### 18848 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 65 / Friday, April 4, 2014 / Proposed Rules

(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: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–1137; fax (425) 227– 1149. Information may be emailed to: 9-ANM-116-AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. 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) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, use these actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if they were approved by the State of Design Authority (or its delegated agent, or by the DAH with a State of Design Authority’s design organization approval). You are required to ensure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service.
(j) Related Information

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) EASA Airworthiness Directive 2013–0195, dated August 27, 2013, 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 it in Docket No.
FAA–2014–0177.

(2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Dassault Falcon Jet, P.O. Box 2000, South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone 201–440–6700; Internet http:// www.dassaultfalcon.com. 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 March
28, 2014. Jeffrey E. Duven, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2014–07519 Filed 4–3–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION** 

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2014–0187; Directorate Identifier 2012–NM–087–AD]** 

**RIN 2120–AA64**

**Airworthiness Directives; Hawker Beechcraft Corporation 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 Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (Type Certificate previously held by Mitsubishi; Raytheon Aircraft Company) Model MU–300 airplanes, and Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (Type Certificate previously held by Raytheon Aircraft Company; Beech Aircraft Corporation) Model 400, 400A, and 400T airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by multiple reports of fatigue cracking in the horizontal stabilizer ribs. This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections of the horizontal stabilizer rib assemblies for cracking, and replacement if necessary. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct such cracking, which could result in the failure of the horizontal stabilizer and loss of pitch control of the airplane.

**DATES :**  We must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 19, 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. 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– 0187; 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 :**  Paul Chapman, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ACE–118W, FAA, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone (316) 946–4152; fax (316) 946–4107.

**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– 2014–0187; Directorate Identifier 2012– NM–087–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 propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (Type Certificate previously held by Mitsubishi; Raytheon Aircraft Company) Model MU–300 airplanes, and Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (Type Certificate previously held by Raytheon Aircraft Company; Beech Aircraft Corporation) Model 400, 400A, and 400T airplanes. We have received multiple reports of fatigue cracking in the horizontal stabilizer ribs. This condition, if not corrected, could result in failure of the horizontal stabilizer and loss of pitch control of the airplane.

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.


### 18849 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 65 / Friday, April 4, 2014 / Proposed Rules

Proposed AD Requirements

This proposed AD would require repetitive radiographic (x-ray) inspections or borescope inspections for cracking of the horizontal stabilizer rib assemblies, and replacement if necessary, in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA. Costs of Compliance We estimate that this proposed AD affects 735 airplanes of U.S. registry.

We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:



### E STIMATED 

### COSTS

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

Inspection ...................... 20 work-hours × $85 per hour = $1,700 per inspection cycle. $30 $1,730 per inspection cycle. $1,271,550 per inspection cycle.

We estimate the following costs to do any necessary replacements that would be required based on the results of the proposed inspection. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these replacements:



### O N 

### -CONDITION 

### C OSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product

Replacement .................................... 280 work-hours × $85 per hour = $23,800 ............................................... $8,321 $32,121

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):
Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (Type Certificate Previously held by Raytheon Aircraft Company; Beech Aircraft Corporation); and Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (Type Certificate Previously held by Mitsubishi; Raytheon Aircraft Company): Docket No. FAA–2014–0187; Directorate Identifier 2012–NM–087–AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

We must receive comments by May 19,
2014. (b) Affected ADs

None.
(c) Applicability

This AD applies to the airplanes, certificated in any category, identified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(5) of this AD.

(1) Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (Type Certificate previously held by Mitsubishi; Raytheon Aircraft Company) Model MU–300 airplanes, serial numbers A003SA through A093SA inclusive.

(2) Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (Type Certificate previously held by Raytheon Aircraft Company; Beech Aircraft Corporation) Model 400 airplanes, serial numbers RJ–1 through RJ–65 inclusive.

(3) Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (Type Certificate previously held by Raytheon Aircraft Company; Beech Aircraft Corporation) Model 400A airplanes, serial numbers RK–1 through RK–604 inclusive.

(4) Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (Type Certificate previously held by Raytheon Aircraft Company; Beech Aircraft Corporation) Model 400T (T–1A) airplanes, serial numbers TT–1 through TT–180 inclusive.

(5) Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (Type Certificate previously held by Raytheon Aircraft Company; Beech Aircraft Corporation) Model 400T (TX), serial numbers TX–1 through TX–13 inclusive.
(d) Subject

Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 55, Stabilizers.

(e) Unsafe Condition

This AD was prompted by multiple reports of fatigue cracking in the horizontal stabilizer ribs. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct such cracking, which could result in the failure of the horizontal stabilizer and loss of pitch control of the airplane.


### 18850 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 65 / Friday, April 4, 2014 / Proposed Rules

1 Federal Trade Commission: Automotive Fuel Ratings, Certification and Posting: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (‘‘2010 NPRM’’), 75 FR 12470 (Mar. 16, 2010).

2 Federal Trade Commission: Automotive Fuel Ratings, Certification and Posting: Final Rule Amendments (‘‘2011 Final Amendments’’), 76 FR 19684 (Apr. 8, 2011).

3 EPA made this decision through a two-step process. First, the agency approved E15 for 2007 and newer vehicles. Environmental Protection Agency: Partial Grant and Partial Denial of Clean Air Act Waiver Application Submitted by Growth Energy to Increase the Allowable Ethanol Content of Gasoline to 15 Percent; Decision of the Administrator (‘‘EPA Waiver Decision I’’), 75 FR 68094 (Nov. 4, 2010). Then, it expanded its approval to 2001 and newer vehicles, based on additional test data. Environmental Protection Agency, Partial Grant of Clean Air Act Waiver Application Submitted by Growth Energy to Increase the Allowable Ethanol Content of Gasoline to 15 Percent; Decision of the Administrator (‘‘EPA Waiver Decision II’’), 76 FR 4662 (Jan. 26, 2011). For ease of discussion, this document refers to them together as the EPA ‘‘waiver decision.’’ (f) Compliance

Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
(g) Repetitive Inspections

Before the accumulation of 7,400 total flight hours or within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, perform a radiographic (x-ray) inspection or a borescope inspection for cracking of the horizontal stabilizer rib assemblies, in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 2,400 flight hours. For an inspection method to be approved by the Manager, Wichita ACO, as required by this paragraph, the Manager’s approval letter must specifically refer to this AD.
(h) Replacement

If any cracking is found during any inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD: Before further flight, replace the horizontal rib assemblies with new horizontal rib assemblies, in accordance with method to be approved by the Manager, Wichita ACO. For a replacement method to be approved by the Manager, Wichita ACO, as required by this paragraph, the Manager’s approval letter must specifically refer to this AD. This replacement does not terminate the repetitive inspection requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD.
(i) Special Flight Permit

Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where the airplane can be repaired (if the operator elects to do so), provided the restrictions specified in paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(4) of this AD are followed.

(1) Do not exceed 10 flight hours of operation.

(2) Only operations under daylight conditions and under visual flight rules are allowed.

(3) Only operations with the minimum flightcrew and with no passengers are allowed.

(4) Do not exceed maneuver speed as specified in the applicable airplane flight manual.
(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

(1) The Manager, Airframe Branch, ACE– 118W, 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. (k) Related Information For more information about this AD, contact Paul Chapman, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ACE–118W, FAA, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone (316) 946–4152; fax (316) 946–4107.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 28, 2014. Jeffrey E. Duven, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2014–07520 Filed 4–3–14; 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 :**  Notice of proposed rulemaking.

**SUMMARY :**  The Commission proposes amendments to its Rule for Automotive Fuel Ratings, Certification and Posting (‘‘Fuel Rating Rule’’ or ‘‘Rule’’) that would adopt and revise rating, certification, and labeling requirements for ethanol-gasoline blends and would allow an alternative octane rating method. The proposed amendments further the Rule’s goal of helping purchasers identify the correct fuel for their vehicles.

**DATES :**  Comments on the proposed information requests must be received on or before June 2, 2014.

**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 or deliver your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Room H–113 (Annex N), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Miriam Lederer, (202) 326–2975, Division of Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  I. Introduction
The Federal Trade Commission proposes amending its Fuel Rating Rule, 16 CFR part 306, to provide: (1) Revised rating, certification, and labeling requirements for blends of gasoline and more than 10 percent ethanol (‘‘ethanol blends’’); and 2) an additional octane rating method for gasoline. The Commission previously proposed amendments governing ethanol blends in a 2010 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (‘‘2010 NPRM’’). 1 After reviewing the comments, the Commission responded in April 2011 by publishing final amendments addressing other issues. Specifically, the Commission approved a new octane rating method and declined to amend the biodiesel and biomass-based diesel provisions. 2 The Commission deferred consideration of ethanol blend labeling to consider an Environmental Protection Agency (‘‘EPA’’) decision permitting the use of ethanol blends between 10 to 15 percent concentration (‘‘E15’’) in 2001 and newer conventional vehicles. 3 TheCommission now proposes ethanollabeling amendments in response to comments received on the 2010 NPRM proposals, EPA’s action, and changes in an ASTM International specification regarding ethanol.

The amendments proposed today retain the 2010 NPRM’s proposal that entities rate and certify all ethanol blends, but alter the proposed ethanol label’s disclosures, to provide consumers with more precise concentration and suitability information. The new proposed amendments also exempt EPA-approved E15 from the Commission’s labeling requirements.

The Commission also proposes an additional octane rating method that