Child Safe NON-Viewing Area on Airplanes
posted by registeredtraveler @ 6:50 AM
0 comments
RegisteredTraveler
"Got no Privacy, Got no Liberty; 'Cause the 20th Century people took it all away from me." from "20th Century Man", The Kinks
Saturday, September 29, 2007
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Monday, September 24, 2007
Why Congress is barking up the wrong tree with respect to ATC
posted by registeredtraveler @ 7:46 AM
0 comments
Deadline to comment on new NO FLY rules is Oct 22, 2007
Published August 23, 2007 in the Federal Register, NEW RULES for NO FLY. The commercial carriers, who would be obliged to turn over their records to the Dept of Homeland Security, are refusing to comment, except through their trade organization, the Air Transport Association. Ed Hasbrouck, a respected expert on travel and consumer rights and privacy, has roundly critized the proposed rules, saying it sets no boundaries on how long airlines may retain personal data they collect and no limit on what they may do with that information."This is a fundamental change in the system," says Hasbrouck, noting that the currenct system lists those barred from flying, whereas the new system will require permission for anyone to board a plane.Deadline for comments is Oct. 22, 2007. See Hasbrouck's testimony and notes:
Ed Hasbrouck's Testimony.If you think this is all just a bunch of hysteria, see page 58 of Wired Magazine's October, 2007 issue.There, an incident is recounted of a Canadian psychotherapist named Andrew Feldmar who was barred from entering the US last year after a border guard discovered he had written an article about his experience taking LSD in the '60s.
posted by registeredtraveler @ 7:11 AM
0 comments
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Hitler Youth, Again
The Re-emergence of the Fascist State. Dept. of Homeland Security collects data on travelers, including what books they read, who they stay with and with whom they travel. This systematic violation of First Amendment Rights and the Right to Travel has already been challenged by John Gilmore., in the 9th Circuit. He lost.
posted by registeredtraveler @ 8:30 AM
0 comments
Friday, September 21, 2007
7-3, slat downtrack assembly
[Federal Register: September 21, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 183)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 53928-53933]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr21se07-9]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2007-29089; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-215-AD;
Amendment 39-15197; AD 2007-18-52]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -
800, -900, and -900ER Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document publishes in the Federal Register an amendment
[[Page 53929]]
adopting airworthiness directive (AD) 2007-18-52 that was sent
previously to all known U.S. owners and operators of Boeing Model 737-
600, -700, -700C, -800, -900, and -900ER series airplanes by individual
notices. This AD requires repetitive detailed inspections of the slat
track downstop assemblies to verify that proper hardware is installed,
one-time torquing of the nut and bolt, and corrective actions if
necessary. This AD is prompted by reports of parts coming off the main
slat track downstop assemblies. We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct loose or missing parts from the main slat track downstop
assemblies, which could result in a fuel leak and consequent fire.
DATES: This AD becomes effective September 26, 2007 to all persons
except those persons to whom it was made immediately effective by
emergency AD 2007-18-52, issued August 28, 2007, which contained the
requirements of this amendment.
We must receive comments on this AD by November 20, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on
this AD.
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: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Hand Delivery: Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124-2207, for service information identified in this AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
917-6440; fax (425) 917-6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 28, 2007, we issued emergency AD
2007-18-52, which applies to all Boeing Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -
800, -900, and -900ER series airplanes. That emergency AD superseded
emergency AD 2007-18-51, described below.
Background
On August 25, 2007, we issued emergency AD 2007-18-51 for all
Boeing Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, -900, and -900ER series
airplanes. That AD requires repetitive detailed inspections of the main
slat track downstop assemblies to verify that proper hardware is
installed, one-time torquing of the nut and bolt, and corrective
actions if necessary. Corrective actions include installing a new or
serviceable part; and doing a detailed inspection of the inside of the
slat can for foreign object debris (FOD) and damage, and removing any
FOD and repairing damage that is found.
That AD resulted from reports of parts of the main slat track
downstop assembly coming off the main slat track. In one case, a nut
fell into the slat track housing (referred to as ``slat can'') and,
during a subsequent slat retraction, the track made contact with the
nut, pushing it into the wall of the can and puncturing it. That
operator reported finding fuel leaking from the drain hole in the slat
track housing at the No. 5 slat track position. In another case, an
initial investigation revealed that following retraction of the slats
after landing on a Model 737-800 airplane, loose parts of the main slat
track downstop assembly punctured the slat can, which resulted in a
fuel leak and a fire that ultimately destroyed the airplane. We issued
that AD to detect and correct loose or missing parts from the main slat
track downstop assemblies, which could result in a fuel leak and
consequent fire.
Actions Since Issuance of Emergency AD 2007-18-51
Since the issuance of emergency AD 2007-18-51, we have received
additional reports of parts coming off the main slat track downstop
assemblies. In these cases, the parts were found in the bottom of the
slat track housing (``slat can''). Additionally, in one case, the slat
can was damaged.
Based on this new information, we find that the 24-day compliance
time specified in emergency AD 2007-18-51 for accomplishing the
detailed inspection of each main slat track downstop assembly to verify
proper installation of the slat track hardware is not adequate to
address the unsafe condition. We have determined that the appropriate
compliance time for this inspection is 10 days after receipt of
emergency AD 2007-18-52. In addition, we have determined that an
inspection using borescope techniques in lieu of a detailed inspection
is acceptable.
Further, we have determined that by performing the initial detailed
or borescope inspection within the reduced compliance time of 10 days,
the compliance time for torquing the nut and bolt can remain at 24 days
after receipt of emergency AD 2007-18-51.
FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD
Since the unsafe condition described is likely to exist or develop
on other airplanes of the same type design, we issued emergency AD
2007-18-52 to detect and correct loose or missing parts from the main
slat track downstop assemblies, which could result in a fuel leak and
consequent fire.
This AD supersedes emergency AD 2007-18-51, which required
repetitive detailed inspections of the main slat track downstop
assemblies to verify that proper hardware is installed, one-time
torquing of the nut and bolt, and corrective actions if necessary.
Corrective actions include installing a new or serviceable part; and
doing a detailed inspection of the inside of the slat can for foreign
object debris (FOD) and damage, and removing any FOD and repairing
damage that is found.
This AD continues to require the same actions as emergency AD 2007-
18-51, but reduces the compliance time for the initial detailed
inspection of each main slat track downstop assembly to verify proper
installation of the slat track hardware from 24 days after receipt of
emergency AD 2007-18-51 to 10 days after receipt of this new AD. This
AD also provides an additional inspection method (using borescope
techniques) in lieu of the detailed inspection.
Clarification of Determining Proper Installation of Hardware
Operators should note that it was not our intent that the hardware
for the main slat track downstop assemblies be disassembled to
determine proper installation of the sleeve. Proper installation of the
sleeve need not be confirmed, and the stop location part may be
installed on either the inboard or the outboard side of the slat track.
Disassembling the parts provides additional opportunities for
introducing the unsafe condition addressed in this AD. Therefore, we
have revised paragraph (f) of this AD accordingly.
Clarification of Reference to Boeing Multi Operator Message
Paragraph (f)(1) of emergency AD 2007-18-51 identified ``Boeing
Correspondence (Multi Operator Message) Service Request ID 1-523812011,
issued August 25, 2007,'' as one approved method for verifying proper
installation; installing a new or serviceable part; and inspecting for
[[Page 53930]]
damage and FOD, and removing FOD and repairing damage. This AD
identifies that document correctly as ``Boeing Multi Operator Message
Number 1-523812011-1, issued August 25, 2007.''
Since the issuance of emergency AD 2007-18-51, Boeing has issued
Boeing Multi Operator Message Number 1-527463441-1, issued August 28,
2007. We have referenced that document in this AD as an additional
approved method for doing the specified actions.
We found that immediate corrective action was required; therefore,
notice and opportunity for prior public comment thereon were
impracticable and contrary to the public interest, and good cause
existed to make the AD effective immediately by individual notices
issued on August 28, 2007, to all known U.S. owners and operators of
Boeing Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, -900, and -900ER series
airplanes. These conditions still exist, and the AD is hereby published
in the Federal Register as an amendment to section 39.13 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 39.13) to make it effective to all
persons.
Interim Action
We consider this AD interim action. If final action is later
identified, we might consider further rulemaking then.
Comments Invited
This AD is a final rule that involves requirements that affect
flight safety and was not preceded by notice and an opportunity for
public comment; however, we invite you to submit any relevant written
data, views, or arguments regarding this AD. Send your comments to an
address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2007-
29089, Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-215-AD,'' at the beginning of
your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall
regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the AD that
might suggest a need to modify it.
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://dms.dot.gov
, including any personal information you provide. We will
also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA
personnel concerning this AD. Using the search function of that Web
site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets,
including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed
the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review the 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.
Examining the Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov
, or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
Docket Operations office (telephone (800) 647-5527) is located on the
ground level of the West Building at the DOT street address stated in
the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after the Docket Management System receives them.
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 AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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.
The FAA has determined that this regulation is an emergency
regulation that must be issued immediately to correct an unsafe
condition in aircraft, and that it is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866. It has been determined further
that this action involves an emergency regulation under DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If this
emergency regulation is later deemed significant under DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures, we will prepare a final regulatory evaluation
and place it in the AD Docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location
to examine the regulatory evaluation, if filed.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
0
2. The FAA amends Sec. 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
2007-18-52 Boeing: Amendment 39-15197. Docket No. FAA-2007-29089;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-215-AD.
Effective Date
(a) This AD becomes effective September 26, 2007, to all persons
except those persons to whom it was made immediately effective by
emergency AD 2007-18-52, issued on August 28, 2007, which contained
the requirements of this amendment.
Affected ADs
(b) This AD supersedes emergency AD 2007-18-51, issued August
25, 2007.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to all Boeing Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -
800, -900, and -900ER series airplanes, certificated in any
category.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from additional reports of parts coming off
the main slat track downstop assemblies. We are issuing this AD to
detect and correct loose or missing parts from the main slat track
downstop assemblies, which could result in a fuel leak and
consequent fire.
Compliance
(e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.
Note 1: Paragraph (f) of this AD merely restates the
requirements of paragraph (f)(1) of AD 2007-18-51. As allowed by the
phrase, ``unless the actions have already been done,'' if the
applicable initial inspections required by paragraph (f)(1) of AD
2007-18-51 have already been done, this AD does not require that
those inspections be repeated until the repetitive interval of 3,000
flight cycles.
[[Page 53931]]
Repetitive Detailed Inspections: New Initial Compliance Time
(f) Within 10 days after the effective date of this AD: Do a
detailed inspection or a borescope inspection of each main slat
track downstop assembly to verify proper installation of the slat
track hardware (i.e., the bolt, washers, downstops, stop location,
and nut shown in Figure 1 of Boeing Service Letter 737-SL-57-084-B,
dated July 10, 2007, and in this AD). Proper installation of the
sleeve need not be confirmed, and the stop location part may be
installed on either the inboard or the outboard side of the slat
track. If any part is missing or is installed improperly, before
further flight, install a new or serviceable part using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph
(h) of this AD; and do a detailed inspection of the inside of the
slat can for foreign object debris (FOD) and damage. Before further
flight, remove any FOD found and repair any damage found using a
method approved in accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (h) of this AD. Using Boeing Multi Operator Message Number
1-523812011-1, issued August 25, 2007; or 1-527463441-1, issued
August 28, 2007; is one approved method for verifying proper
installation; installing a new or serviceable part; and inspecting
for damage and FOD, and removing FOD and repairing damage. Repeat
the actions required by paragraph (f) of this AD thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles.
Note 2: Paragraph (g) of this AD merely restates the
requirements of paragraph (f)(2) of AD 2007-18-51. As allowed by the
phrase, ``unless the actions have already been done,'' if the torque
application required by paragraph (f)(2) of AD 2007-18-51 has
already been done, this AD does not require that the torque
application be repeated.
One-Time Torquing
(g) Within 24 days after receipt of AD 2007-18-51: Apply a
torque between 50 to 80 inch-pounds to the nut. The bolt head must
be held with the torque applied to the nut.
Note 3: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is:
``An intensive examination of a specific item, installation, or
assembly to detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available
lighting is normally supplemented with a direct source of good
lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. Inspection aids such as
mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface cleaning
and elaborate procedures may be required.''
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
[[Page 53932]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21SE07.042
BILLING CODE 4910-13-C
[[Page 53933]]
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(h)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in
accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
(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 an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Delegation Option Authorization Organization who 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 2007-18-51
are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD.
Material Incorporated by Reference
(i) None.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 10, 2007.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E7-18436 Filed 9-20-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
posted by registeredtraveler @ 6:09 AM
0 comments
Thursday, September 20, 2007
737- skin crack inspections
[Federal Register: September 20, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 182)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 53706-53709]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr20se07-18]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2007-29255; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-085-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -
300, -400, and -500 Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500
series airplanes. This proposed AD would require doing repetitive
internal eddy current and detailed inspections to detect cracked
stringer tie clips; doing applicable corrective and related
investigative actions, if necessary; and measuring the fastener spacing
and the edge margin; as applicable. As a temporary alternative to doing
the actions described previously, this proposed AD would require
repetitive external general visual inspections of the skin and lap
joints for cracks and evidence of overload resulting from cracked
stringer tie clips, and applicable corrective actions if necessary.
This proposed AD results from a report of several cracked stringer tie
clips. We are proposing this AD to prevent multiple cracked stringer
tie clips and damaged skin and frames, which could lead to the skin and
frame structure developing cracks and consequent decompression of the
airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 5,
2007.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on
this proposed AD.
[[Page 53707]]
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: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Hand Delivery: Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124-2207, for the service information identified in this
proposed AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
917-6447; fax (425) 917-6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number ``FAA-2007-
29255; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-085-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the
proposed AD in light of those comments.
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://dms.dot.gov
, including any personal information you provide. We will
also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of
that web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our
dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or
signed 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.
Examining the Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov
, or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
Docket Operations office (telephone (800) 647-5527) is located on the
ground level of the West Building at the DOT street address stated in
the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after the Docket Management System receives them.
Discussion
We have received a report of 15 cracked stringer tie clips in the
crown skin area between station (STA) 500B and STA 907 between stringer
(S) 10L and S-10R, on a Boeing Model 737 airplane. The airplane had
accumulated total 31,415 flight cycles. This airplane had three
adjacent cracked clips at two consecutive body station frames (six
clips total). The six stringer tie clips were cracked along the joint
common to the stringer. The six total stringer tie clips were the same
formed bonded stringer tie clips that were installed as terminating
action in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1085, Revision
1, dated May 10, 1990.
Stringer tie clip cracking along the joint common to the stringer
occurs primarily as a result of cyclic loading associated with cabin
pressure and flight loads. If three adjacent stringer tie clips on one
frame crack, it could result in an inability of the fuselage frame
structure to support operating loads. This could result in local skin
buckling and deformation of the skin and frame. Multiple cracked
stringer tie clips and damaged skin and frames, if not corrected, could
lead to the skin and frame structure developing cracks, which could
result in decompression of the airplane.
Other Relevant Rulemaking
We previously issued AD 93-08-04, amendment 39-8551 (58 FR 25546,
April 27, 1993), for certain Boeing Model 737-100, -200, and -200C
series airplanes. That AD requires structural inspections of older
airplanes and is part of the Aging Airplane Service Bulletin Structural
Modification and Inspection Program. Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-
1085, Revision 1, is one of several service bulletins required by that
AD.
This proposed AD would affect the requirements of AD 93-08-04
pertaining to Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1085, Revision 1.
We previously issued AD 2002-07-08, amendment 39-12702 (67 FR
17917, April 12, 2002), applicable to certain Boeing Model 737-200, -
200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. That AD requires
repetitive inspections to find cracking of the lower skin at the lower
row of fasteners in the lap joints of the fuselage, and repair of
cracking found. That AD also requires modification of the fuselage lap
joints at certain locations, which constitutes terminating action for
certain repetitive inspections.
This proposed AD would not affect the current requirements of AD
2002-07-08.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-
1268, dated August 25, 2006. This service bulletin supersedes Boeing
Service Bulletin 737-53-1085, Revision 1.
The service bulletin describes one required inspection and one
temporary alternative inspection. Inspection A, the one required
inspection, involves the following:
Doing repetitive internal eddy current and detailed
inspections to detect cracked stringer tie clips. The inspection area
is from STA 559 to STA 887, STA 360 to STA 540, and STA 907. The
inspections from STA 559 to STA 887 are identical to those specified in
Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1085, Revision 1. If the terminating
action was done in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1085,
the inspections need to be restarted in accordance with Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 737-53-1268.
Doing applicable corrective and related investigative
actions, if necessary. The corrective actions include replacing any
cracked stringer tie clip with a new clip, contacting Boeing for repair
instructions, and repairing any damaged lap joints; as applicable. The
related investigative actions include doing an internal detailed
inspection to detect damaged or deformed skin and frame and to detect
damaged lap joints, and doing internal eddy current inspections to
detect cracked lap joints; as applicable.
Measuring the fastener spacing and the edge margin; as
applicable.
The initial compliance time for Inspection A is before the
accumulation of 25,000 or 35,000 total flight cycles (as applicable),
or within 2 or 3 years (as applicable) after the date of the service
bulletin, whichever occurs later. The repeat interval for Inspection A
is 15,000 or 20,000 flight cycles (as applicable).
[[Page 53708]]
Inspection B, which is a temporary alternative to doing Inspection
A, involves the following:
Doing repetitive external general visual inspections of
the skin and lap joints for cracks and evidence of overload resulting
from cracked stringer tie clips, and
Doing applicable corrective actions if necessary. The
corrective actions include contacting Boeing for repair instructions,
and repairing any cracked or damaged lap joint and skin.
For Inspection B, the threshold for the initial compliance times
ranges between 37,500 and 47,500 total flight cycles, and the grace
period for the initial compliance times is 25,000 flight cycles or 6 or
12 months, depending on the number of flight cycles on the airplane.
Inspection B must be done before exceeding an inspection period ranging
from 5,000 to 50,000 total flight cycles. The repeat interval for
Inspection B is 2,500 flight cycles.
The service bulletin also describes procedures for an optional eddy
current inspection to detect damaged stringer tie clips and replacement
of any cracked clip with a new clip. The optional inspection can be
done in addition to and at the same time as Inspection A described
previously. The optional inspection will detect damaged stringer clips
earlier than the detailed inspection, which may prevent future costly
repairs.
Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is
intended to adequately address the unsafe condition.
The service bulletin refers to Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1177,
Revision 6, dated May 31, 2001, as an additional source of service
information for doing an internal eddy current inspection of the lap
joint for certain airplane configurations.
FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD
We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes
of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD,
which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service
information described previously, except as discussed under
``Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Information.''
Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Information
The service information 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:
Using a method that we approve; or
Using data that meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and that have been approved by an Authorized Representative
for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization
Organization whom we have authorized to make those findings.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 2,685 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for
U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD.
Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of U.S.-
Action Work hours \1\ Average labor Cost per registered Fleet cost \1\
rate per hour airplane \1\ airplanes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection A................. Between 40 and $80 Between $3,200 787 Between
103. and $8,240, $2,518,400 and
per inspection $6,484,880,
cycle. per inspection
cycle.
Inspection B (temporary Between 2 and 80 Between $160 787 Between
alternative to Inspection A). 109. and $8,720. $125,920 and
$6,862,640,
per inspection
cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Depending on the airplane configuration.
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 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); and
3. 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.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the
ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, 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.
[[Page 53709]]
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec. 39.13 by
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):
Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2007-29255; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-
085-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by November
5, 2007.
Affected ADs
(b) AD 93-08-04, amendment 39-8551.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300,
-400, and -500 series airplanes, certificated in any category; as
identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1268, dated August 25,
2006.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from a report of several cracked stringer
tie clips. We are issuing this AD to prevent multiple cracked
stringer tie clips and damaged skin and frames, which could lead to
the skin and frame structure developing cracks and consequent
decompression of the airplane.
Compliance
(e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.
Service Bulletin References
(f) The term ``the service bulletin,'' as used in this AD, means
the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-
1268, dated August 25, 2006.
Inspection A: Required Internal Inspections, Applicable Corrective and
Related Investigative Actions, and Measurement
(g) Do repetitive internal eddy current and detailed inspections
to detect cracked stringer tie clips; do applicable corrective and
related investigative actions, if necessary; and measure the
fastener spacing and the edge margin; as applicable. Do all
applicable actions at the applicable compliance times and repeat
intervals identified in tables 2 through 8 inclusive of paragraph
1.E., ``Compliance,'' of the service bulletin; except as provided by
paragraphs (i), (j), and (k) of this AD. Do all applicable actions
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the service
bulletin, except as provided by paragraph (m) of this AD.
Note 1: The service bulletin refers to Boeing Service Bulletin
737-53A1177, Revision 6, dated May 31, 2001, as an additional source
of service information for doing an internal eddy current inspection
of the lap joint for certain airplane configurations.
Inspection B: Temporary Alternative External Inspections and Corrective
Actions
(h) As a temporary alternative to doing the actions required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, do repetitive external general visual
inspections of the skin and lap joints for cracks and evidence of
overload resulting from cracked stringer tie clips, and applicable
corrective actions if necessary. Do all applicable actions at the
applicable compliance times and repeat intervals identified in
tables 9 through 12 inclusive of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
the service bulletin, but not to exceed the flight cycles in the
``Inspection Period Allowed'' column of the tables; except as
provided by paragraphs (i) and (l) of this AD. Do all applicable
actions in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the
service bulletin, except as provided by paragraph (m) of this AD.
Note 2: The eddy current inspection along the stringer tie clip
radius to detect damage and replacement, as applicable, specified in
paragraph 3.B.5. of the Accomplishment Instructions of the service
bulletin are not required by this AD. The actions are optional and
can be done in addition to and at the same time as the actions
required by paragraph (g) of this AD.
Exceptions to Service Information
(i) Where the service bulletin specifies a compliance time after
the date of the service bulletin, this AD requires compliance within
the specified compliance time after the effective date of this AD.
(j) For Model 737-100, -200, and -200C series airplanes, on
which Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53-1085, Revision 1, dated May 10,
1990, has not been done in accordance with AD 93-08-04: As of the
effective date of this AD, do the applicable inspections from STA
559 to STA 887 in accordance with paragraph (g) of this AD, at the
applicable compliance times specified in paragraph (b) of AD 93-08-
04.
(k) In the first row of tables 5 and 6 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of the service bulletin, where the service bulletin
specifies a compliance time of before 25,000 total airplane flight
cycles, this AD requires a compliance time of before the
accumulation of 25,000 total flight cycles, or within 2 years after
the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.
(l) Where the service bulletin specifies no starting point
(e.g., ``after the date on the service bulletin'') for a grace
period, this AD requires compliance within the specified grace
period after the effective date of this AD.
(m) Where the service bulletin specifies to contact Boeing for
appropriate action: Before further flight, repair the discrepancy
using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (o) of this AD.
Certain Actions End Certain Requirements of AD 93-08-04
(n) Accomplishment of the internal eddy current and detailed
inspections for STA 559 to STA 887 in accordance with paragraph (g)
of this AD constitutes compliance with the inspections required by
paragraph (a) of AD 93-08-04, as it pertains to Boeing Service
Bulletin 737-53-1085, Revision 1, dated May 10, 1990. Accomplishment
of the internal eddy current and detailed inspections does not
terminate the remaining requirements of AD 93-08-04, as it applies
to other service bulletins. Operators are required to continue to
inspect and/or modify per the other service bulletins listed in that
AD.
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(o)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in
accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
(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 an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Delegation Option Authorization Organization who 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.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 12, 2007.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E7-18554 Filed 9-19-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
posted by registeredtraveler @ 8:28 AM
0 comments
7-6, conversion from vibration to divergent flutter
[Federal Register: September 20, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 182)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 53701-53704]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr20se07-16]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2007-29259; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-195-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767 Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness
directive (AD) that applies to all Boeing Model 767 airplanes. The
existing AD currently requires repetitive measurements of the rudder
and elevator freeplay, repetitive lubrications of rudder and elevator
components, and related investigative/corrective actions if necessary.
This proposed AD would instead require revised repetitive measurements
of the rudder freeplay and the elevator freeplay for each of the power
control actuators (PCAs) that move the rudder and elevator, corrective
and related investigative actions if necessary, and repetitive
lubrications of the rudder and elevator components. For some airplanes,
this proposed AD would also require related concurrent actions. This
proposed AD results from reports of freeplay-induced vibration of the
rudder and the elevator. The potential for vibration of the control
surface should be avoided because the point of transition from
vibration to divergent flutter is unknown. We are proposing this AD to
prevent excessive vibration of the airframe during flight, which could
result in loss of control of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 22,
2007.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on
this proposed AD.
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: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Hand Delivery: Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,
Washington 98124-2207, for service information identified in this
proposed AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tamara Anderson, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
917-6421; fax (425) 917-6590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number ``Docket No.
FAA-2007-29259; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-195-AD'' at the
beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the
overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the
proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date
and may amend the proposed AD in light of those comments.
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://dms.dot.gov
, including any personal information you provide. We will
also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of
that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our
dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or
signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union,
etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or may
can visit http://dms.dot.gov.
Examining the Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov
, or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
Docket Operations office (telephone (800) 647-5527) is located on the
ground level of the West Building at the DOT street address stated in
the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after
[[Page 53702]]
the Docket Management System receives them.
Discussion
On May 17, 2006, we issued AD 2006-11-12, amendment 39-14616 (71 FR
30272, May 26, 2006), for all Boeing Model 767 airplanes. That AD
requires repetitive measurements of the rudder and elevator freeplay,
repetitive lubrication of rudder and elevator components, and related
investigative/corrective actions if necessary. That AD resulted from
reports of freeplay-induced vibration of the rudder and the elevator.
We issued that AD to prevent excessive vibration of the airframe during
flight, which could result in loss of control of the airplane.
Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued
Since we issued AD 2006-11-12, we have learned that the procedures
in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletins 767-27-0197 and 767-27-
0198, both dated October 27, 2005 (referred to in the existing AD as
the appropriate sources of service information for accomplishing the
actions required by that AD), yielded false-positive results for the
measurements of the rudder and elevator freeplay. The service bulletin
instructions for measuring the freeplay also did not include
information on certain prior or concurrent actions to be performed on
certain airplanes. Therefore, we have determined that the requirements
of AD 2006-11-12 do not adequately address the identified unsafe
condition.
Other Relevant Rulemaking
On February 21, 2001, we issued AD 2001-04-09, amendment 39-12128
(66 FR 13227, March 5, 2001). That AD requires repetitively testing the
elevator control system to determine if an elevator power control
actuator (PCA) is rigged incorrectly due to yielded or failed shear
rivets in a bellcrank assembly, and follow-on actions, if necessary.
That AD refers to Boeing Alert Service Bulletins 767-27A0168 and 767-
27A0169, both dated November 21, 2000, as the applicable sources of
service information. Boeing Alert Service Bulletins 767-27A0168 and
767-27A0169 are referred to in this proposed AD as sources of service
information for accomplishing concurrent actions on certain airplanes.
This proposed AD would not affect any of the requirements of AD 2001-
04-09.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletins 767-27-
0197, Revision 1, dated July 19, 2007 (for Model 767-200, -300, and -
300F series airplanes); and 767-27-0198, Revision 1, dated July 19,
2007 (for Model 767-400ER series airplanes). The service bulletins
describe improved procedures for repetitive measurements of the rudder
freeplay and the elevator freeplay for each of the PCAs that move the
rudder and elevator. For freeplay that exceeds certain specified
limits, the service bulletins describe procedures for doing applicable
related corrective and related investigative actions. Corrective and
related investigative actions include repairing or replacing all
applicable affected parts if necessary, and repeating the freeplay
measurement, until the freeplay is within acceptable limits. Affected
parts may include worn or loose hanger links, reaction links, PCA rod
ends, and trunnion connections that contribute to the freeplay. The
service bulletins also describe procedures and repetitive intervals for
repetitive lubrication of the rudder and elevator components that are
the same as those described in the original issues of the service
bulletins.
For certain Model 767-200, -300, and -300F series airplanes, Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-27-0197, Revision 1, specifies
prior or concurrent accomplishment of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
767-27A0168, dated November 21, 2000, which describes, among other
actions, procedures for inspecting the elevator bellcranks for any
shear rivets that are broken or yielded.
For certain Model 767-400ER series airplanes, Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 767-27-0198, Revision 1, specifies prior or
concurrent accomplishment of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-27A0169,
dated November 21, 2000, which describes, among other actions,
procedures for inspecting the elevator bellcranks for any shear rivets
that are broken or yielded.
Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is
intended to adequately address the unsafe condition.
FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD
We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to develop on other airplanes of the
same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which
would supersede AD 2006-11-12. This proposed AD would require
accomplishing the actions specified in the special attention service
bulletins described previously, except as discussed under ``Differences
Between the Proposed AD and the Special Attention Service Bulletins.''
Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Special Attention Service
Bulletins
Although Revision 1 of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletins
767-27-0197 and 767-27-0198 recommends accomplishing the initial rudder
and elevator freeplay measurements within 18 months after the date on
the service bulletins, the proposed AD would require a compliance time
of 12 months after the effective date of the AD. We have determined
that 18 months would not address the identified unsafe condition soon
enough to ensure an adequate level of safety for the affected fleet. In
developing an appropriate compliance time for this proposed AD, we
considered the degree of urgency associated with the subject unsafe
condition, and the possibility that this proposed AD could extend the
compliance time for airplanes on which the measurements required in AD
2006-11-12 have not been accomplished. In light of these factors, we
find that 12 months represents an appropriate interval of time for
affected airplanes to continue to operate without compromising safety.
This difference has been coordinated with Boeing.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 979 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for
U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD. No parts are necessary
to accomplish any action.
Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of U.S.-
Action Work hours Average labor Cost per airplane registered Fleet cost
rate per hour airplanes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freeplay measurement..................... 30 $80 $2,400, per measurement 423 $1,015,200, per measurement
cycle. cycle.
[[Page 53703]]
Lubrication.............................. 27 $80 $2,160, per lubrication 423 $913,680, per lubrication
cycle. cycle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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); and
3. 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.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the
ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, 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.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec. 39.13 by
removing amendment 39-14616 (71 FR 30272, May 26, 2006) and adding the
following new airworthiness directive (AD):
Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2007-29259; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-
195-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by October
22, 2007.
Affected ADs
(b) This AD supersedes AD 2006-11-12.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to all Boeing Model 767-200, -300, -300F,
and -400ER series airplanes, certificated in any category.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from reports of freeplay-induced vibration
of the rudder and the elevator. The potential for vibration of the
control surface should be avoided because the point of transition
from vibration to divergent flutter is unknown. We are issuing this
AD to prevent excessive vibration of the airframe during flight,
which could result in loss of control of the airplane.
Compliance
(e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.
Service Bulletin References
(f) The term ``service bulletin,'' as used in this AD, means the
Accomplishment Instructions and Appendices A, B, and C of the
following service bulletins, as applicable:
(1) For Model 767-200, -300, and -300F series airplanes: Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-27-0197, Revision 1, dated
July 19, 2007; and
(2) For Model 767-400ER series airplanes: Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 767-27-0198, Revision 1, dated July 19,
2007.
Repetitive Measurements
(g) At the latest of the compliance times specified in
paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD, as applicable:
Measure the rudder and elevator freeplay. Repeat the measurement
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 12,000 flight hours or 36
months, whichever occurs first. Do all actions required by this
paragraph in accordance with the service bulletin.
(1) Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD.
(2) Within 36 months since the date of issuance of the original
standard airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the
original export certificate of airworthiness.
(3) For the elevator freeplay measurement: Within 12,000 flight
hours or within 36 months after the last elevator freeplay
inspection accomplished in accordance with Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 767-27-0197 or 767-27-0198, both dated October 27,
2005, as applicable, whichever occurs first.
Related Investigative and Corrective Actions
(h) If any measurement found during the measurement required by
paragraph (g) of this AD exceeds any applicable limit specified in
the service bulletin: Before further flight, do the applicable
related investigative and corrective actions in accordance with the
service bulletin.
Initial Lubrication
(i) At the latest of the compliance times specified in
paragraphs (i)(1), (i)(2), and (i)(3) of this AD, as applicable:
Lubricate the rudder and elevator components specified in the
service bulletin. Do all actions required by this paragraph in
accordance with the service bulletin.
(1) Within 9 months after the effective date of this AD, or
within 9 months since the date of issuance of the original standard
airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original
export certificate of airworthiness; whichever occurs later.
(2) For airplanes on which BMS 3-33 grease is not already in use
prior to the time the lubrication task is being accomplished: Within
3,000 flight hours or 9 months after the last lubrication
accomplished in accordance with the service bulletin or Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-27-0197 or 767-27-0198, both
dated October 27, 2005, whichever occurs first.
(3) For airplanes on which BMS 3-33 grease is already in use
prior to the time the lubrication task is being accomplished: Within
6,000 flight hours or 18 months after the last lubrication
accomplished in
[[Page 53704]]
accordance with the service bulletin or Boeing Special Attention
Service Bulletin 767-27-0197 or 767-27-0198, both dated October 27,
2005, whichever occurs first.
Repetitive Lubrication
(j) Repeat the lubrication required in paragraph (i) of this AD
at the applicable interval specified in paragraph (j)(1) or (j)(2)
of this AD.
(1) For airplanes on which BMS 3-33 grease is not already in use
prior to the time the lubrication task is being accomplished: At
intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight hours or 9 months, whichever
occurs first.
(2) For airplanes on which BMS 3-33 grease is already in use
prior to the time the lubrication task is being accomplished: At
intervals not to exceed 6,000 flight hours or 18 months, whichever
occurs first.
Repetitive Prior or Concurrent Inspection
(k) For airplanes specified in paragraphs (k)(1) and (k)(2) of
this AD: Prior to or concurrently with the accomplishment of each
elevator freeplay measurement specified in paragraph (g) of this AD,
do all applicable actions required by AD 2001-04-09.
(1) Group 1, configuration 2, airplanes as identified in Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-27-0197, Revision 1, dated
July 19, 2007.
(2) Group 1, configuration 1, airplanes as identified in Boeing
Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-27-0198, Revision 1, dated
July 19, 2007.
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(l)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in
accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
(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 an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Delegation Option Authorization Organization who 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 2006-11-12
are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD.
(5) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2001-04-09,
are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of paragraph
(k) of this AD.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 13, 2007.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E7-18544 Filed 9-19-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
posted by registeredtraveler @ 8:24 AM
0 comments
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
MD 80 fatigue cracks forward entry door
[Federal Register: September 19, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 181)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 53495-53498]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr19se07-24]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2007-29226; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-256-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-81 (MD-81)
and DC-9-82 (MD-82) Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-81 (MD-81) and DC-9-82 (MD-82)
airplanes. This proposed AD would require, for certain airplanes,
inspecting for cracking of the fuselage skin at the upper corners of
the forward passenger doorjamb, installing or replacing doublers as
applicable, and doing applicable repairs. This proposed AD results from
reports of fatigue cracking in the fuselage skin at the upper corners
of the forward passenger doorjamb. We are proposing this AD to prevent
cracking of the fuselage skin at the upper corners of the forward
passenger doorjamb, which could lead to loss of overall structural
integrity of the airplane.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 5,
2007.
ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on
this proposed AD.
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: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
[[Page 53496]]
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
Hand Delivery: Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Long Beach Division, 3855
Lakewood Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90846, Attention: Data and
Service Management, Dept. C1-L5A (D800-0024), for the service
information identified in this proposed AD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roger Durbin, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137;
telephone (562) 627-5233; fax (562) 627-5210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or
arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number ``FAA-2007-
29226; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-256-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the
proposed AD in light of those comments.
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://dms.dot.gov
, including any personal information you provide. We will
also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of
that Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our
dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or
signed 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.
Examining the Docket
You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov
, or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
Docket Operations office (telephone (800) 647-5527) is located on the
ground level of the West Building at the DOT street address stated in
the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after the Docket Management System receives them.
Discussion
We have received a report that fatigue cracking has been discovered
in the fuselage skin at the upper corners of the forward passenger
doorjamb on certain Model DC-9/MD-80 airplanes. This condition, if not
corrected, could lead to loss of overall structural integrity of the
airplane.
Relevant Service Information
We have reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-53A298, dated
August 1, 2006. The alert service bulletin describes procedures for a
low-frequency eddy current (LFEC) or a high-frequency eddy current
(HFEC) inspection, depending on airplane configuration, for cracking of
the fuselage skin at the upper corners of the forward passenger
doorjamb; and applicable corrective actions. The compliance time for
the initial inspection is before accumulating 37,500 total flight
cycles, or within 3,575 flight cycles (whichever is later).
The corrective actions include:
For Group 1, Configuration 1, airplanes on which no
cracking is found: Either repeating the LFEC inspection at intervals of
3,575 flight cycles; or installing external aluminum doublers within
3,575 flight cycles after the last inspection, and doing an HFEC
inspection within 28,000 flight cycles after doing the installation,
and repetitively at 20,000-flight-cycle intervals.
For Group 1, Configuration 1, airplanes on which any crack
is found that is 2.0 inches or shorter in length: Repair before further
flight, and do an HFEC inspection within 28,000 flight cycles after the
repair, and repetitively at 20,000-flight-cycle intervals.
For Group 1, Configuration 1, airplanes on which any crack
is found that is longer than 2.0 inches; for Group 1, Configurations 2
and 3, airplanes on which any crack is found beyond the edge of the
doublers; and for Group 1, Configuration 4, airplanes: Contact Boeing
for repair instructions before further flight.
For Group 1, Configuration 2, airplanes on which no crack
is found beyond the edge of the steel doublers: Replace existing steel
doublers with aluminum doublers, and repair upper corners within 6,000
flight cycles after the initial inspection; and do an HFEC inspection
within 28,000 flight cycles after the repair, and repetitively at
20,000-flight-cycle intervals.
For Group 1, Configuration 3, airplanes on which no cracks
are found beyond the edge of the aluminum doublers: Repeat the HFEC
inspection at 20,000-flight-cycle intervals.
Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is
intended to adequately address the unsafe condition.
FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD
We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes
of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD,
which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service
information described previously, except as discussed under
``Differences Between Proposed AD and Alert Service Bulletin.''
Differences Between Proposed AD and Alert Service Bulletin
For all airplanes, the alert service bulletin 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:
Using a method that we approve; or
Using data that meet the certification basis of the
airplane, and that have been approved by an Authorized Representative
for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization
Organization whom we have authorized to make those findings.
For airplane configuration 4: Where the alert service bulletin
specifies to contact the manufacturer for repair instructions before
further flight, to avoid unnecessarily grounding airplanes, this
proposed AD would require performing repairs within 90 days after the
effective date of this proposed AD.
Costs of Compliance
There are about 76 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. This proposed AD would affect about 46 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The following table provides the estimated costs for
U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD, at an average labor
rate of $80 per work hour. The proposed actions vary depending upon the
airplane configuration.
[[Page 53497]]
Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action Work hours Parts Cost per airplane Fleet cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LFEC inspection.................. 1 None needed......... $80, per inspection Up to $3,680, per
cycle. inspection cycle.
HFEC inspection.................. 1 None needed......... $80, per inspection Up to $3,680, per
cycle. inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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); and
3. 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.
We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the
ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, 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.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec. 39.13 by
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):
McDonnell Douglas: Docket No. FAA-2007-29226; Directorate Identifier
2006-NM-256-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by November
5, 2007.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9-81 (MD-81)
and DC-9-82 (MD-82) airplanes; certificated in any category; as
identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-53A298, dated
August 1, 2006.
Unsafe Condition
(d) This AD results from a report of fatigue cracking in the
fuselage skin at the upper corners of the forward passenger
doorjamb. We are issuing this AD to prevent cracking of the fuselage
skin at the upper corners of the forward passenger doorjamb, which
could lead to loss of overall structural integrity of the airplane.
Compliance
(e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.
Repetitive Inspections and Corrective Actions for Configuration 1, 2,
and 3 Airplanes
(f) For airplanes identified as Configuration 1, 2, or 3 in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-53A298, dated August 1, 2006: At
the applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
the alert service bulletin, do a low-frequency eddy current (LFEC)
or high-frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection, as applicable, for
cracking of the fuselage skin at the upper corners of the forward
passenger doorjamb; and do all applicable corrective actions
(repetitive inspections, installation of doublers, replacements, and
repairs), except as provided by paragraph (g) of this AD. Do the
actions in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the
alert service bulletin. Where the alert service bulletin specifies a
compliance time after the date on the service bulletin, this AD
requires compliance within the specified compliance time after the
effective date of this AD.
Repair of Certain Conditions
(g) If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (f) of this AD and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-
53A298, dated August 1, 2006, specifies to contact Boeing for repair
instructions: Before further flight, repair using a method approved
in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (i) of this
AD.
Corrective Action for Configuration 4 Airplanes
(h) For airplanes identified as Configuration 4 in Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin MD80-53A298, dated August 1, 2006: Within 90 days
after the effective date of this AD, repair using a method approved
in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (i) of this
AD.
Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)
(i)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
(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 an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized
by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to make those findings. For a
repair method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification
basis of the airplane and 14 CFR 25.571, Amendment 45, and the
approval must specifically refer to this AD.
[[Page 53498]]
Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 10, 2007.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E7-18447 Filed 9-18-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
posted by registeredtraveler @ 8:53 AM
0 comments
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Private Aircraft Manifests - the rules
[Federal Register: September 18, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 180)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 53393-53406]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr18se07-29]
[[Page 53393]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part V
Department of Homeland Security
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
19 CFR Part 122
Advance Information on Private Aircraft Arriving and Departing the
United States; Proposed Rule
[[Page 53394]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 122
[USCBP-2007-0064]
RIN 1651-AA41
Advance Information on Private Aircraft Arriving and Departing
the United States
AGENCY: Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) proposes to require
the pilot of any private aircraft arriving in the United States from a
foreign port or location or departing the United States for a foreign
port or location to transmit to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) an
advance electronic transmission of information regarding each
individual traveling onboard the aircraft.
This NPRM also proposes to add data elements to the existing notice
of arrival requirements and proposes a new notice of departure
requirement. The notice of arrival and notice of departure information
would be required to be submitted to CBP through an approved electronic
data interchange system in the same transmission as the corresponding
arrival or departure manifest information. Under the NPRM, this data
must be received by CBP no later than 60 minutes before an arriving
private aircraft departs from a foreign location and no later than 60
minutes before a private aircraft departs a United States airport or
location for a foreign port or place.
Finally, this NPRM proposes to clarify landing rights procedures
and departure clearance procedures as well as expressly setting forth
CBP's authority to restrict aircraft from landing in the United States
based on security and/or risk assessments; or, based on those
assessments, to specifically designate and limit the airports from
where aircraft may land or depart.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before November 19,
2007.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number USCBP-
2007-0064, by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments via docket number.
Mail: Border Security Regulations Branch, Office of
International Trade, U.S Customs and Border Protection, 1300
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., (Mint Annex), Washington, DC 20229.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and document number for this rulemaking. All comments received will be
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For detailed instructions on submitting
comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the
``Public Participation'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Submitted comments
may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9
a.m. and 4:30 p.m. at the Office of International Trade, Customs and
Border Protection, 799 9th Street, NW., 5th Floor, Washington, DC.
Arrangements to inspect submitted comments should be made in advance by
calling Mr. Joseph Clark at (202) 572-8768.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For Operational Matters--Michael
Kaneris, Office of Field Operations, Customs and Border Protection,
202-344-1584. For Legal Matters--Glen Vereb, Branch Chief, Office of
International Trade, Regulations & Rulings, Customs and Border
Protection, 202-572-8700.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Supplementary Information section is
organized as follows:
I. Public Participation
II. Background and Current Requirements
A. Background and Authorities
B. Current Requirements for All Aircraft
1. Advance Notice of Arrival
a. Private Aircraft Arriving in the U.S.
b. Certain Aircraft Arriving From Areas South of the U.S.
c. Aircraft Arriving From Cuba
2. Permission to Land (Landing Rights)
C. Current Requirements for Commercial Aircraft
III. Proposed Requirements
A. General Requirements for Private Aircraft Arriving in the
United States
1. Notice of Arrival
2. Arrival Manifest Data Requirement
3. Method of Transmitting Information to CBP
B. Certain Aircraft Arriving From Areas South of the United
States
C. Notice of Arrival for Private Aircraft Arriving From Cuba
D. Private Aircraft Departing the United States
1. Departure Manifest Data Requirement
2. Notice of Departure
3. Aircraft Required to Clear
E. Landing Rights
1. Landing Rights Airports
2. Aircraft Required to Land
IV. Regulatory Analyses
A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review)
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
E. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
F. National Environmental Policy Act
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
H. Privacy Statement
V. Signing Authority
VI. Proposed Regulatory Amendments
I. Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this rulemaking by
submitting written data, views, or arguments on all aspects of the
notice of proposed rulemaking. The Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) also invites comments that relate to the economic, environmental,
or federalism effects that might result from this proposal. Comments
that will provide the most assistance to the Department in developing
these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed
rule, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include data,
information, or authority that support such recommended change.
II. Background and Current Requirements
A. Background and Authorities
Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1433(c), the Secretary of Homeland Security
has broad authority to regulate all aircraft, including private
aircraft, arriving in and departing from the United States. A private
aircraft, in contrast to a commercial aircraft,\1\ is generally any
aircraft engaged in a personal or business flight to or from the United
States which is not carrying passengers and/or cargo for commercial
purposes. See 19 CFR 122.1(h). Specifically, section 1433(c) provides
that the pilot of any aircraft arriving in the United States or the
Virgin Islands from any foreign
[[Page 53395]]
location is required to comply with such advance notification, arrival
reporting, and landing requirements as regulations may require. This
statute provides CBP with the authority to deny landing rights to
aircraft within the United States based on security and/or risk
assessments, or based on those assessments to specifically designate
and limit the airports where aircraft may land. In addition, under the
statute (19 U.S.C. 1433(d)), an aircraft pilot is required to present
or transmit to CBP through an electronic interchange system such
information, data, documents, papers or manifests as the regulations
may require. Section 1433(e) provides, among other things, that
aircraft after arriving in the United States or Virgin Islands may only
depart from the airport in accordance with regulations prescribed by
the Secretary. Additionally, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1644a and 1644, the
Secretary can designate ports of entry for aircraft and apply vessel
entry and clearance regulations to civil aviation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 19 CFR 122.1(d) defines ``commercial aircraft'' as any
aircraft transporting passengers and/or cargo for some payment or
other consideration, including money or services rendered. It should
be noted that if either the arrival or departure leg of an
aircraft's journey is commercial, then CBP considers both legs of
the journey to be commercial. 19 CFR 122.1(h) defines a private
aircraft as any aircraft engaged in a personal or business flight to
or from the U.S. which is not: (1) Carrying passengers and/or cargo
for commercial purposes; or (2) leaving the U.S. carrying neither
passengers nor cargo in order to lade passengers and/or cargo in a
foreign area for commercial purposes; or (3) returning to the U.S.
carrying neither passengers nor cargo in ballast after leaving with
passengers and/or cargo for commercial purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Current Requirements for All Aircraft
1. Advance Notice of Arrival
DHS currently requires aircraft pilots of all aircraft entering the
United States from a foreign area, except aircraft of a scheduled
airline arriving under a regular schedule, to give advance notice of
arrival. See 19 CFR 122.31(a). Advance notice of arrival must be
furnished by the pilot of the aircraft and is generally given when the
aircraft is in the air. As described below, the regulations set forth
the general rule for advance notice of arrival for private aircraft and
specific requirements for certain aircraft arriving from areas south of
the United States, including aircraft from Cuba.
a. Private Aircraft Arriving in the United States
Pursuant to 19 CFR 122.22, private aircraft, except those arriving
from areas south of the United States (discussed below), are required
to give advance notice of arrival as set forth in 19 CFR 122.31. This
notice must be given to the port director at the place of first landing
by radio, telephone, or other method, or through the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA)'s flight notification procedure. 19 CFR 122.31(c).
The advance notice of arrival requires information about the number of
alien passengers and number of U.S. citizen passengers, but it does not
require any identifying information for individual passengers onboard
to be submitted.\2\ The current regulations do not provide a specific
timeframe when the notice of arrival shall be given, but direct that
the pilot shall furnish such information far enough in advance to allow
inspecting officers to reach the place of first landing of the
aircraft. 19 CFR 122.31(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 19 CFR 122.31 provides that the contents of advance notice
of arrival shall include the following information: (1) Type of
aircraft and registration number; (2) name of aircraft commander;
(3) place of last foreign departure; (4) international airport of
intended landing or other place at which landing has been authorized
by CBP; (5) number of alien passengers; (6) number of citizens
passengers; and (7) estimated time of arrival.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Certain Aircraft Arriving From Areas South of the United States
Certain aircraft entering the continental United States from a
foreign area in the Western Hemisphere south of the United States are
subject to special advance notice of arrival and landing requirements.
19 CFR 122.23-24. These aircraft include all private aircraft and
commercial unscheduled aircraft with a seating capacity of 30
passengers or less or maximum payload capacity of 7,500 pounds or less.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 122.23(b), such aircraft are required to give
advance notice of arrival to CBP at the nearest designated airport to
the border or coastline crossing point listed in 19 CFR 122.24(b).
These aircraft must also provide advance notice of arrival at least one
hour before crossing the U.S. coastline or border. 19 CFR 122.23(b).
The pilot may provide advance notice of arrival for these aircraft by
radio, telephone, or other method, or through the FAA flight
notification procedure. The advance notice of arrival for such aircraft
arriving from areas south of the United States must include the
information listed in 19 CFR 122.23(c).\3\ Aircraft arriving from areas
south of the United States that are subject to the requirements of 19
CFR 122.23 are required to land at designated airports listed in 19 CFR
122.24(b), unless CBP grants an exemption from the special landing
requirement.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Section 122.23(c) provides that the contents of the advance
notice of arrival shall include the following: (1) Aircraft
registration number; (2) name of aircraft commander; (3) number of
U.S. citizen passengers; (4) number of alien passengers; (5) place
of last departure; (6) estimated time and location of crossing U.S.
border/coastline; (7) estimated time of arrival; and (8) name of
intended U.S. airport of first landing, as listed in Sec. 122.24,
unless an exemption has been granted under Sec. 122.25, or the
aircraft has not landed in foreign territory or is arriving directly
from Puerto Rico, or the aircraft was inspected by CBP officers in
the U.S. Virgin Islands.
\4\ 19 CFR 122.25 sets forth the procedures concerning exemption
from special landing requirements--known as an overflight privilege.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Aircraft Arriving From Cuba
The current regulations require private aircraft entering the
United States from Cuba, except for public aircraft,\5\ to give advance
notice of arrival at least one hour before crossing the U.S. border or
coastline. 19 CFR 122.152 and 122.154. This notice must be furnished
either directly to the CBP Officer in charge at the relevant airport
listed in 19 CFR 122.154(b)(2), or through the FAA flight notification
procedure. The advance notice of arrival for aircraft from Cuba must
include the information listed in 19 CFR 122.154(c).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 19 CFR 122.1(i) defines ``public aircraft'' as any aircraft
owned by, or under the complete control and management of the U.S.
government or any of its agencies, or any aircraft owned by or under
the complete control and management of any foreign government which
exempts public aircraft of the U.S. from arrival, entry and
clearance requirements similar to those provided in subpart C of
this part, but not including any government-owned aircraft engaged
in carrying persons or property for commercial purposes.
\6\ 19 CFR 122.154(c) provides that the contents of advance
notice of arrival shall state: (1) Type of aircraft and registration
number; (2) name of aircraft commander; (3) number of U.S. citizen
passengers; (4) number of alien passengers; (5) place of last
foreign departure; (6) estimated time and location of crossing the
U.S. coast or border; and (7) estimated time of arrival.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Permission to Land (Landing Rights)
The current regulations require the owner or operator of any
aircraft, including a private aircraft, arriving at a landing rights
airport or user fee airport to request permission to land--known as
landing rights--from CBP (19 CFR 122.14(a) and 122.15(a)). A ``landing
rights airport'' is defined as any airport, other than an international
airport or user fee airport, at which flights from a foreign area are
given permission by CBP to land. See 19 CFR 122.1(f). A ``user fee
airport'' is defined as an airport so designated by CBP and flights
from a foreign area may be granted permission to land at a user fee
airport rather than at an international airport or a landing rights
airport. See 19 CFR 122.1(m). An informational listing of user fee
airports is contained in Sec. 122.15. Permission to land must be
secured from the director of the port, or his representative, at the
port nearest the first place of landing for both landing rights
airports and user fee airports. However, the current regulations do not
set forth a precise application procedure or timeframe for securing
permission to land.
C. Current Requirements for Commercial Aircraft
In contrast to private aircraft, commercial air carriers are
required to
[[Page 53396]]
electronically transmit passenger arrival manifests to CBP no later
than 15 \7\ minutes (19 CFR 122.75a(b)(2)) after the departure of the
aircraft from any place outside the United States (19 CFR
122.49a(b)(2)) and passenger departure manifests no later than 15
minutes prior to departure of the aircraft from the United States.
Manifests for crew members on passenger flights and all-cargo flights
and manifests for non-crew members on all-cargo flights must be
electronically transmitted to CBP no later than 60 minutes prior to the
departure of any covered flight to, continuing within, or overflying
the United States (19 CFR 122.49b(b)(2)) and no later than 60 minutes
prior to the departure of any covered flight from the United States. 19
CFR 122.75b(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ CBP published a final rule in the Federal Register on August
23, 2007 (72 FR 48320), which amends its regulations regarding the
electronic transmission of manifest data by commercial air carriers
bound for and departing the United States, to require the APIS
transmission 30 minutes prior to securing of the aircraft doors
(APIS 30 interactive and non-interactive) and up to the time the
aircraft doors are secured for APIS Quick Query (AQQ) transmissions.
This rule takes effect February 19, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial air carriers transmit passenger information to CBP
through the Advance Passenger Information System (APIS) which is an
electronic data interchange system \8\ approved by DHS for use by
international commercial air and vessel carriers. By receiving the
advance passenger and crew information, CBP is able to perform
enforcement and security queries against various multi-agency law
enforcement and terrorist databases in connection with international
flights to and from the United States. Based on the manifest reporting
requirements for commercial air carriers, CBP currently has the
capability to review advance information on commercial air travelers to
assess potential risks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ A DHS-approved electronic data interchange system is any
electronic system that is approved by DHS that allows the public to
interface with DHS for the purposes of transmitting required
information. CBP anticipates that most transmissions will be made
using eAPIS which is an example of such an application and is an
application that is available through the internet. The pilot may
choose to authorize an agent to transmit the data if internet access
is not available at the pilot's location or for other reasons of
convenience. The pilot remains responsible for the timing and
accuracy of the transmission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposed rule allows for a risk assessment of all private
aircraft traveling internationally and will aid CBP in obtaining
advance information so that risk analyses may be conducted before the
departure of private aircraft bound for or departing the United States
in an effort to improve border security. This rule serves to provide
the nation, private aircraft operators, and the international traveling
public, additional security from the threat of terrorism and enhance
CBP's ability to carry out its border enforcement mission.
III. Proposed Requirements
Private aircraft operators currently do not electronically transmit
to CBP advance notice of arrival through an approved electronic data
interchange system. In addition, private aircraft, unlike commercial
aircraft, are not presently required to electronically transmit
passenger arrival and departure manifests that provide identifying
information for individuals onboard the aircraft before arriving in or
departing from the United States. CBP regulations do not contain
precise procedures for a private aircraft operator to follow to request
permission to land at landing rights airports. Private aircraft
operators are also currently not required to provide notice of
departure or obtain clearance prior to departing the United States.
Accordingly, CBP's current regulations do not provide CBP with the
necessary information to fully assess potential threats posed by
private aircraft entering into and departing from the United States. To
adequately and accurately assess potential threats posed by private
aircraft entering and departing the United States, CBP needs sufficient
and timely information about the impending arrival or departure of a
private aircraft, the passengers and crew onboard, and clear procedures
regarding landing rights and departure clearance. Without these tools,
CBP currently lacks the capability to perform risk assessments on
passengers traveling on private aircraft.
Under this rule, CBP is proposing regulatory changes that include
requiring the advance electronic information of notice of arrival
combined with passenger manifest data for those aboard private aircraft
that arrive in and depart from the United States. Additionally, this
rule proposes amendments regarding notice of arrival requirements,
landing rights, and departure requirements.
The proposed changes would provide CBP with more detailed
information about arriving and departing private aircraft and persons
onboard within a timeframe that would enable CBP to more fully pre-
screen information on all individuals intending to travel onboard
private aircraft to or from the United States. As a result, CBP would
more accurately assess the risks that certain flights may pose to
national security and take appropriate action. Moreover, these changes
would enable CBP to minimize potential threats posed by private
aircraft by identifying high-risk individuals and aircraft and allowing
CBP to coordinate with airport personnel and domestic or foreign
government authorities to take appropriate action when warranted by a
threat.
A. General Requirements for Private Aircraft Arriving in the United
States
This rule proposes to add new passenger manifest and departure
requirements and to revise existing notice of arrival and landing
rights requirements for private aircraft arriving in the United States
from a foreign location or departing the United States to a foreign
location.
1. Notice of Arrival
This NPRM proposes to require pilots of private aircraft arriving
in the United States from a foreign port or location to transmit notice
of arrival information to CBP through a CBP-approved electronic data
interchange system no later than 60 minutes prior to departure from a
foreign port or location. ``Departure'' would be defined as ``the point
at which the aircraft is airborne and the aircraft is en route directly
to its destination.'' See proposed Sec. 122.22(a). Under this proposed
rule, aircraft that are not originally destined for the United States
but are diverted to the United States due to an emergency would be
required to transmit an arrival manifest no later than 30 minutes prior
to arrival, although the circumstances of the emergency situation and
whether or not the aircraft is equipped to make the transmission will
be taken into consideration by CBP.
This NPRM also proposes expanding the data elements that private
aircraft operators are required to report in the notice of arrival. The
current contents of notice of arrival reporting for private aircraft
require that the following data elements be submitted by telephone,
radio or other method: type of aircraft and registration number, name
of aircraft commander, place of last foreign departure, international
airport or intended landing or other place at which landing has been
authorized by CBP, number of alien passengers, number of citizen
passengers and estimated time of arrival. This rule proposes to clarify
the existing notice of arrival reporting requirements for private
aircraft by duplicating the data elements provided in 19 CFR 122.31,
which apply to all aircraft (including private aircraft), into 19 CFR
122.22, which applies specifically to private aircraft. This NPRM also
proposes to
[[Page 53397]]
expand the data elements for notice of arrival regarding private
aircraft. The proposed data elements for notice of arrival report
include the following: aircraft registration number, decal number,
place of last departure, aircraft tail number, aircraft call sign,
aircraft type, date of aircraft arrival, complete itinerary, estimated
time of arrival, estimated time and location of crossing the U.S.
border/coastline, name of intended airport of first landing, owner/
lessee name and address, pilot license number, pilot address, country
of issuance of pilot's license, transponder code, color, operator name
and address, and 24-hour point of contact.
2. Arrival Manifest Data Requirement
This NPRM proposes that private aircraft pilots arriving in the
United States would be responsible for submitting manifest data that
provides identifying information for all individuals on board the
aircraft no later than 60 minutes prior to departure from a foreign
port or location. This manifest data would be provided simultaneously
with the notice of arrival information and would include the following
information for all individuals onboard the aircraft: full name; date
of birth; gender; citizenship; country of residence; status on board
the aircraft (i.e., passenger or crew member); travel document type;
travel document number; travel document country of issuance; travel
document expiration date; alien registration number, redress number (if
available),\9\ and address while in the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The redress number is the number assigned by DHS to an
individual processed through the redress procedures described in 49
CFR part 1560, subpart C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The pilot collecting the manifest information would be required to
compare the manifest information with the information on the DHS-
approved travel document presented by each individual attempting to
travel onboard the aircraft to ensure that the manifest information is
correct, that the travel document appears to be valid for travel to the
United States, and the traveler is the person to whom the travel
document was issued.\10\ If additional passengers not included in the
manifest arrive after the manifest data was submitted to CBP, the pilot
would be responsible for submitting a corrected manifest. The pilot
would be required to await CBP approval of the corrected manifest
before departing. Additionally, any approval to land at a United States
airport or location from a foreign port or location that was previously
granted by CBP as a result of the original manifest's submission would
be invalidated. If a subsequent manifest is submitted less than 60
minutes prior to departure, the private aircraft pilot must resubmit
the arrival manifest and receive approval from CBP for the amended
manifest containing the added or amended information before allowing
the aircraft to depart the foreign location, or the aircraft may be, as
appropriate, denied clearance to depart, diverted from arriving in the
United States, or denied permission to land in the United States.
