Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 155 / Monday, August 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules 48835 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0686; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NM–006–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 supersede 

airworthiness directive (AD) 2007–16– 

19, which applies to certain The Boeing 

Company Model 747–200B, 747–300, 

and 747–400 series airplanes. AD 2007– 

16–19 requires repetitive detailed 

inspections for cracking of the aft 

tension tie channels from body station 

(BS) 1120 to BS 1220 and from BS 880 

to BS 1100, and corrective actions if 

necessary, and optional terminating 

action. Since we issued that AD, 

analysis has indicated the need to 

mandate the previously optional 

modification. This proposed AD would 

retain the existing requirements, limit 

the area of the detailed inspection, add 

repetitive surface high-frequency eddy 

current inspections, and mandate the 

previously optional terminating action. 

We are proposing this AD to prevent 

fatigue cracking of the tension ties, 

which could result in reduced structural 

integrity of the airplane and rapid 

depressurization of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by September 26, 

2013. 

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 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 

review copies of the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, WA. For information on 

the availability of this material at the 

FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; 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: Bill 

Ashforth, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe 

Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 

Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 

98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6432; fax: 

425–917–6590; email: 

bill.ashforth@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2013–0686; Directorate Identifier 

2013–NM–006–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 

On August 2, 2007, we issued AD 

2007–16–19, Amendment 39–15158 (72 

FR 45151, August 13, 2007), for certain 

The Boeing Company Model 747–200B, 

747–300, and 747–400 series airplanes. 

AD 2007–16–19 requires repetitive 

detailed inspections for cracking of the 

aft tension tie channels from body 

station (BS) 1120 to BS 1220 and from 

BS 880 to BS 1100, and corrective 

actions if necessary. AD 2007–16–19 

was prompted by cracks found in the aft 

tension tie channels at four station 

locations on a Model 747–200B series 

airplane that had been modified to a 

special freighter. We issued AD 2007– 

16–19 to detect and correct cracking of 

the aft tension tie channels; failure of 

more than one tension tie could result 

in rapid depressurization of the 

airplane. 

WFD (Widespread Fatigue Damage) 

Program 

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 widespread fatigue 

damage (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 

design approval holders 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. 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
48836 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 155 / Monday, August 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

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. 

Actions Since AD 2007–16–19, 

Amendment 39–15158 (72 FR 45151, 

August 13, 2007) Was Issued 

AD 2007–16–19, Amendment 39– 

15158 (72 FR 45151, August 13, 2007), 

provides a terminating modification as 

an option. We have determined that it 

is necessary to mandate this 

modification to adequately address the 

identified unsafe condition. We can 

better ensure long-term continued 

operational safety by design changes to 

remove the source of the problem, rather 

than by repetitive inspections. Longterm inspections may not provide the 

degree of safety necessary for the 

transport airplane fleet. This 

determination, along with a better 

understanding of the human factors 

associated with numerous continual 

inspections, has led us to consider 

placing less emphasis on inspections 

and more emphasis on design 

improvements. The proposed 

modification requirement is consistent 

with these conditions. 

Relevant Service Information 

We reviewed Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 747–53A2610, Revision 1, 

dated December 4, 2012. For 

information on the procedures and 

compliance times, see this service 

information at http:// 

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

Docket No. FAA–2013–0686. 

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 

Although this proposed AD does not 

explicitly restate the requirements of AD 

2007–16–19, Amendment 39–15158 (72 

FR 45151, August 13, 2007), this 

proposed AD would retain all of the 

requirements of AD 2007–16–19. Those 

requirements are referenced in the 

service information identified 

previously, which, in turn, is referenced 

in paragraph (g) of this proposed AD. 

Also, this proposed AD would limit the 

area of the existing detailed inspection 

required by AD 2007–16–19, add 

repetitive surface high-frequency eddy 

current inspections, and mandate the 

previously optional terminating action. 

The phrase ‘‘related investigative 

actions’’ is used in this proposed AD. 

‘‘Related investigative actions’’ are 

follow-on actions that (1) are related to 

the primary actions, and (2) further 

investigate the nature of any condition 

found. Related investigative actions in 

an AD could include, for example, 

inspections. 

In addition, the phrase ‘‘corrective 

actions’’ is used in this proposed AD. 

‘‘Corrective actions’’ are actions that 

correct or address any condition found. 

Corrective actions in an AD could 

include, for example, repairs. 

Difference Between Proposed AD and 

Service Information 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2610, Revision 1, dated December 4, 

2012, 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. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 1 airplane 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 

Retained detailed inspection (retained actions.4 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

$340 per inspection cycle.

$0 $340 per inspection 

cycle.

$340 per inspection 

cycle. 

New proposed surface high-frequency eddy current inspection.4 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

$340 per inspection cycle.

0 $340 per inspection 

cycle.

