11636 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 41 / Thursday, March 2, 1995 / Proposed Rules

kept the FAA informed of the situation

described above.

The FAA has examined the findings

of the CAA, reviewed all available

information, and determined that AD

action is necessary for products of this

type design that are certificated for

operation in the United States.

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop in other JAL HP137 Mk1 and

Jetstream series 200 airplanes of the

same type design, the proposed AD

would require incorporating operating

limitations that revise the maximum

flap operating speed for DOWN flaps to

120 KIAS, and that prohibit extending

the flaps beyond the take-off position if

ice is visible on the airplane. The

proposed actions would be

accomplished in accordance with

Jetstream SB 27–A–JA 911044, dated

January 31, 1992.

The FAA estimates that 10 airplanes

in the U.S. registry would be affected by

the proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 1 workhour per airplane

to accomplish the proposed action, and

that the average labor rate is

approximately $60 an hour. Parts

(placards fabricated from local

resources) cost approximately $30 per

airplane. Based on these figures, the

total cost impact of the proposed AD on

U.S. operators is estimated to be $900.

This figure is based on the assumption

that no affected airplane owner/operator

has incorporated the proposed

limitations.

All 10 of the affected airplanes are

HP137 Mk1’s; there are no Jetstream

series 200 airplanes registered in the

United States, but they are type

certificated for operation in the United

States. According to FAA records, none

of these HP137 Mk1 airplanes are in

operation. Since there are no airplanes

currently in operation, the cost impact

of the proposed AD would be narrowed

to only those owners/operators

returning their airplane to operation.

The regulations proposed herein

would not have substantial direct effects

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. Therefore,

in accordance with Executive Order

12612, it is determined that this

proposal would not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this action (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) if

promulgated, 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. A copy of the draft

regulatory evaluation prepared for this

action has been placed in the Rules

Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by

contacting the Rules Docket at the

location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(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. App. 1354(a), 1421

and 1423; 49 U.S.C. 106(g); and 14 CFR

11.89.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

adding a new AD to read as follows:

Jetstream Aircraft Limited: Docket No. 95–

CE–12–AD.

Applicability: HP137 Mk1 and Jetstream

Series 200 airplanes (all serial numbers),

certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area

subject to the requirements of this AD. For

airplanes that have been modified, altered, or

repaired so that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must use the authority

provided in paragraph (d) of this AD to

request approval from the FAA. This

approval may address either no action, if the

current configuration eliminates the unsafe

condition, or different actions necessary to

address the unsafe condition described in

this AD. Such a request should include an

assessment of the effect of the changed

configuration on the unsafe condition

addressed by this AD. In no case does the

presence of any modification, alteration, or

repair remove any aircraft from the

applicability of this AD.

Compliance: Required within the next 100

hours time-in-service after the effective date

of this AD, unless already accomplished.

To prevent sudden pitch down of the

airplane during icing conditions, which

could lead to loss of control of the airplane,

accomplish the following:

(a) Modify the operating limitations

placards located on the flight deck in

accordance with the ACCOMPLISHMENT

INSTRUCTIONS section of Jetstream Service

Bulletin (SB) No. 27–A–JA 911044, dated

January 31, 1992. This modification limits

the maximum flap operating speed for

DOWN flaps to 120 indicated airspeed

(KIAS). Insert a copy of this AD into the

Limitations section of the applicable airplane

flight manual (AFM).

(b) Fabricate a placard with the words ‘‘Do

not extend the flaps beyond the take-off

position if ice is visible on the aircraft.

Ensure the landing gear selector is down

prior to landing.’’ Install this placard on the

airplane’s instrument panel within the pilot’s

clear view. Insert a copy of paragraph B.

Instructions for Aircraft Operations of the

Accomplishment Instructions section of

Jetstream SB 27–A–JA 911044, dated January

31, 1992, into the Limitations section of the

AFM.

Note 2: Parts of the airplane where ice

could specifically be visible include the

windshield wipers, center windshield,

propeller spinners, or inboard wing leading

edges.

(c) 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 airplanes to a

location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

(d) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the initial and repetitive

compliance times that provides an equivalent

level of safety may be approved by the

Manager, Brussels Aircraft Certification

Office (ACO), Europe, Africa, Middle East

office, FAA, c/o American Embassy, B–1000,

Brussels, Belgium. The request should be

forwarded through an appropriate FAA

Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Brussels ACO.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Brussels ACO.

(e) All persons affected by this directive

may obtain copies of the documents referred

to herein upon request to Jetstream Aircraft

Limited, Manager Product Support,

Prestwick Airport, Ayrshire, KA9 2RW

Scotland; or Jetstream Aircraft Inc., Librarian,

P.O. Box 16029, Dulles International Airport,

Washington, DC 20041–6029; or may

examine these documents at the FAA,

Central Region, Office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street,

Kansas City, Missouri 64106.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on

February 24, 1995.

Barry D. Clements,

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–5121 Filed 3–1–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 41 / Thursday, March 2, 1995 / Proposed Rules 11637

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 95–CE–09–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Jetstream

Aircraft Limited HP137 Mk1 and

Jetstream Series 200 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)

83–05–01, which currently requires the

following on Jetstream Aircraft Limited

(JAL) HP137 Mk1 and Jetstream series

200 airplanes: Repetitively inspecting

the wing lower skin panels at the main

gear bay cutout for loose or damaged

rivets and cracks, replacing loose or

damaged rivets, and repairing any

cracked wing lower skin panel. The

Federal Aviation Administration’s

policy on aging commuter-class aircraft

is to eliminate or, in certain instances,

reduce the number of repetitive shortinterval inspections when improved

parts or modifications are available. The

proposed action would require

reinforcing the wing lower skin at both

the landing gear cutout at Wing Station

(WS) 115 and the undercarriage bay

cutout at WS 60 and WS 90, as

terminating action for the repetitive

inspections that are currently required

by AD 83–05–01. The actions specified

in the proposed AD are intended to

prevent wing damage caused by cracks

or loose or damaged rivets in the wing

lower skin panels, which, if not

detected and corrected, could result in

damage to the point of structural failure.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before May 15, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments on the

proposal in triplicate to the Federal

Aviation Administration (FAA), Central

Region, Office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No.

95–CE–09–AD, Room 1558, 601 E 12th

Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, holidays

excepted.

Service information that applies to the

proposed AD may be obtained from

Jetstream Aircraft Limited, Manager

Product Support, Prestwick Airport,

Ayrshire, KA9 2RW Scotland; telephone

(44–292) 79888; facsimile (44–292)

79703; or Jetstream Aircraft Inc.,

Librarian, P.O. Box 16029, Dulles

International Airport, Washington, DC

20041–6029; telephone (703) 406–1161;

facsimile (703) 406–1469. This

information also may be examined at

the Rules Docket at the address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Raymond A. Stoer, Program Officer,

Brussels Aircraft Certification Office,

FAA, Europe, Africa, and Middle East

Office, c/o American Embassy, B–1000,

Brussels, Belgium; telephone (322)

513.3830; facsimile (322) 230.6899; or

Mr. John P. Dow, Sr., Project Officer,

Small Airplane Directorate, Airplane

Certification Service, FAA, 1201

Walnut, suite 900, Kansas City, Missouri

64106; telephone (816) 426–6932;

facsimile (816) 426–2169.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications

should identify the Rules Docket

number and be submitted in triplicate to

the address specified above. All

communications received on or before

the closing date for comments, specified

above, will be considered before taking

action on the proposed rule. The

proposals contained in this notice may

be changed in light of the comments

received.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons. A report that

summarizes each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this

proposal will be filed in the Rules

Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

submitted in response to this notice

must submit a self-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket No. 95–CE–09–AD.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA, Central Region, Office of the

Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention:

Rules Docket No. 95–CE–09–AD, Room

1558, 601 E 12th Street, Kansas City,

Missouri 64106.

Discussion

The FAA has determined that reliance

on critical repetitive inspections on

aging commuter-class airplanes carries

an unnecessary safety risk when a

design change exists that could

eliminate or, in certain instances,

reduce the number of those critical

inspections. In determining what

inspections are critical, the FAA

considers (1) The safety consequences if

the known problem is not detected

during the inspection; (2) the

probability of the problem not being

detected during the inspection; (3)

whether the inspection area is difficult

to access; and (4) the possibility of

damage occurring to an adjacent

structure as a result of the problem.

These factors have led the FAA to

establish an aging commuter-class

aircraft policy that requires

incorporating a known design change

when it could eliminate, or, in certain

instances, reduce the number of critical

repetitive inspections.

From this review, the FAA has

identified AD 83–05–01, Amendment

39–4573, as one that should be

superseded with a new AD that would

require a modification that, when

incorporated, would eliminate the need

for short-interval and critical repetitive

inspections. AD 83–05–01 currently

requires repetitively inspecting the wing

lower skin panels at the main gear bay

cutout for loose or damaged rivets and

cracks, replacing loose or damaged

rivets, and repairing any cracked wing

lower skin panel. The inspections are

accomplished in accordance with

Jetstream Service Bulletin (SB) No. 7/3,

dated October 1980.

JAL has introduced two wing lower

skin reinforcements that, when

incorporated, (1) Reinforce the wing

lower skin at the landing gear bay

cutout at WS 115 (Modification No.

5122), and (2) reinforce the wing lower

skin at undercarriage bay cutout

between WS 60 and WS 90

(Modification No. 5146). Jetstream SB

57–JM5221 specifies procedures for

incorporating Modification 5221, and

Modification No. 5146 Part 2 (Ref 7/

5146), specifies procedures for

incorporating Modification 5146.

Based on its aging commuter-class

aircraft policy and after reviewing all

available information, the FAA has

determined that AD action should be

taken to eliminate the repetitive shortinterval inspections required by AD 83–

05–01, Amendment 39–4573, and to

prevent wing damage caused by cracks

or loose or damaged rivets in the wing

lower skin panels, which, if not

detected and corrected, could result in

damage to the point of structural failure.

This airplane model is manufactured

in the United Kingdom and is type

certificated for operation in the United

States under the provisions of section

21.29 of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the
11638 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 41 / Thursday, March 2, 1995 / Proposed Rules

applicable bilateral airworthiness

agreement.

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop in other JAL HP137 Mk1 and

Jetstream series 200 airplanes of the

same type design, the proposed AD

would supersede AD 83–05–01 with a

new AD that would (1) retain the

requirements of repetitively inspecting

the wing lower skin panels at the main

gear bay cutout for loose or damaged

rivets and cracks, replacing loose or

damaged rivets, and repairing any

cracked wing lower skin panel; and (2)

require incorporating Modification Nos.

5122 and 5146 as terminating action for

the repetitive inspections. The proposed

inspection would be accomplished in

accordance with Jetstream SB No. 7/3,

dated October 1980. Modification 5122

would be accomplished in accordance

with Jetstream SB 57–JM5221, dated

September 28, 1984, and Jetstream

Modification 5146 would be

accomplished in accordance with

Modification No. 5146 Part 2 (Ref 7/

5146), which incorporates the following

pages:

Pages Issue

level Date

1, 2, 4, 7, and 8 1 March 1981.

3, 5, and 6 ........ 2 August 1982.

The FAA estimates that 10 airplanes

in the U.S. registry would be affected by

the proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 332 workhours per

airplane to accomplish the proposed

modifications (172 workhours for

Modification 5221 and 160 workhours

for Modification 5146), and that the

average labor rate is approximately $60

an hour. Parts cost approximately

$12,000 per airplane ($2,400 for

Modification 5221 and $9,600 for

Modification 5146). Based on these

figures, the total cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $319,200 ($31,920 per

airplane).

All 10 of the affected airplanes are

HP137 Mk1’s; there are no Jetstream

series 200 airplanes registered in the

United States, but they are type

certificated for operation in the United

States. According to FAA records, none

of these HP137 Mk1 airplanes are in

operation. JAL no longer stocks

Modification No. 5122, but can develop

modification kits within three months

after order. Since there are no airplanes

currently in operation, the cost impact

of the proposed AD would be narrowed

to only those owners/operators

returning their airplane to operation.

The regulations proposed herein

would not have substantial direct effects

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. Therefore,

in accordance with Executive Order

12612, it is determined that this

proposal would not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this action (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) if

promulgated, 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. A copy of the draft

regulatory evaluation prepared for this

action has been placed in the Rules

Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by

contacting the Rules Docket at the

location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(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. App. 1354(a), 1421

and 1423; 49 U.S.C. 106(g); and 14 CFR

11.89.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

removing AD 83–05–01, Amendment

39–4573, and adding a new AD to read

as follows:

Jetstream Aircraft Limited: Docket No. 95–

CE–09–AD. Supersedes AD 83–05–01,

Amendment 39–4573.

Applicability: HP137 Mk1 and Jetstream

Series 200 airplanes (all serial numbers),

certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area

subject to the requirements of this AD. For

airplanes that have been modified, altered, or

repaired so that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must use the authority

provided in paragraph (d) of this AD to

request approval from the FAA. This

approval may address either no action, if the

current configuration eliminates the unsafe

condition, or different actions necessary to

address the unsafe condition described in

this AD. Such a request should include an

assessment of the effect of the changed

configuration on the unsafe condition

addressed by this AD. In no case does the

presence of any modification, alteration, or

repair remove any aircraft from the

applicability of this AD.

Compliance: Required as indicated after

the effective date of this AD, unless already

accomplished.

To prevent wing damage caused by cracks

or loose or damaged rivets in the wing lower

skin panels, which, if not detected and

corrected, could result in damage to the point

of structural failure, accomplish the

following:

(a) Upon the accumulation of 6,500 hours

time-in-service (TIS) or within the next 100

hours time-in-service after the effective date

of this AD, whichever occurs later, unless

already accomplished (see NOTE 1), and

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 hours

TIS until the modifications required by

paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this AD are

incorporated, accomplish the following:

(1) Inspect the wing lower skin between

Wing Station (WS) 60 and WS 115 for loose

or damaged rivets or cracks in accordance

with section 3. ACTION, paragraphs (a)

through (e), of Jetstream Service Bulletin (SB)

No. 7/3, dated October 1980.

(2) Replace any loose or damaged rivets

and repair any cracked wing lower skin panel

in accordance with section 3. ACTION,

paragraphs (f) through (k), of Jetstream SB

No. 7/3, dated October 1980.

Note 2: The repetitive inspections required

by paragraph (a) of this AD are the same as

required by superseded AD 83–05–01. The

intent of this AD is to maintain this repetitive

inspection program for the affected airplane

operators until the requirements of paragraph

(b) of this AD are accomplished.

(b) Upon the accumulation of 10,000 hours

TIS or within the next 100 hours TIS after the

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs

later, accomplish the following:

(1) Reinforce the wing lower skin at the

landing gear bay cutout at WS 115 in

accordance with Jetstream SB 57–JM5221,

dated September 18, 1984. This is referred to

as Modification 5221.

(2) Reinforce the wing lower skin at

undercarriage bay cutout between WS 60 and

WS 90 in accordance with Modification No.

5146 Part 2 (Ref 7/5146), which incorporates

the following pages:

Pages Issue

level Date

1, 2, 4, 7, and 8 1 March 1981.

3, 5, and 6 ........ 2 August 1982.

(c) The reinforcements required by

paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this AD may

be accomplished prior to 10,000 hours TIS as
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 41 / Thursday, March 2, 1995 / Proposed Rules 11639

terminating action for the repetitive

inspection requirement of this AD.

(d) 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 requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

(e) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the initial and repetitive

compliance times that provides an equivalent

level of safety may be approved by the

Manager, Brussels Aircraft Certification

Office (ACO), Europe, Africa, Middle East

office, FAA, c/o American Embassy, B–1000,

Brussels, Belgium. The request should be

forwarded through an appropriate FAA

Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Brussels ACO.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Brussels ACO.

(f) All persons affected by this directive

may obtain copies of the documents referred

to herein upon request to Jetstream Aircraft

Limited, Manager Product Support,

Prestwick Airport, Ayrshire, KA9 2RW

Scotland; or Jetstream Aircraft Inc., Librarian,

P.O. Box 16029, Dulles International Airport,

Washington, DC 20041–6029; or may

examine these documents at the FAA,

Central Region, Office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E 12th Street,

Kansas City, Missouri 64106.

(g) This amendment supersedes AD 83–05–

01, Amendment 39–4573.

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on

February 24, 1995.

Barry D. Clements,

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft

Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 95–5122 Filed 3–1–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD

20 CFR Part 200

[RIN 3220–AB12]

General Administration

AGENCY: Railroad Retirement Board.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Railroad Retirement

Board (Board) proposes to amend its

regulations to explain when the Board

will provide custom tailored

information to a member of the public

and to set forth the charges for such

special services. The Board also

proposes to amend its regulations to

explain when the Board may provide

custom tailored information without

charging for that service.

DATES: Comment shall be submitted on

or before May 1, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Secretary to the Board,

Railroad Retirement Board, 844 Rush

Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael C. Litt, Bureau of Law, Railroad

Retirement Board, 844 Rush Street,

Chicago, Illinois 60611, (312) 751–4929,

TDD (312) 751–4701.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB

Circular A–25 establishes Federal policy

regarding fees to be assessed for special

benefits. In the case of the Railroad

Retirement Board those benefits would

be the provision of custom tailored or

non-routine information services. The

Board proposes to require payment of

the Board’s actual costs, as defined in

the proposed rule, for the provision of

such services. Consistent with OMB

Circular A–25, the proposed rule

provides that if it is determined that the

identity of the specific beneficiary is

obscure and that provision of the

information can be considered primarily

as benefiting broadly the general public,

then the Board may determine in a

particular case not to charge for the

service. However, consistent with the

authority contained in section 12(d) of

the Railroad Unemployment Insurance

Act (which is incorporated into the

Railroad Retirement Act by section

7(b)(3) of the Act), the proposed

regulation provides that charges may be

assessed in any specific case. This

regulation does not cover information

which is required to be disclosed by

statute or regulation such as information

required to be disclosed under the

Freedom of Information Act.

The Board, in conjunction with the

Office of Management and Budget, has

determined that this is not a significant

regulatory action for purposes of

Executive Order 12866. Therefore, no

regulatory impact analysis is required.

There are no information collections

associated with this rule.

List of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 200

Railroad employees, Railroad

retirement, Railroad unemployment

insurance.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, title 20, chapter II, part 200 of

the Code of Federal Regulations is

proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 200—GENERAL

ADMINISTRATION

1. The authority citation for part 200

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 45 U.S.C. 231f(b)(5) and 45

U.S.C. 362; § 200.4 also issued under 5 U.S.C.

552; § 200.5 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552a;

§ 200.6 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552b; and

§ 200.7 also issued under 31 U.S.C. 3717.

2. Section 200.4 is amended by

adding paragraphs (o) and (p) to read as

follows:

§ 200.4 Availability of information to

public.

* * * * *

(o) Custom Tailored Information

Services; Fees Charged.

This paragraph and paragraph (p) of

this section set forth the policy of the

Railroad Retirement Board with respect

to the assessment of a fee for providing

custom tailored information where

requested. Except as provided in

paragraphs (o)(4) (vii) and (p) of this

section, a fee shall be charged for

providing custom tailored information.

(1) Definition: Custom tailored

information. Custom tailored

information is information not

otherwise required to be disclosed

under this part but which can be created

or extracted and manipulated,

reformatted, or otherwise prepared to

the specifications of the requester from

existing records. For example, the Board

needs to program computers to provide

data in a particular format or to compile

selected items from records, provide

statistical data, ratios, proportions,

percentages, etc., and this data is not

already compiled and available, the end

product would be the result of custom

tailored information services.

(2) Providing custom tailored

information. The Board is not required

to provide custom tailored information.

It will do so only when the appropriate

fees have been paid as provided in

paragraph (o)(4) of this section and

when the request for such information

will not divert staff and equipment from

the Board’s primary responsibilities.

(3) Requesting custom tailored

information. Information may be

requested in person, by telephone, or by

mail. Any reuqest should reasonably

describe the information wanted and

may be sent to the Director of

Administration, Railroad Retirement

Board, 844 North Rush Street, Chicago,

Illinois 60611–2092.

(4) Fee schedule. Request for custom

tailored information are chargeable

according to the following schedule:

(i) Manual searching for records. Full

cost of the time of the employees who

perform the service, even if records

cannot be found, management and

supervisory costs, plus the full costs of

any machine time and materials the

employee uses. Consulting and other

indirect costs will be assessed as

appropriate.

(ii) Photocopying or reproducing

records on magnetic tapes or computer

diskettes. The charge for making

photocopies of any size document shall