31888 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

covers, however, need not be more 

impact resistant than the contiguous 

tank structure,’’ highlighting the 

assumption that the wing structure is 

more capable of resisting tire impact 

debris than fuel tank access covers. 

In order to maintain the level of safety 

envisioned by 14 CFR 25.963(e), these 

special conditions propose a standard 

for resistance to potential tire debris 

impacts to the contiguous wing surfaces 

and require consideration of possible 

secondary effects of a tire impact, such 

as the induced pressure wave that was 

a factor in the Concorde accident. It 

takes into account that new construction 

methods and materials will not 

necessarily yield debris resistance that 

has historically been shown as 

adequate. The proposed standard is 

based on the defined tire impact areas 

and tire fragment characteristics. 

In addition, despite practical design 

considerations, some uncommon debris 

larger than that defined in paragraph 2 

may cause a fuel leak within the defined 

area, so paragraph 3 of these proposed 

special conditions also takes into 

consideration possible leakage paths. 

Fuel tank surfaces of typical transport 

airplanes have thick aluminum 

construction in the tire debris impact 

areas that is tolerant to tire debris larger 

than that defined in paragraph 2 of these 

special conditions. Consideration of 

leaks caused by larger tire fragments is 

needed to ensure that an adequate level 

of safety is provided. 

These proposed special conditions 

contain the additional safety standards 

that the Administrator considers 

necessary to establish a level of safety 

equivalent to that established by the 

existing airworthiness standards. 

Applicability 

As discussed above, these special 

conditions are applicable to the BD– 

500–1A10 and BD–500–1A11 (CSeries) 

airplanes. Should Bombardier 

Aerospace apply at a later date for a 

change to the type certificate to include 

another model incorporating the same 

novel or unusual design feature, the 

special conditions would apply to that 

model as well. 

Conclusion 

This action affects only certain novel 

or unusual design features on one model 

series of airplanes. It is not a rule of 

general applicability. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25 

Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

The authority citation for these 

special conditions is as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 

44702, 44704. 

The Proposed Special Conditions 

Accordingly, the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) proposes the 

following special conditions as part of 

the type certification basis for 

Bombardier Aerospace BD–500–1A10 

and BD–500–1A11 (CSeries) airplanes. 

Tire Debris Impacts to Fuel Tanks 

1. Impacts by tire debris to any fuel 

tank or fuel system component located 

within 30 degrees to either side of wheel 

rotational planes may not result in 

penetration or otherwise induce fuel 

tank deformation, rupture (for example, 

through propagation of pressure waves), 

or cracking sufficient to allow a 

hazardous fuel leak. A hazardous fuel 

leak results if debris impact to a fuel 

tank surface causes a— 

a. Running leak, 

b. Dripping leak, or 

c. Leak that, 15 minutes after wiping 

dry, results in a wetted airplane surface 

exceeding 6 inches in length or 

diameter. 

The leak must be evaluated under 

maximum fuel head pressure. 

2. Compliance with paragraph 1 must 

be shown by analysis or tests assuming 

all of the following: 

a. The tire debris fragment size is 1 

percent of the tire mass. 

b. The tire debris fragment is 

propelled at a tangential speed that 

could be attained by a tire tread at the 

airplane flight manual airplane 

rotational speed (VR at maximum gross 

weight). 

c. The tire debris fragment load is 

distributed over an area on the fuel tank 

surface equal to 11⁄2 percent of the total 

tire tread area. 

3. Fuel leaks caused by impact from 

tire debris larger than that specified in 

paragraph 2, from any portion of a fuel 

tank or fuel system component located 

within the tire debris impact area 

defined in paragraph 1, may not result 

in hazardous quantities of fuel entering 

any of the following areas of the 

airplane: 

a. Engine inlet, 

b. Auxiliary power unit inlet, or 

c. Cabin air inlet. 

This must be shown by test or 

analysis, or a combination of both, for 

each approved engine forward thrust 

condition and each approved reverse 

thrust condition. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 15, 

2014. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–12691 Filed 6–2–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0338; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–CE–010–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Piper 

Aircraft, Inc. 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 

Piper Aircraft, Inc. Model PA–31–350 

airplanes. This proposed AD was 

prompted by a report of an engine fire 

caused by a leak in the fuel pump inlet 

hose. This proposed AD would require 

inspecting the fuel hose assembly and 

the turbocharger support assembly for 

proper clearance between them, 

inspecting each assembly for any sign of 

damage, and making any necessary 

repairs or replacements. We are 

proposing this AD to correct the unsafe 

condition on these products. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by July 18, 2014. 

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 Piper 

Aircraft, Inc., 2926 Piper Drive, Vero 

Beach, Florida 32960; telephone: (772) 

567–4361; fax: (772) 978–6573; Internet: 

www.piper.com/home/pages/

Publications.cfm. You may review 

copies of the referenced service 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 31889 

information at the FAA, Small Airplane 

Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, 

Missouri 64106. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, 

call (816) 329–4148. 

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– 

0338; 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: Gary 

Wechsler, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, 

Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office, 

1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, 

Georgia 30337; telephone: (404) 474– 

5575; fax: (404) 474–5606; email: 

gary.wechsler@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– 

2014–0338; Directorate Identifier 2014– 

CE–010–AD’’ at the beginning of your 

comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

We received a report of an engine fire 

on a Piper Aircraft, Inc. (Piper) Model 

PA–31–350 airplane. Investigation 

revealed that the fire was caused by a 

leak in the fuel pump inlet hose that 

resulted from repeated contact with an 

adjacent turbocharger support assembly 

caused by inadequate clearance between 

the two assemblies. 

This condition, if not corrected, could 

result in damage to the fuel inlet hose 

assembly, which could cause the fuel 

pump inlet hose to fail and leak fuel in 

the engine compartment. This condition 

could also cause damage to the 

turbocharger support assembly, which 

could require the turbocharger support 

assembly to be repaired or replaced. 

Relevant Service Information 

We reviewed Piper Aircraft, Inc. 

Service Bulletin No. 1257, dated 

February 25, 2014. The service 

information describes procedures for the 

following: 

—Inspecting for a minimum 3⁄16-inch 

clearance between the fuel hose 

assembly and the turbocharger 

support assembly and making any 

necessary adjustments. 

—Inspecting the fuel hose assembly for 

any signs of damage and, if necessary, 

replacing with a serviceable part. 

—Inspecting the turbocharger support 

assembly for any signs of damage and, 

if necessary, repairing or replacing 

with a serviceable part. 

—Performing an engine run-up to check 

for any leaks. 

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. 

Differences Between the Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

There are differences between the 

compliance times for the corrective 

actions in this proposed AD and those 

in Piper Aircraft, Inc. Service Bulletin 

No. 1257, dated February 25, 2014. 

We based the compliance times in 

this proposed AD on risk analysis and 

cost impact to operators. There has only 

been one event of the reported incident 

in the operational history of Piper 

Model PA–31–350 airplanes. Cost was 

also a strong consideration due to the 

age of the fleet and the number of 

airplanes still in service. 

The one-time inspection required in 

this proposed AD is very inexpensive 

and requires minimal time to 

accomplish. It is expected that almost 

all airplanes in service can be cleared 

with a single inspection, and no 

additional actions or costs would be 

incurred by the vast majority of the 

fleet. 

We determined that a single 

inspection with any necessary 

corrective actions is an adequate 

terminating action for the unsafe 

condition. The risk related to future 

maintenance on the fuel line would be 

mitigated by the related service 

information and awareness from this 

proposed AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 773 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 

Inspect for proper clearance between the fuel 

hose assembly and the turbocharger support assembly.

1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 ................. N/A $85 $65,705 

Inspect the fuel hose assembly for evidence 

of leaking, cracking, chafing, and any other 

sign of damage.

.5 work-hour × $85 per hour = $42.50 ........... N/A $42.50 32,852.50 

Inspect the turbocharger support assembly 

for evidence of chafing and any other sign 

of damage.

.5 work-hour × $85 per hour = $42.50 ........... N/A $42.50 32,852.50 

We estimate the following costs to do 

any necessary follow-on actions that 

would be required based on the results 

of the proposed inspection. We have no 

way of determining the number of 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
31890 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

airplanes that might need these 

corrective actions. 

ON-CONDITION COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

Adjust for proper clearance between the fuel hose assembly and the turbocharger support assembly..5 work-hour × $85 per hour = $42.50 ......................... N/A $42.50 

Replace fuel hose assembly ........................................ 1 work-hour × $85 per hour = $85 ............................... $1,068 1,153 

Replace turbocharger support assembly ..................... 24 work-hours × $85 per hour = $2,040 ...................... $12,874 14,914 

Engine run-up/leak check ............................................. 1 work-hour × $85 = $85 (.5 work hour per engine) .... N/A 85 

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 proposed 

regulation is within the scope of that 

authority because it addresses an unsafe 

condition that is likely to exist or 

develop on products identified in this 

rulemaking action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this proposed regulation: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under 

the DOT Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 

1979), 

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska, and 

(4) Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

Piper Aircraft, Inc.: Docket No. FAA–2014– 

0338; Directorate Identifier 2014–CE– 

010–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by July 18, 

2014. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Piper Aircraft, Inc. 

Model PA–31–350 airplanes, serial numbers 

31–5001 through 31–5004, 31–7305005 

through 31–8452024, and 31–8253001 

through 31–8553002, certificated in any 

category. 

(d) Subject 

Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America 

Code 73: Engine Fuel and Control. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by a report of an 

engine fire caused by a leak in the fuel pump 

inlet hose. We are issuing this AD to correct 

the unsafe condition on these products. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified in paragraphs 

(g)(1) through (j)(2) of this AD, unless already 

done. 

(g) Ensure Proper Clearance Between the 

Fuel Hose Assembly and the Turbocharger 

Support Assembly 

(1) Within the next 60 hours time-inservice (TIS) after the effective date of this 

AD or within the next 6 months after the 

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 

first, inspect to determine the clearance 

between the fuel hose assembly, Piper part 

number (P/N) 39995–034, and the 

turbocharger support assembly, Lycoming P/ 

N LW–18302. There should be a minimum 

3⁄16-inch clearance. Do the inspection 

following the INSTRUCTIONS section of 

Piper Aircraft, Inc. Service Bulletin No. 1257, 

dated February 25, 2014. 

(2) Before further flight after the inspection 

required in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, if the 

measured clearance is less than 3/16-inch, 

make all necessary adjustments following the 

INSTRUCTIONS section of Piper Aircraft, 

Inc. Service Bulletin No. 1257, dated 

February 25, 2014, to make the clearance a 

minimum of 3/16-inch. 

(h) Inspect the Fuel Hose Assembly and 

Replace if Necessary 

(1) Within the next 60 hours TIS after the 

effective date of this AD or within the next 

6 months after the effective date of this AD, 

whichever occurs first, inspect P/N 39995– 

034 for evidence of leaking, cracking, 

chafing, and any other sign of damage 

following the INSTRUCTIONS section of 

Piper Aircraft, Inc. Service Bulletin No. 1257, 

dated February 25, 2014. 

(2) Before further flight after the inspection 

required in paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, if any 

evidence of leaking, cracking, chafing, or any 

other sign of damage is found, replace P/N 

39995–034 with a serviceable part following 

the INSTRUCTIONS section of Piper Aircraft, 

Inc. Service Bulletin No. 1257, dated 

February 25, 2014. 

(i) Inspect the Turbocharger Support 

Assembly and Replace if Necessary 

(1) Within the next 60 hours TIS after the 

effective date of this AD or within the next 

6 months after the effective date of this AD, 

whichever occurs first, inspect P/N LW– 

18302 for evidence of chafing and any other 

signs of damage following the 

INSTRUCTIONS section of Piper Aircraft, 

Inc. Service Bulletin No. 1257, dated 

February 25, 2014. 

(2) Before further flight after the inspection 

required in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD, if any 

evidence of chafing or any other sign of 

damage is found, replace P/N LW–18302 

with a serviceable part. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 106 / Tuesday, June 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 31891 

1 Federal Trade Commission: Automotive Fuel 

Ratings, Certification and Posting: Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking, 79 FR 18850 (Apr. 4, 2014). 

(j) Engine Run-Up 

(1) If any fuel line component was adjusted 

or replaced during any actions required in 

paragraphs (g)(1) through (i)(2) of this AD, 

before further flight, perform an engine runup on the ground to check for leaks following 

the INSTRUCTIONS section of Piper Aircraft, 

Inc. Service Bulletin No. 1257, dated 

February 25, 2014. 

(2) If any leaks are found during the engine 

run-up required in paragraph (j)(1) of this 

AD, emanating from any fuel line component 

adjusted, repaired, or replaced during any 

actions required in paragraphs (g)(1) through 

(i)(2) of this AD, before further flight, take all 

necessary corrective actions following the 

INSTRUCTIONS section of Piper Aircraft, 

Inc. Service Bulletin No. 1257, dated 

February 25, 2014. 

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Atlanta 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. 

(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. 

(l) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Gary Wechsler, Aerospace Engineer, 

FAA, Atlanta ACO, 1701 Columbia Avenue, 

College Park, Georgia 30337; telephone: (404) 

474–5575; fax: (404) 474–5606; email: 

gary.wechsler@faa.gov. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Piper Aircraft, Inc., 926 

Piper Drive, Vero Beach, Florida 32960; 

telephone: (772) 567–4361; fax: (772) 978– 

6573; Internet: www.piper.com/home/pages/

Publications.cfm. You may review copies of 

the referenced service information at the 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, 

Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information 

on the availability of this material at the 

FAA, call (816) 329–4148. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on May 

23, 2014. 

Earl Lawrence, 

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–12780 Filed 6–2–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

16 CFR Part 306 

Automotive Fuel Ratings, Certification, 

and Posting 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission 

(‘‘FTC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’). 

ACTION: Extension of comment period. 

SUMMARY: In an April 4, 2014 Federal 

Register Notice, the Federal Trade 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) proposed 

amending its Fuel Rating Rule to 

provide revised rating, certification, and 

labeling requirements for blends of 

gasoline and more than 10 percent 

ethanol (‘‘ethanol blends’’) and an 

additional octane rating method for 

gasoline. The NPRM requested 

comments on the proposed 

amendments, and stated that comments 

must be received on or before June 2, 

2014. In response to a request to extend 

the comment period received on May 

20, 2014, the Commission is extending 

the comment period from June 2, 2014 

to July 2, 2014. 

DATES: Comments addressing the 

Automotive Fuel Ratings, Certification, 

and Posting NPRM must be received on 

or before July 2, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Miriam R. Lederer, (202) 326– 2975, R. 

Michael Waller, (202) 326–2902, 

Division of Enforcement, Federal Trade 

Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC 20580. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may file a 

comment online or on paper, by 

following the instructions in the 

Request for Comment part of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below. Write ‘‘Fuel Rating Rule Review, 

16 CFR Part 306, Project No. R811005’’ 

on your comment, and file your 

comment online at https://

ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/

autofuelratingscertnprm by following 

the instructions on the web-based form. 

If you prefer to file your comment on 

paper, mail your comment to the 

following address: Federal Trade 

Commission, Office of the Secretary, 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Suite 

CC–5610 (Annex N), Washington, DC 

20580, or deliver your comment to the 

following address: Federal Trade 

Commission, Office of the Secretary, 

Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW., 

5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex N), 

Washington, DC 20024. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Commission is extending the comment 

period for its NPRM on proposed 

amendments to the Fuel Rating Rule to 

July 2, 2014. The Commission’s NPRM 1

proposed amendments in two areas. 

First, the NPRM proposed rating, 

certification, and labeling requirements 

for blends of gasoline with more than 

ten percent ethanol. Second, it proposed 

an additional octane rating method that 

uses infrared sensor technology. The 

NPRM’s comment period was to end on 

June 2, 2014. 

In a May 20, 2014 letter, the following 

stakeholders requested that the 

Commission extend the comment period 

by 30 days: Auto Alliance, Global Auto 

Manufacturers, Outdoor Power 

Equipment Institute, and National 

Marine Manufacturers Association. The 

Commission is extending the deadline 

as requested. The Commission 

recognizes that its proposal raises 

significant issues and believes that 

extending the comment period will 

facilitate a more complete record. 

You can file a comment online or on 

paper. For the Commission to consider 

your comment, we must receive it on or 

before July 2, 2014. Write ‘‘Fuel Rating 

Rule Review, 16 CFR Part 306, Project 

No. 811005’’ on your comment. Your 

comment—including your name and 

your state—will be placed on the public 

record of this proceeding, including, to 

the extent practicable, on the public 

Commission Web site, at http://

www.ftc.gov/os/publiccomments.shtm. 

As a matter of discretion, the 

Commission tries to remove individuals’ 

home contact information from 

comments before placing them on the 

Commission Web site. 

Because your comment will be made 

public, you are solely responsible for 

making sure that your comment doesn’t 

include any sensitive personal 

information, such as anyone’s Social 

Security number, date of birth, driver’s 

license number or other state 

identification number or foreign country 

equivalent, passport number, financial 

account number, or credit or debit card 

number. You are also solely responsible 

for making sure that your comment does 

not include any sensitive health 

information, such as medical records or 

other individually identifiable health 

information. In addition, do not include 

any ‘‘[t]rade secret or any commercial or 

financial information . . . which is 

privileged or confidential,’’ as provided 

in Section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 

46(f), and FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 

4.10(a)(2). In particular, do not include 

competitively sensitive information 

such as costs, sales statistics, 

inventories, formulas, patterns, devices, 

manufacturing processes, or customer 

names. If you want the Commission to 

give your comment confidential 

treatment, you must file it in paper 

form, with a request for confidential 

treatment, and you have to follow the 

procedure explained in FTC Rule 4.9(c), 

16 CFR 4.9(c). Your comment will be 

kept confidential only if the FTC 

General Counsel grants your request in 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS