators? 

Weather Minimums 

(aa) Weather minimums. 

i. Should the weather minimums be 

raised for all LHFE flights or should the 

FAA require the pilot in command (PIC) 

of LHFE aircraft to be instrument rated 

and current? 

ii. Since § 91.515 requires large 

aircraft to remain at least 1,000 feet 

above ground level, and the minimum 

distance below clouds in class C, D, and 

E airspace is 500 feet, is a 1500 foot 

ceiling appropriate or should the FAA 

require more appropriate weather 

minimums for these aircraft? 

iii. If the FAA allows passengers to 

manipulate the controls of the LHFE 

aircraft, what should be the minimum 

weather? 

iv. If the FAA allows aerobatic flight 

in LHFE aircraft, what should be the 

minimum weather? 

Pilot Qualification/Currency 

(bb) Pilot qualification/experience 

minimums. 

i. Is an unrestricted pilot qualification 

required? 

(cc) Pilot and crew training 

requirements. 

i. Are the current LHFE training 

requirements adequate? 

Maintenance/Inspection 

(dd) Should the operator be required 

to demonstrate their ability to maintain 

the aircraft? 

(ee) Are the current LHFE 

maintenance and inspection 

requirements adequate? 

i. An experimental airworthiness 

certificate assumes a higher level of risk 

is acceptable for the pilot. However, is 

the higher level of risk acceptable for a 

paying passenger or should the FAA 

change the conditions and limitations, 

or the operating limitations, to mitigate 

the risks? If so, what should such 

changes look like? 

(ff) Should the FAA require that the 

interior and exterior entrances be 

marked as exit doors? 

i. Should the markings be in 

contrasting colors? 

ii. Should the markings have a 

minimum legibility requirement such as 

36 inches? 

iii. Should the FAA require that the 

handles be marked in a contrasting 

color? 

(gg) Should aircraft that have been 

modified by the addition of a second 

seat be required to provide a means for 

the passenger to exit the aircraft without 

the pilot exiting first? 

(hh) Safety of the public is the FAA’s 

primary goal. Since LHFE aircraft are all 

older aircraft, how should the FAA 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 22, 2012 / Proposed Rules 30241 

determine which aircraft can be 

operated under LHFE? Some of the 

LHFE aircraft range from complete 

restorations (from the data plate up) to 

aircraft that have serious corrosion or 

other structural issues. 

i. How should the FAA identify 

which aircraft are eligible for LHFE 

status? 

ii. How does the FAA or operator 

ensure an equal level of safety? 

(ii) Should the FAA allow aircraft that 

previously held a standard certificate, 

but later ‘‘decertified’’ and now hold an 

experimental certificate, be allowed to 

operate under an LHFE exemption? 

i. Aircraft that no longer conform to 

their type certificate data sheet create an 

issue for the FAA since it can be 

difficult to determine an equal level of 

safety for a decertified aircraft. With this 

in mind, should such aircraft be allowed 

to operate under LHFE status? 

Participation at the Public Meetings 

Commenters who wish to present oral 

statements at the June 26, 27, and 28, 

2012, public meetings should submit 

requests to the FAA no later than June 

18, 2012. 

Requests should be submitted as 

described in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

document and should include a written 

summary of oral remarks to be 

presented and an estimate of time 

needed for the presentation. Preferably, 

please submit requests via email to: 9- 

AFS-LHFE@faa.gov. Requests received 

after the dates specified above will be 

scheduled if there is time available 

during the meetings; however, the 

speakers’ names may not appear on the 

written agendas. To accommodate as 

many speakers as possible, the amount 

of time allocated to each speaker may be 

less than the amount of time requested 

to ensure various views can be heard. 

See ‘‘Public Meeting Procedures’’ below. 

The FAA may have available a 

projector and a computer capable of 

accommodating Word and PowerPoint 

presentations from a compact disk (CD) 

or USB memory device. Persons 

requiring any other kind of audiovisual 

equipment should notify the FAA when 

requesting to be placed on the agenda. 

Sign and oral interpretation can be 

made available at the meeting, as well 

as an assistive listening device, if 

requested 10 calendar days before the 

meeting. 

Public Meeting Procedures 

A panel of representatives from the 

FAA and other government agencies 

will be present. An FAA representative 

will facilitate the meetings in 

accordance with the following 

procedures: 

(1) The meetings are designed to 

facilitate the public comment process. 

The meetings will be informal and nonadversarial. No individual will be 

subject to cross-examination by any 

other participant. Government 

representatives on the panel may ask 

questions to clarify statements and to 

ensure an accurate record. Any 

statement made during the meetings by 

a panel member should not be 

construed as an official position of the 

government. 

(2) There will be no admission fees or 

other charges to attend or to participate 

in the public meetings. The meetings 

will be open to all persons, subject to 

availability of space in the meeting 

room. The FAA will make every effort 

to accommodate all persons wishing to 

attend. The FAA asks that participants 

sign in between 7:30 and 8:00 a.m. on 

the days the meetings are being 

attended. The FAA will try to 

accommodate all speakers; however if 

available time does not allow this, 

speakers will be scheduled on a firstcome-first-served basis. The FAA 

reserves the right to exclude some 

speakers, if necessary, to obtain 

balanced viewpoints. The meetings may 

adjourn early if scheduled speakers 

complete their statements in less time 

than is scheduled for the meetings. 

(3) The FAA will prepare agendas of 

speakers and presenters and make the 

agendas available at the meetings. 

(4) Speakers may be limited to 3- 

minute statements. If possible, the FAA 

will notify speakers if additional time is 

available. 

(5) The FAA will review and consider 

all material presented by participants at 

the public meetings. Position papers or 

materials presenting views or 

information related to the draft policy 

may be accepted at the discretion of the 

presiding officer and will be 

subsequently placed in the public 

docket. The FAA requests that 

presenters at the meetings provide at 

least 10 copies of all materials for 

distribution to the panel members. 

Presenters may provide other copies to 

the audience at their discretion. 

(6) Each person presenting comments 

is asked to submit data to support the 

comments. The FAA will protect from 

disclosure all proprietary data 

submitted in accordance with 

applicable laws. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on May 16, 

2012. 

John M. Allen, 

Director, Flight Standards Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–12383 Filed 5–21–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

NATIONAL MEDIATION BOARD 

29 CFR Part 1206 

[Docket No. C–7034] 

RIN 3140–ZA01 

Representation Procedures and 

Rulemaking Authority 

AGENCY: National Mediation Board. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of public 

hearing. 

SUMMARY: The National Mediation 

Board (NMB or Board) extends an 

invitation to interested parties to attend 

an open public hearing with the Board 

and its staff on June 19, 2012. During 

the hearing, the NMB invites interested 

persons to share their views on the 

proposed rule changes related to the 

amendments to the Railway Labor Act 

(RLA) in the Federal Aviation 

Administration Modernization and 

Reform Act of 2012. 

DATES: The hearing will be held on 

Tuesday, June 19, 2012 from 9 a.m. to 

4 p.m. A second day may be scheduled 

for Wednesday, June 20, 2012 if 

necessary. Due to time and seating 

considerations, individuals desiring to 

attend the hearing, or to make a 

presentation before the Board, must 

notify the NMB staff, no later than 

4 p.m. EDT on Friday, June 1, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: The hearing will be held in 

the Margaret A. Browning Hearing 

Room (Room 11000), National Labor 

Relations Board, 1099 14th Street NW., 

Washington, DC 20570. Requests to 

attend the hearing must be addressed to 

Mary Johnson, General Counsel, 

National Mediation Board, 1301 K Street 

NW., Suite 250–East, Washington, DC 

20005. Written requests may also be 

made electronically to legal@nmb.gov. 

All communications must include 

Docket No. C–7034. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mary Johnson, General Counsel, 

National Mediation Board, 202–692– 

5050, infoline@nmb.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

National Mediation Board will hold an 

open public hearing on Tuesday, June 

19, 2012, from 9 a.m. until 4 p.m. The 

purpose of the hearing will be to solicit 

views of interested persons concerning 

proposed rule changes. On Tuesday, 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS