Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 12047 

Note 5 to paragraph (i) of this AD: An 

additional source of guidance for the actions 

specified in paragraph (i) of this AD can be 

found in BAE Systems (Operations) Limited 

Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.53–237, 

Revision 1, dated April 2, 2013. 

(j) New Requirement of This AD: No 

Alternative Actions, Intervals, and 

CDCCLs 

After accomplishment of the revision 

required by paragraph (i) of this AD, no 

alternative actions (e.g., inspections), 

intervals, and CDCCLs may be used, 

unless the actions, intervals, and 

CDCCLs are approved as an AMOC in 

accordance with the procedures 

specified in paragraph (k)(1) of this AD. 

(k) Other FAA AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply 

to this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of 

Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 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 International Branch, 

send it to ATTN: Todd Thompson, 

Aerospace Engineer, International 

Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; 

telephone: 425–227–1175; fax: 425– 

227–1149. 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: As 

of the effective date of this AD, 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, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or 

the European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA); or BAE Systems (Operations) 

Limited’s EASA Design Organization 

Approval (DOA). If approved by the 

DOA, the approval must include the 

DOA-authorized signature. 

(l) Related Information 

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information (MCAI) 

EASA Airworthiness Directive 2014– 

0071, dated March 19, 2014, 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–2016– 

4220. 

(2) For service information identified 

in this AD, contact BAE Systems 

(Operations) Limited, Customer 

Information Department, Prestwick 

International Airport, Ayrshire, KA9 

2RW, Scotland, United Kingdom; 

telephone +44 1292 675207; fax +44 

1292 675704; email 

RApublications@baesystems.com; 

Internet http://www.baesystems.com/ 

Businesses/RegionalAircraft/index.htm. 

You may view this 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 

29, 2016. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2016–04932 Filed 3–7–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2016–4221; Directorate 

Identifier 2015–NM–167–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 767–200 and 

–300 series airplanes. This proposed AD 

was prompted by an evaluation by the 

design approval holder (DAH) 

indicating that the aft pressure bulkhead 

web to pressure chord joint is subject to 

widespread fatigue damage (WFD). This 

proposed AD would require repetitive 

high frequency eddy current (HFEC) 

inspections of the aft pressure bulkhead 

web, at fasteners common to the 

bulkhead web and pressure chord, 

around the entire circumference of the 

pressure chord for any crack, and repair 

of cracks. We are proposing this AD to 

detect and correct cracks in the aft 

pressure bulkhead web. Such cracking 

could result in the loss of structural 

integrity of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by April 22, 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 NPRM, 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– 

4221. 

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– 

4221; 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: 

Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office 

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

WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6447; 

fax: 425–917–6590; email: 

wayne.lockett@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
12048 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

this proposal. Send your comments to 

an address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 

2016–4221; Directorate Identifier 2015– 

NM–167–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. 

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. 

The FAA has received a report 

indicating that an evaluation by the 

DAH has indicated that the aft pressure 

bulkhead web to pressure chord joint is 

subject to WFD. This condition, if not 

corrected could result in cracks from the 

aft pressure bulkhead web to pressure 

chord joint and possible loss of 

structural integrity of the airplane. 

Related Service Information Under 1 

CFR part 51 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 767–53A0268, dated April 1, 

2015. This service information describes 

procedures for repetitive high frequency 

eddy current (HFEC) inspections of all 

visible locations of the aft pressure 

bulkhead web, at fasteners common to 

the bulkhead web and pressure chord, 

and around the entire circumference of 

the pressure chord for any crack, and 

repair of cracks. 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 

accomplishing the actions specified in 

the service information described 

previously, except as discussed under 

‘‘Differences Between this Proposed AD 

and the Service Information.’’ For 

information on the procedures and 

compliance times, see this service 

information at http:// 

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2016– 

4221. 

Differences between This Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767– 

53A0268, dated April 1, 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. 

The applicability in this proposed AD 

is not limited to airplanes identified in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767– 

53A0268, dated April 1, 2015. That 

service information does not contain a 

comprehensive list of the airplanes that 

are subject to the identified unsafe 

condition. This proposed AD would 

therefore apply to all Model 767–200 

and –300 series airplanes. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 296 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We estimate the following costs to 

comply with this proposed AD: 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 12049 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. operators 

Inspection .................................... 57 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

$4,845 per inspection cycle.

$0 $4,845 $1,434,120 per inspection cycle. 

The size of any repair area needs to 

be determined before material and 

work-hour costs can be calculated. 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, 

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– 

2016–4221; Directorate Identifier 2015– 

NM–167–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by April 22, 

2016. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to all The Boeing 

Company Model 767–200 and –300 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 aft pressure bulkhead web to 

pressure chord joint is subject to widespread 

fatigue damage (WFD). We are issuing this 

AD to detect and correct cracks in the aft 

pressure bulkhead web to pressure chord 

joint which could result in the loss of 

structural integrity of the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Repetitive Inspections 

Except as required by paragraph (h) of this 

AD, at the applicable time specified in 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0268, dated 

April 1, 2015, perform a surface high 

frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection for 

cracking of the aft pressure bulkhead web, at 

fasteners common to the bulkhead web and 

pressure chord, around the entire 

circumference of the pressure chord, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

767–53A0268, dated April 1, 2015. For this 

AD, Group 2, Configuration 2, as specified in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0268, 

dated April 1, 2015, includes airplanes with 

the aft pressure bulkhead replaced as 

specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

767–53A0267. Repeat the inspection 

thereafter at the applicable time specified in 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0268, dated 

April 1, 2015. 

(h) Service Information Exception 

Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767– 

53A0268, dated April 1, 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. 

(i) Crack Repair 

If any crack is found during any inspection 

required by paragraph (g) of this AD, before 

further flight, repair the crack using a method 

approved in accordance with the procedures 

specified in paragraph (j) of this AD. 

Although Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767– 

53A0268, dated April 1, 2015, specifies to 

contact Boeing for repair instructions, and 

specifies that action as ‘‘RC’’ (Required for 

Compliance), this AD requires repair as 

specified in this paragraph. Installation of a 

repair terminates the inspections required by 

paragraph (g) of this AD in the area covered 

by the repair only. 

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested using the procedures found in 14 

CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, 

send your request to your principal inspector 

or local Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the manager of the ACO, send it to the 

attention of the person identified in 

paragraph (k)(1) of this AD. Information may 

be emailed to: 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-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 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
12050 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) that has 

been authorized by the Manager, Seattle 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 (i) of 

this AD: For service information that 

contains steps that are labeled as RC, the 

provisions of paragraphs (j)(4)(i) and (j)(4)(ii) 

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 Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle 

ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 

98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6447; fax: 425– 

917–6590; email: wayne.lockett@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 

29, 2016. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2016–04931 Filed 3–7–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

22 CFR Part 41 

[Public Notice: 9458] 

RIN 1400–AD30 

Visas: Documentation of 

Nonimmigrants Under the Immigration 

and Nationality Act, as Amended 

AGENCY: Department of State. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Department of State 

proposes to reinstate a temporarily 

suspended amendment to its visa 

regulations to clarify procedures for 

waiver of documentary requirements 

due to an unforeseen emergency for 

nonimmigrants seeking admission to the 

United States. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 9, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Internet: You may view this 

proposed rule and submit your 

comments by visiting the 

Regulations.gov Web site at 

www.regulations.gov, and searching for 

docket number DOS–2016–0010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Lauren A. Boquin, Legislation and 

Regulations Division, Legal Affairs, 

Office of Visa Services, Bureau of 

Consular Affairs, Department of State, 

600 19th St NW., Washington, DC 20006 

(202) 485–7638. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

This rulemaking proposes to reinstate 

a 1999 regulatory amendment that was 

invalidated by court order in United 

Airlines, Inc. v. Brien, 588 F.3d 158 (2d 

Cir. 2009). 

Pursuant to Section 212(a)(7)(B)(i) of 

the Immigration and Nationality Act 

(INA), a nonimmigrant is inadmissible 

to the United States if he or she does not 

present an unexpired passport and valid 

visa at the time of application for 

admission. 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(7)(B)(i). 

Either or both of these requirements 

may be waived by the Secretary of 

Homeland Security and the Secretary of 

State, acting jointly, in specified 

situations, as provided in INA section 

212(d)(4) (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(4)). One 

circumstance in which this requirement 

may be waived is when a nonimmigrant 

is unable to present a valid visa or 

unexpired passport due to an 

unforeseen emergency. In accordance 

with INA section 212(d)(4) (8 U.S.C. 

1182(d)(4)), the Department of State and 

the Department of Homeland Security 

have consulted and are acting jointly to 

propose amendments to 8 CFR 212.1 

and 22 CFR 41.2. 

Former Regulations 

The Department of State and the 

former Immigration and Naturalization 

Service (INS) published parallel 

regulations in 1994 to consolidate and 

simplify procedures for processing 

waivers of documentary requirements in 

cases of emergency circumstances. INS 

amended its regulation in 1996, 

preserving its authority to impose fines 

on carriers for transporting 

nonimmigrants who did not present a 

valid visa and passport, even in cases 

where the INS granted a waiver. In 

1999, the Department of State published 

a regulation to accompany the INS 

amendment, also allowing the INS to 

fine carriers who transported 

individuals who later received waivers 

of the visa and passport requirement. In 

a 2009 decision, the U.S. Court of 

Appeals for the Second Circuit found 

the 1999 State Department amendment 

invalid as it lacked joint action and was 

not promulgated with a period for 

public notice and comment. 

Accordingly, the Department of State 

and DHS have consulted and are acting 

jointly to propose reinstating the 

amendments. 

Because of the court’s ruling, the 1994 

rule is in effect until the Department of 

State issues a final rule. The 1994 

version of the text, which is available to 

the public through the Government 

Printing Office, stipulated that in cases 

of unforeseen emergencies, a visa and 

passport are not required of an alien if, 

either prior to the alien’s embarkation 

abroad or upon arrival at a port of entry, 

the responsible district director of the 

Immigration and Naturalization Service 

in charge of the port of entry concludes 

that the alien is unable to present the 

required documents because of an 

unforeseen emergency. The 1994 rule 

also stipulated that any waiver of the 

visa or passport requirement may be 

granted by the INS district director 

pursuant to INA 212(d)(4)(A) without 

the prior concurrence of the Department 

of State in each case in which the 

district director concludes that the 

alien’s claim of emergency 

circumstances is legitimate and bona 

fide and that approval of the waiver 

would be appropriate under all of the 

attendant facts and circumstances. 

The Department of Homeland 

Security is proposing a parallel Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking to amend 8 

CFR 212.1(g), published in today’s 

Federal Register. 

Regulatory Findings 

A. Administrative Procedure Act 

The Department is publishing this 

notice of proposed rulemaking with a 

60-day period of notice and comment. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive 

Order 13272: Small Business 

The Department of State has reviewed 

this regulation and certifies that this 

rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

C. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 

Section 202 of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995, Public 

Law 104–4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1532, 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS