54454 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 177 / Wednesday, September 14, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Parts 121, 125, and 135 

[Docket No. FAA–2000–7952] 

RIN 2120–AI08 

Service Difficulty Reports 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation 

Administration is proposing to 

withdraw a final rule published on 

September 15, 2000 that would have 

amended the reporting requirements for 

certificate holders concerning failures, 

malfunctions, and defects of aircraft, 

aircraft engines, systems, and 

components. The effective date of this 

final rule has been delayed several times 

and is now January 31, 2006. We are 

proposing to withdraw this rule to allow 

the FAA time to re-examine the service 

difficulty report (SDR) program based 

on comments received and other 

developments since the final rule was 

published. We are also proposing 

several amendments that improve the 

existing SDR program because they did 

not receive significant comment when 

proposed in the final rule. 

DATES: Send your comments on or 

before October 14, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments 

[identified by Docket Number FAA– 

2000–7952] using any of the following 

methods: 

• DOT Docket Web site: Go to http:// 

dms.dot.gov and follow the instructions 

for sending your comments 

electronically. 

• Government-wide rulemaking Web 

site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov 

and follow the instructions for sending 

your comments electronically. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility; 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, 

Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590. 

• Fax: 1–202–493–2251. 

• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on 

the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Emilio Estrada, Flight Standards 

Service, Aircraft Maintenance Division 

(AFS–300), Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, 

telephone (202) 267–5571. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited 

The FAA invites interested persons to 

participate in this rulemaking by 

submitting written comments, data, or 

views. We also invite comments relating 

to the economic, environmental, energy, 

or federalism impacts that might result 

from adopting the proposals in this 

document. The most helpful comments 

reference a specific portion of the 

proposal, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. We ask that you send 

us two copies of written comments. 

We will file in the docket all 

comments we receive, as well as a 

report summarizing each substantive 

public contact with FAA personnel 

concerning this proposed rulemaking. 

The docket is available for public 

inspection before and after the comment 

closing date. If you wish to review the 

docket in person, go to the address in 

the ADDRESSES section of this preamble 

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

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

You may also review the docket using 

the Internet at the Web address in the 

ADDRESSES section. 

Privacy Act: Using the search function 

of our docket Web site, anyone can find 

and read the comments received into 

any of our dockets, including the name 

of the individual sending the comment 

(or signing the comment on behalf of an 

association, business, labor union, etc.). 

You may review DOT’s complete 

Privacy Act Statement in the Federal 

Register published on April 11, 2000 

(65 FR 19477–78) or you may visit 

http://dms.dot.gov. 

Before acting on this proposal, we 

will consider all comments we receive 

on or before the closing date for 

comments. We will consider comments 

filed late if it is possible to do so 

without incurring expense or delay. We 

may change this proposal in light of the 

comments we receive. 

If you want the FAA to acknowledge 

receipt of your comments on this 

proposal, include with your comments 

a pre-addressed, stamped postcard on 

which the docket number appears. We 

will stamp the date on the postcard and 

mail it to you. 

Availability of Rulemaking Documents 

You can get an electronic copy of 

rulemaking documents using the 

Internet by: 

(1) Searching the Department of 

Transportation’s electronic Docket 

Management System (DMS) Web site 

(http://dms.dot.gov/search); 

(2) Visiting the Office of Rulemaking’s 

Web site at http://www.faa.gov/ 

regulations_policies/; or 

(3) Accessing the Government 

Printing Office’s Web site at http:// 

www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html. 

You can also get a copy by submitting 

a request to the Federal Aviation 

Administration, Office of Rulemaking, 

ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by 

calling (202) 267–9680. Make sure to 

identify the docket number, notice 

number, or amendment number of this 

rulemaking. 

Statutory Authority 

Title 49, 44701 of the United States 

Code, authorizes the Administrator of 

the Federal Aviation Administration to 

prescribe regulations for practices the 

Administrator finds necessary for safety 

in air commerce [49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(5)]. 

Pursuant to that statutory authority, the 

Administrator has prescribed 

regulations for certificate holders on the 

reporting of failures, malfunctions, and 

defects of aircraft, aircraft engines, 

systems, and components (commonly 

called Service Difficulty Reports). These 

regulations are found at 14 CFR 121.703, 

121.704, 121.705, 125.409, 125.410, 

135.415, and 135.416. This action 

proposes amendments to those 

regulations. 

Background 

On September 15, 2000, the FAA 

published a final rule (65 FR 56191) 

entitled, ‘‘Service Difficulty Reports,’’ 

Amendment Numbers 121–279, 125–35, 

135–77, and 145–22. That final rule, 

applicable to air carriers and certificated 

domestic and foreign repair station 

operators, amended the requirements for 

reporting failures, malfunctions, and 

defects of aircraft, aircraft engines, 

systems, and components. In the final 

rule, the FAA also sought comments on 

the impact of paperwork and other 

information collection burdens imposed 

on the public. The comment period 

closed on November 14, 2000, and the 

effective date was scheduled for January 

16, 2001. 

The FAA received extensive written 

comments raising concerns with many 

of the provisions of the new SDR 

requirements. In response, the FAA held 

a public meeting about the final rule on 

December 11, 2000. Participants at that 

public meeting also raised significant 

issues concerning the implementation of 

the final rule. 

As a result of the concerns raised at 

the public meeting and during the 

comment period, the FAA delayed the 

effective date of the final rule to July 16, 

2001. This effective date was 

subsequently delayed four more times 

(66 FR 21626, April 30, 2001/66 FR 

58912, November 23, 2001/67 FR 78970, 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 177 / Wednesday, September 14, 2005 / Proposed Rules 54455 

December 27, 2002/68 FR 75116, 

December 30, 2003). The current 

effective date is January 31, 2006. The 

purpose of these delays was to provide 

us more time to consider industry’s 

concerns and to revise the final rule 

where necessary. 

Since the publication of the final rule, 

the FAA amended the SDR 

requirements for repair stations (66 FR 

41117, August 6, 2001). Among other 

things, this amendment addressed one 

of the causes of potential duplicate 

reporting, as a part 145 certificate holder 

no longer has an independent reporting 

provision when performing work for a 

part 121, 125, or 135 certificate holder. 

The FAA has also made 

improvements to the computer software 

and hardware that monitors SDRs. 

These changes are designed to facilitate 

searches of the SDR database and result 

in more useful results. 

The Proposal To Withdraw the Final 

Rule 

The intent of the final rule was to 

improve the existing SDR program 

without having a significant adverse 

impact on industry. The new SDR 

requirements were designed to correct 

deficiencies in the SDR program and 

improve the quality of the data in the 

SDR database. However, based on the 

comments received and information 

gathered at the public meeting and 

during the comment period, we now 

realize the final rule may not meet these 

goals. The concerns raised by industry 

also highlighted the need to resolve 

problems with the existing SDR program 

before increasing the amount and type 

of data recorded. 

The topic that received the most 

comments was the FAA’s economic 

analysis for the final rule. The 

commenters are uniform in their 

contention that the new reporting 

requirements will greatly increase the 

costs of the SDR program. The FAA 

received cost estimates from industry 

which considerably exceed our own 

estimates based, in part, on the wide 

disparity between the industry’s and the 

FAA’s evaluation of the number of SDRs 

resulting from the rulemaking. 

While not completely agreeing with 

the industry’s estimate of the increase in 

the number of reports or the significant 

increase in costs, we have determined 

that some of the assumptions we used 

to predict the number of additional 

reports could have led industry to 

overestimate the costs of compliance 

with this rulemaking. We have 

reevaluated the final rule in light of the 

data provided in the comments and 

have determined that the costs of this 

rulemaking may be higher than 

projected. In addition, we acknowledge 

that populating data collection systems 

with inappropriate data could have a 

negative impact on the FAA’s ability to 

identify and collect meaningful safety 

data on the operation of aircraft. 

Since the public meeting, we have 

considered ways to fix the final rule to 

maintain its original intent while 

addressing the concerns raised by 

industry. During this time period, the 

Commercial Airplane Certification 

Process Study (CPS) also issued its 

findings about the SDR program. The 

CPS was chartered by the FAA’s 

Associate Administrator for Regulation 

and Certification in January 2001 to 

conduct a comprehensive review of the 

processes and procedures associated 

with aircraft certification, operations 

and maintenance. The CPS identified 

certain underlying deficiencies in the 

SDR program that should be corrected 

so data collected may provide the 

maximum safety benefit. A copy of the 

CPS report has been placed in the 

docket for this rulemaking. 

Based on the comments received and 

the CPS findings, the FAA has 

determined there is a need to enhance 

the SDR program so it meets the needs 

of the FAA and industry more 

efficiently and effectively. Rather than 

continuing to delay the effective date of 

the final rule while we address this 

issue, we believe it is prudent to 

withdraw the final rule. This approach 

will prevent uncertainty about the final 

rule’s status and allows us time to 

thoroughly evaluate and improve the 

existing SDR program. The effect of a 

withdrawal will be the retention of the 

regulation currently in effect. 

The Proposal for Amending the Current 

Rule 

The FAA is also proposing to make 

several minor changes to the existing 

SDR program. Most of these changes 

were already incorporated in the final 

rule we are now proposing to withdraw; 

we are proposing to proceed with these 

changes because they did not receive 

significant comment and will improve 

the SDR program. 

Sections 121.703, 125.409, and 135.415 

The FAA is proposing to rename the 

titles of §§ 121.703, 125.409, and 

135.415 to ‘‘Service Difficulty Reports.’’

The existing titles reflect the fact that 

these reports have been called various 

names over the years by different 

parties, resulting in some confusion. 

This proposed change would reflect the 

most common industry term for SDRs 

and result in the eventual use of only 

one consistently used term when 

referring to them. 

Sections 121.703(d), 125.409(b), and 

135.415(d) 

The FAA is proposing three changes 

to improve the process of submitting 

SDRs to the FAA under these sections: 

(1) Replacing the terms ‘‘send,’’

‘‘mailed,’’ or ‘‘delivered’’ with the term 

‘‘submit.’’ This change would allow for 

the use of other means, such as 

electronic transmission, to submit SDRs 

to the FAA. 

(2) Increasing the time for submitting 

an SDR from 72 hours to 96 hours after 

an event occurs that requires an SDR. 

The increased reporting time gives 

certificate holders additional time to 

prepare the SDR and should reduce the 

number of supplemental SDRs that need 

to be filed. A reduction of supplemental 

SDRs should reduce the administrative 

burden on both the FAA and industry. 

(3) Changing the location to which the 

certificate holder must send SDRs. The 

current rule requires SDRs to be sent 

directly to the Certificate Holding 

District Office (CHDO). There, the SDRs 

are reviewed by the assigned Principal 

Maintenance Inspector (PMI) and then 

forwarded to the FAA offices in 

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, where all 

SDRs are entered into the SDR database. 

The proposal would require the 

certificate holder to send SDRs directly 

to our Oklahoma City offices. The PMI 

would be instructed by internal agency 

procedures to review the individual 

SDR for their assigned certificate holder 

through an internal FAA computer 

system that would access the SDR 

database. This proposal would remove 

the intermediate step of processing 

SDRs through the PMI, but not relieve 

the PMI of the responsibility for 

reviewing them. The proposed change 

would also facilitate electronic reporting 

by eliminating the necessity of 

delivering a copy to the PMI. The 

certificate holder would retain the 

option of submitting paper SDRs should 

it so choose, although the FAA strongly 

encourages electronic reporting. 

Finally, for only § 135.415, the FAA is 

proposing to remove the provision for 

aircraft operated where mail is not 

collected. This was an old provision 

that was rarely used by the industry. 

Mail service is available now in most 

locations and various alternatives to the 

U.S. Mail exist. 

Section 121.703(e) 

The proposal would require certificate 

holders to submit SDRs in a form or 

format acceptable to the Administrator. 

Many operators have voluntarily 

adopted reporting formats compatible 

with the FAA’s electronic systems to 

simplify their reporting under the 

54456 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 177 / Wednesday, September 14, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

current rule. Electronic submission of 

SDRs through the FAA Web site is an 

acceptable format. This provision is 

intended to assure that, regardless of the 

method and format chosen for use, the 

information we receive is readable. 

However, when using electronic 

technology, the electronic language used 

must be one the FAA is capable of 

reading. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that the 

FAA consider the impact of paperwork 

and other information collection 

burdens imposed on the public. 

Information collection requirements 

associated with this NPRM have been 

approved previously by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) under 

the provisions of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 

3507(d)) and have been assigned OMB 

Control Number 2120–0663. The 

proposals in this NPRM do not impose 

new information collection 

requirements on certificate holders. 

International Compatibility 

In keeping with U.S. obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to 

comply with International Civil 

Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards 

and Recommended Practices to the 

maximum extent practicable. The FAA 

has determined that there are no ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

that correspond to these proposed 

regulations. 

Regulatory Evaluation Summary 

Changes to Federal regulations must 

undergo several economic analyses. 

First, Executive Order 12866 directs that 

each Federal agency shall propose or 

adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned 

determination that the benefits of the 

intended regulation justify its costs. 

Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

of 1980 requires agencies to analyze the 

economic impact of regulatory changes 

on small entities. Third, the Trade 

Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 2531–2533) 

prohibits agencies from setting 

standards that create unnecessary 

obstacles to the foreign commerce of the 

United States. In developing U.S. 

standards, this Trade Act requires 

agencies to consider international 

standards and, where appropriate, to be 

the basis of U.S. standards. Fourth, the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(Public Law 104–4) requires agencies to 

prepare a written assessment of the 

costs, benefits, and other effects of 

proposed or final rules that include a 

Federal mandate likely to result in the 

expenditure by State, local, or tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $120.7 million or more 

annually (adjusted for inflation.) 

In conducting these analyses, FAA 

has determined this proposed rule: (1) 

Has benefits that justify its costs, is not 

a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as 

defined in section 3(f) of Executive 

Order 12866, and is not ‘‘significant’’ as 

defined in Department of Transportation 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (2) 

would not have a ‘‘significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities;’’ (3) would reduce barriers to 

international trade; and (4) would not 

impose an unfunded mandate on state, 

local, or tribal governments, or on the 

private sector. These analyses, available 

in the docket for this rulemaking, are 

summarized below. 

Purpose of This Rulemaking 

This proposed rulemaking would 

withdraw a delayed final rule on 

Service Difficulty Reports (SDR), but 

retain several relieving items from that 

delayed final rule. The FAA is 

proposing to withdraw the delayed final 

rule because, after receipt of public 

comments on that action, the FAA has 

determined that its cost impact is 

greater than originally projected. 

Total Costs and Benefits of This 

Rulemaking 

Costs 

This proposed rule imposes minimal 

new costs on industry, and results in 

cost-savings ranging from $16.13 

million ($11.33 million, discounted) to 

$38.96 million ($27.36 million, 

discounted). This results in a net cost 

savings to industry ranging from $15.98 

million ($11.23 million, discounted) to 

$38.97 million ($27.37 million, 

discounted). The impact to the FAA are 

additional costs of $145,200 ($102,000, 

discounted) and savings of $9,300 

($6,500, discounted). The FAA has 

determined this rule to be cost 

beneficial. 

Benefits 

Currently, a significant effort is 

underway to improve the quality of 

aviation safety data identification and 

collection. This rulemaking is a 

component of this effort and proposes 

changes to improve the existing SDR 

program. These changes include: 

• Extending the reporting time to 

submit SDRs from 72 hours to 96 hours, 

• Requiring certificate holders to 

submit SDRs directly to a centralized 

collection point, thus allow the reports 

to be entered into the SDR database 

quicker and reduce the administrative 

workload of the certificate-holding 

district office (CHDO), and 

• Allowing electronic submission of 

SDR reports. 

Regulatory Flexibility Determination 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(RFA) establishes ‘‘as a principle of 

regulatory issuance that agencies shall 

endeavor, consistent with the objective 

of the rule and of applicable statutes, to 

fit regulatory and informational 

requirements to the scale of the 

business, organizations, and 

governmental jurisdictions subject to 

regulation.’’ To achieve that principle, 

the RFA requires agencies to solicit and 

consider flexible regulatory proposals 

and to explain the rationale for their 

actions. The RFA covers a wide-range of 

small entities, including small 

businesses, not-for-profit organizations 

and small governmental jurisdictions. 

Agencies must perform a review to 

determine whether a proposed or final 

rule will have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. If the agency determines that it 

will, the agency must prepare a 

regulatory flexibility analysis as 

described in the Act. 

However, if an agency determines that 

a proposed or final rule is not expected 

to have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities, section 605(b) of the 1980 RFA 

provides that the head of the agency 

may so certify and a regulatory 

flexibility analysis is not required. The 

certification must include a statement 

providing the factual basis for this 

determination, and the reasoning should 

be clear. 

For this rule, the small entity group is 

considered to be part 121, 125, and 135 

certificate holders (North American 

Industry Classification System [NAICS] 

481111). For this analysis, the FAA 

considers each part 125 and 135 

certificate holder to be a small entity, 

and some of the part 121 and 121/135 

certificate holders are also small 

entities. 

These regulations result in cost 

savings for all certificate holders of 

between $16.13 million ($11.33 million, 

discounted) to $38.96 million ($27.36 

million, discounted) over the next ten 

years or, on average, between $1.61 

million to $3.90 million per year. 

Assuming that the cost savings is spread 

among the types of certificate holders in 

proportion to the number of SDRs each 

type generated from January 1, 2002 

through August 31, 2004, the average 

part 121 certificate holder would save 

between $13,010 and $31,424 a year, the 

average part 121/135 certificate holder 

would save between $3,511 and $8,479 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 177 / Wednesday, September 14, 2005 / Proposed Rules 54457 

a year, the average part 125 certificate 

holder would save between $16 and $39 

a year, and the average part 135 

certificate holder would save between 

$68 and $165 a year. Thus, the 

economic impact is minimal. Therefore, 

we certify that this action would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

International Trade Impact Assessment 

The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 

prohibits Federal agencies from 

establishing any standards or engaging 

in related activities that create 

unnecessary obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. 

Legitimate domestic objectives, such as 

safety, are not considered unnecessary 

obstacles. The statute also requires 

consideration of international standards 

and, where appropriate, that they be the 

basis for U.S. standards. The FAA has 

assessed the potential effect of this 

NPRM and has determined that it would 

have only a domestic impact and 

therefore no affect on any tradesensitive activity. 

Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (the Act) is intended, among 

other things, to curb the practice of 

imposing unfunded Federal mandates 

on State, local, and tribal governments. 

Title II of the Act requires each Federal 

agency to prepare a written statement 

assessing the effects of any Federal 

mandate in a proposed or final agency 

rule that may result in an expenditure 

of $100 million or more (adjusted 

annually for inflation) in any one year 

by State, local, and tribal governments, 

in the aggregate, or by the private sector; 

such a mandate is deemed to be a 

‘‘significant regulatory action.’’ The 

FAA currently uses an inflationadjusted value of $120.7 million in lieu 

of $100 million. 

This proposed rule does not contain 

such a mandate. The requirements of 

Title II do not apply. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this proposed 

rule under the principles and criteria of 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We 

determined that this action 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, and therefore 

would not have federalism implications. 

Environmental Analysis 

FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA 

actions that are categorically excluded 

from preparation of an environmental 

assessment or environmental impact 

statement under the National 

Environmental Policy Act in the 

absence of extraordinary circumstances. 

The FAA has determined this proposed 

rulemaking action qualifies for the 

categorical exclusion and involves no 

extraordinary circumstances. 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

The FAA has analyzed this NPRM 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). We 

have determined that it is not a 

‘‘significant energy action’’ under the 

executive order because it is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

Executive Order 12866, and it is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. 

International Compatibility 

In keeping with U.S. obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to 

comply with International Civil 

Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards 

and Recommended Practices to the 

maximum extent practicable. The FAA 

has determined that there are no ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

that correspond to these proposed 

regulations. 

List of Subjects 

14 CFR Part 121 

Air carriers, Aircraft, Aviation safety, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Safety, Transportation. 

14 CFR Part 125 

Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

14 CFR Part 135 

Air taxis, Aircraft, Aviation safety, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

The Proposed Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

proposes to amend 14 CFR parts 121, 

125, and 135, as follows: 

PART 121—OPERATING 

REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, 

AND SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATIONS 

1. The authority citation for part 121 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 40119, 

41706, 44101, 44701–44702, 44705, 44709–

44711, 44713, 44716–44717, 44722, 44901, 

44903–44904, 44912, 45101–45105, 46105, 

46301. 

2. Amend § 121.703 to revise the 

heading and paragraphs (d) and (e) to 

read as follows: 

§ 121.703 Service difficulty reports. 

* * * * * 

(d) Each certificate holder shall 

submit each report required by this 

section, covering each 24-hour period 

beginning at 0900 local time of each day 

and ending at 0900 local time on the 

next day, to the FAA offices in 

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Each report 

of occurrences during a 24-hour period 

shall be submitted to the collection 

point within the next 96 hours. 

However, a report due on Saturday or 

Sunday may be submitted on the 

following Monday, and a report due on 

a holiday may be submitted on the next 

work day. 

(e) The certificate holder shall submit 

the reports required by this section on 

a form or in another format acceptable 

to the Administrator. The reports shall 

include the following information: 

* * * * * 

3. Amend § 121.705 to revise the 

introductory text to read as follows: 

§ 121.705 Mechanical interruption 

summary report. 

Each certificate holder shall submit to 

the Administrator, before the end of the 

10th day of the following month, a 

summary report for the previous month 

of: 

* * * * * 

PART 125—CERTIFICATION AND 

OPERATIONS: AIRPLANES HAVING A 

SEATING CAPACITY OF 20 OR MORE 

PASSENGERS OR A MAXIMUM 

PAYLOAD CAPACITY OF 6,000 

POUNDS OR MORE; AND RULES 

GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD 

SUCH AIRCRAFT 

4. The authority citation for part 125 

continues to read as follows: 

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

44702, 44705, 44710–44711, 44713, 44716–

44717, 44722. 

5. Amend § 125.409 to revise the 

heading and paragraph (b) to read as 

follows: 

§ 125.409 Service difficulty reports. 

* * * * * 

(b) Each certificate holder shall 

submit each report required by this 

section, covering each 24-hour period 

beginning at 0900 local time of each day 

and ending at 0900 local time on the 

next day, to the FAA offices in 

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Each report 

of occurrences during a 24-hour period 

54458 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 177 / Wednesday, September 14, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

shall be submitted to the FAA within 

the next 96 hours. However, a report 

due on Saturday or Sunday may be 

submitted on the following Monday, 

and a report due on a holiday may be 

submitted on the next workday. 

* * * * * 

PART 135—OPERATING 

REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND 

ON-DEMAND OPERATIONS AND 

RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON 

BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT 

6. The authority citation for part 135 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 41706, 44113, 

44701–44702, 44705, 44709, 44711–44713, 

44715–44717, 44722. 

7. Amend § 135.415 to revise the 

heading and paragraph (d) to read as 

follows: 

§ 135.415 Service difficulty reports. 

* * * * * 

(d) Each certificate holder shall 

submit each report required by this 

section, covering each 24-hour period 

beginning at 0900 local time of each day 

and ending at 0900 local time on the 

next day, to the FAA offices in 

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Each report 

of occurrences during a 24-hour period 

shall be submitted to the FAA within 

the next 96 hours. However, a report 

due on Saturday or Sunday may be 

submitted on the following Monday, 

and a report due on a holiday may be 

submitted on the next workday. 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 8, 

2005. 

James J. Ballough, 

Director, Flight Standards Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–18176 Filed 9–13–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P