$340 per inspection 

cycle. 

New proposed modification .............. 64 work-hours × $85 per hour = 

$5,440.

14,948 $20,388 ........................ $20,388. 

We have received no definitive data 

that would enable us to provide workhour estimates for repair of cracks found 

in a bolt hole during the detailed 

inspection specified in this proposed 

AD. The cost for parts (oversized 

fastener kit) for this condition is $2,292. 

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 have 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 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 155 / Monday, August 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules 48837 

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 that the proposed regulation: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

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

the DOT Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 

1979), 

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska, and 

(4) Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing airworthiness directive (AD) 

2007–16–19, Amendment 39–15158 (72 

FR 45151, August 13, 2007), and adding 

the following new AD: 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2013–0686; Directorate Identifier 2013– 

NM–006–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

The FAA must receive comments on this 

AD action by September 26, 2013. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD supersedes AD 2007–16–19, 

Amendment 39–15158 (72 FR 45151, August 

13, 2007). Certain requirements of AD 2012– 

15–13, Amendment 39–17142 (77 FR 47267, 

August 8, 2012), affect certain requirements 

of this AD. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to The Boeing Company 

Model 747–200B, 747–300, and 747–400 

series airplanes, certificated in any category, 

as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2610, Revision 1, dated December 4, 

2012. 

(d) Subject 

Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/ 

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 tension ties are subject to widespread 

fatigue damage (WFD). We are issuing this 

AD to prevent fatigue cracking of the tension 

ties, which could result in reduced structural 

integrity of the airplane and rapid 

depressurization of the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Repetitive Inspections 

At the applicable time specified in 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2610, 

Revision 1, dated December 4, 2012, except 

as specified in paragraph (i) of this AD: Do 

detailed and surface high-frequency eddy 

current inspections for cracks in the tension 

ties at body stations (STAs) 880 to 1100, 

1120, 1160, 1200, and 1220, and do all 

applicable corrective actions, in accordance 

with the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2610, 

Revision 1, dated December 4, 2012, except 

as required by paragraph (i)(3) of this AD. Do 

all applicable corrective actions before 

further flight. Repeat the inspections 

thereafter at the applicable time specified in 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2610, 

Revision 1, dated December 4, 2012, until the 

tension ties have been modified as required 

by paragraph (h) of this AD. Repair or 

modification of a tension tie at any location 

in accordance with Part 3 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2610, Revision 1, 

dated December 4, 2012, terminates the 

repetitive inspection requirements of this AD 

for that tension tie location only. 

(h) Tension Tie Modification 

At the applicable time specified in 

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

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2610, 

Revision 1, dated December 4, 2012, except 

as specified in paragraph (i) of this AD: 

Modify the tension ties from STA 880 to 

1100, and do all applicable related 

investigative and corrective actions, in 

accordance with Part 3 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2610, Revision 1, 

dated December 4, 2012, except as required 

by paragraph (i)(3) of this AD. Do all 

applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions before further flight. 

Modification of all tension ties at the body 

stations specified in Part 3 of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 747–53A2610, Revision 1, 

dated December 4, 2012, terminates the 

repetitive inspection requirements of this 

AD. Modification of a tension tie at STA 1120 

to 1220, as required by paragraph (p) of AD 

2012–15–13, Amendment 39–17142 (77 FR 

47267, August 8, 2012), is acceptable for 

compliance with the requirements of 

paragraph (h) of this AD for that tension tie 

location only. 

(i) Service Information Clarification and 

Exceptions 

(1) Paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2610, 

Revision 1, dated December 4, 2012, specifies 

certain compliance times ‘‘after August 28, 

2007.’’ August 28, 2007, is the effective date 

of AD 2007–16–19, Amendment 39–15158 

(72 FR 45151, August 13, 2007). 

(2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2610, Revision 1, dated December 4, 

2012, specifies a compliance time ‘‘after the 

Revision 1 date of this service bulletin,’’ this 

AD requires compliance within the specified 

time after the effective date of this AD. 

(3) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 

747–53A2610, Revision 1, dated December 4, 

2012, specifies to contact Boeing for certain 

repair instructions: Repair before further 

flight using a method approved in 

accordance with the procedures specified in 

paragraph (k) of this AD. 

(j) Credit for Previous Actions 

This paragraph provides credit for the 

detailed inspections, repairs, and 

modification specified in paragraphs (g) and 

(h) of this AD, for that affected tension tie 

location only, if those actions were 

performed before the effective date of this AD 

using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747– 

53A2610, dated May 10, 2007 (which is not 

incorporated by reference in this AD). 

(k) 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 the 

Related Information section of this AD. 

Information may be emailed to: 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@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 

required by this AD if it is approved by the 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) that has 

been authorized by the Manager, Seattle 

ACO, to make those findings. For a repair 

method to be approved, the repair must meet 

the certification basis of the airplane, and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

(4) AMOCs approved previously in 

accordance with AD 2007–16–19, 

Amendment 39–15158 (72 FR 45151, August 

13, 2007), are approved as AMOCs for the 

corresponding provisions of this AD. 

(l) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Bill Ashforth, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057– 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
48838 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 155 / Monday, August 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

3356; phone: 425–917–6432; fax: 425–917– 

6590; email: bill.ashforth@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 review copies of the 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 August 

1, 2013. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–19462 Filed 8–9–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0608; Airspace 

Docket No. 13–ACE–14] 

Proposed Establishment of Class E 

Airspace; Curtis, NE 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This action proposes to 

establish Class E airspace at Curtis, NE. 

Controlled airspace is necessary to 

accommodate new Standard Instrument 

Approach Procedures (SIAP) at Curtis 

Municipal Airport. The FAA is taking 

this action to enhance the safety and 

management of Instrument Flight Rules 

(IFR) operations for SIAPs at the airport. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 26, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this 

proposal to the U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. You must 

identify the docket number FAA–2013– 

0608/Airspace Docket No. 13–ACE–14, 

at the beginning of your comments. You 

may also submit comments through the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. 

You may review the public docket 

containing the proposal, any comments 

received, and any final disposition in 

person in the Dockets Office between 

9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

The Docket Office (telephone 1–800– 

647–5527), is on the ground floor of the 

building at the above address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Scott Enander, Central Service Center, 

Operations Support Group, Federal 

Aviation Administration, Southwest 

Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort 

Worth, TX 76137; telephone: 817–321– 

7716. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

Interested parties are invited to 

participate in this proposed rulemaking 

by submitting such written data, views, 

or arguments, as they may desire. 

Comments that provide the factual basis 

supporting the views and suggestions 

presented are particularly helpful in 

developing reasoned regulatory 

decisions on the proposal. Comments 

are specifically invited on the overall 

regulatory, aeronautical, economic, 

environmental, and energy-related 

aspects of the proposal. 

Communications should identify both 

docket numbers and be submitted in 

triplicate to the address listed above. 

Commenters wishing the FAA to 

acknowledge receipt of their comments 

on this notice of proposed rulemaking 

must submit with those comments a 

self-addressed, stamped postcard on 

which the following statement is made: 

‘‘Comments to Docket No. FAA–2013– 

0608/Airspace Docket No. 13–ACE–14.’’ 

The postcard will be date/time stamped 

and returned to the commenter. 

Availability of NPRMs 

An electronic copy of this document 

may be downloaded through the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. 

Recently published rulemaking 

documents can also be accessed through 

the FAA’s Web page at http:// 

www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/ 

air_traffic/publications/ 

airspace_amendments/. 

You may review the public docket 

containing the proposal, any comments 

received and any final disposition in 

person in the Dockets Office (see 

ADDRESSES section for address and 

phone number) between 9:00 a.m. and 

5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. An informal 

docket may also be examined during 

normal business hours at the office of 

the Central Service Center, 2601 

Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137. 

Persons interested in being placed on 

a mailing list for future NPRMs should 

contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking 

202–267–9677, to request a copy of 

Advisory Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking Distribution 

System, which describes the application 

procedure. 

The Proposal 

This action proposes to amend Title 

14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 

CFR), Part 71 by establishing Class E 

airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface within a 7.6-mile 

radius to accommodate new standard 

instrument approach procedures at 

Curtis Municipal Airport, Curtis, NE. 

Controlled airspace is needed for the 

safety and management of IFR 

operations at the airport. 

Class E airspace areas are published 

in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 

7400.9W, dated August 8, 2012 and 

effective September 15, 2012, which is 

incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 

71.1. The Class E airspace designation 

listed in this document would be 

published subsequently in the Order. 

The FAA has determined that this 

proposed regulation only involves an 

established body of technical 

regulations for which frequent and 

routine amendments are necessary to 

keep them operationally current. It, 

therefore, (1) is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under Executive 

Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant 

rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies 

and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 

26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant 

preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation 

as the anticipated impact is so minimal. 

Since this is a routine matter that will 

only affect air traffic procedures and air 

navigation, it is certified that this 

proposed rule, when promulgated, will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, 

Section 106 describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the agency’s 

authority. This rulemaking is 

promulgated under the authority 

described in Subtitle VII, Part A, 

Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that 

section, the FAA is charged with 

prescribing regulations to assign the use 

of airspace necessary to ensure the 

safety of aircraft and the efficient use of 

airspace. This proposed regulation is 

within the scope of that authority as it 

would establish controlled airspace at 

Curtis Municipal Airport, Curtis, NE. 

Environmental Review 

This proposal will be subject to an 

environmental analysis in accordance 

with FAA Order 1050.1E, 

‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1