Certain private aircraft may also be subject to the Transportation
Security Administration (TSA) security and boarding requirements for
large aircraft including those contained in 49 CFR 1544.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Further information outlining the various types of travel
documents approved by DHS can be found at: http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/travel/inspections_carriers_facilities/doc_require.ctt/doc_require.pdf
.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Method of Transmitting Information to CBP
Under this proposed rule, both the notice of arrival information
and manifest data must be transmitted in the same transmission via
electronic submissions through the Electronic Advance Passenger
Information System (eAPIS) \11\ Web portal or by a CBP-approved
alternative transmission medium. More information on eAPIS is available
at http://www.cbp.gov (related links). Under this proposed rule, any
electronic data interchange system approved by CBP would be an
acceptable method for private aircraft to submit notice of arrival
information and manifest data. The pilot would be responsible for
submitting this information, but could authorize another party to
submit the information on his or her behalf. After CBP receives the
submitted information, DHS would send a message to the submitter of the
manifest information before departure from a foreign airport indicating
that the information has been received and specifying whether landing
rights have been granted at the requested airport, granted at a
different airport designated by CBP, or denied. There will be a
transitional period during which the current manual process of
requesting landing rights will gradually be replaced by this automated
procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ eAPIS is an online transmission system that meets all
current and future APIS data element requirements for all mandated
APIS transmission types.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A private aircraft pilot who chooses not to transmit required
arrival manifest data by means of a CBP-approved interactive \12\
electronic transmission system would be required to make batch manifest
transmissions by means of a non-interactive electronic transmission
system approved by CBP. The private aircraft pilot would make a single,
complete batch manifest transmission containing all the required
arrival manifest data for every person on the aircraft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ CBP anticipates that most pilots of private aircraft will
use the eAPIS web portal as the transmission method of choice
because of the ease and availability of internet access. Electronic
EDIFACT transmissions are currently used by commercial carriers to
transmit passenger data to CBP. Pilots of large business aircraft
could choose to use this or other CBP-approved electronic
transmission medium rather than the eAPIS portal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After receipt of the manifest information, as in the case where the
manifest information is conveyed using a CBP-approved interactive
electronic transmission system, CBP would perform an initial security
vetting of the data and grant, deny, or restrict landing rights as
appropriate.
Through an analysis of the data provided by the pilot's
transmission, DHS will be able to identify passengers who are
designated as selectee or no-fly. This and other information will be
used in determining whether landing rights or clearance will be
granted, restricted or denied. DHS is evaluating whether to inform the
pilot, in the event that CBP denies or restricts landing rights for the
plane, which passenger(s) has been identified by DHS on the selectee or
no-fly lists so that the pilot may better understand potential threats
to the security of the aircraft. In addition, such notification could
avoid additional flight delays or disruptions by allowing the pilot to
remove that individual from the flight until such time as the
individual resolves the selectee or no-fly designation with TSA under
TSA's redress system. Accordingly, DHS is soliciting public comments on
the economic costs and benefits of notifying a pilot about an
individual selectee or no-fly match being aboard the aircraft. DHS is
also seeking comments on any operational and privacy concerns
associated with sharing such information.
B. Certain Aircraft Arriving From Areas South of the United States
This NPRM proposes a new timeframe for reporting notice of arrival,
which would be no later than 60 minutes prior to the aircraft's
departure to the United States from a foreign port or location, as
opposed to 60 minutes before crossing the U.S border as is the current
requirement. Under this proposed rule, notice of arrival would be
required, along with manifest data being furnished as set forth in 19
CFR 122.22 for private aircraft, which requires
[[Page 53398]]
submission of such information to CBP via an electronic data
interchange system approved by CBP. All other aircraft subject to 19
CFR 122.23, would be required to report notice of arrival as required
under that provision.
This NPRM also proposes to correct a discrepancy between the
definition of ``private aircraft'' in 19 CFR 122.23, which encompasses
both private aircraft and, in some instances, small, unscheduled
commercial aircraft and the general definition provided for ``private
aircraft'' in 19 CFR 122.1(h). To correct this discrepancy, CBP is
proposing to revise the heading for 19 CFR 122.23 to read ``Certain
aircraft arriving from areas south of the U.S.'' Additionally, the
proposed regulatory text would expressly state the specific types of
aircraft to which the section applies rather than defining them. These
proposed amendments to 19 CFR 122.23 would make the section easier for
the public to understand.
C. Notice of Arrival for Private Aircraft Arriving From Cuba
This NPRM proposes that private aircraft arriving from Cuba, as
provided for in 19 CFR 122.154, would be required to provide notice of
arrival and manifest data in the same manner as private aircraft that
are subject to proposed 19 CFR 122.22. Private aircraft arriving from
Cuba would continue to be required to provide notice of arrival
information to the specifically designated airport where the aircraft
will land: Miami International Airport, Miami Florida; John F. Kennedy
International Airport, Jamaica, New York; or Los Angeles International
Airport, Los Angeles, California.
D. Private Aircraft Departing the United States
1. Departure Manifest Data Requirement
This NPRM proposes to require the pilot of a private aircraft
departing the United States to a foreign port or location to submit a
departure manifest to CBP. Similar to the arrival manifest, the
departure manifest would contain information identifying all
individuals onboard the aircraft. The timeframe for submission of the
departure manifest would be no later than 60 minutes prior to departure
from the United States to a foreign port or location. This NPRM
clarifies the pilot's responsibility to ensure that a departure
manifest regarding all individuals onboard the private aircraft is
submitted and specifies that the transmission of the manifest data must
be through any CBP-approved electronic data interchange system. The
information to be provided in the departure manifest would be the same
as that provided in the arrival manifest.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Like the arrival manifest, the departure manifest would
include the following information for all individuals onboard the
aircraft: Full name; date of birth; gender; citizenship; country of
residence; status on board the aircraft (i.e., passenger or crew
member); travel document type; travel document number; travel
document country of issuance; travel document expiration date; alien
registration number, redress number if available and address while
in the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under this proposed rule, the pilot collecting the information
would be responsible for comparing the travel document presented by
each individual attempting to travel onboard the aircraft with the DHS-
approved travel document information he or she is transmitting to CBP.
The pilot would also be responsible for ensuring that the information
is correct and that the traveler is the person to whom the travel
document was issued.
This NPRM clarifies that if a departure manifest is submitted to
CBP before all individuals arrive for transport, the pilot must
resubmit an amended manifest with all required information, and any
clearance previously granted by CBP as a result of the original
manifest's submission would be invalidated. The pilot would have an
obligation to make necessary changes to the departure manifest and
specifies what circumstances would constitute necessary changes (e.g.,
adding a name or any required information or amending previously
submitted information). If changes are submitted less than 60 minutes
prior to departure, the pilot would be required to receive a new
clearance from CBP before departing.
2. Notice of Departure
This NPRM proposes to require private aircraft leaving the United
States for a foreign port or location to obtain clearance from CBP
prior to departing from the United States. Under this proposed rule,
private aircraft pilots departing for a foreign port or location would
be required to submit an electronic departure manifest on all
individuals onboard the aircraft, and notice of departure information
no later than 60 minutes prior to departure. Notice of departure
elements would constitute the following information: aircraft
registration number, type of aircraft, call sign (if available), decal
number, place of last departure, date of aircraft departure, estimated
time of departure, estimated time and location of crossing U.S. border/
coastline, name of intended foreign airport of first landing, owner/
lessees name (last, first, and, if available, middle), owner/lessees
street address (number and street, city, state, zip code, country,
telephone number, fax number, and e-mail address), pilot/private
aircraft pilot name (last, first and, if available, middle), pilot
license number, pilot street address: (number and street, city, state,
zip code, country, telephone number, fax number and e-mail address),
country of issuance of pilot's license, operator name (last, first, and
if available, middle), operator street address: (number and street,
city, state, zip code, country, telephone number, fax number and e-mail
address), 24-hour point of contact (e.g., broker, dispatcher, repair
shop) name, transponder code (beacon number), color, complete itinerary
(intended foreign airport destinations for 24 hours following
departure).
3. Aircraft Required To Clear
The existing regulatory language in 19 CFR 122.61 exempts public
and private aircraft from leaving the United States for a foreign area
from having to obtain clearance prior to departing from the United
States. As such, CBP is proposing to revise paragraph (a) of Sec.
122.61 to indicate that private aircraft leaving the United States for
a foreign area are required to obtain clearance from CBP as set forth
in the language proposed for Sec. 122.26. The paragraph will further
state that all other aircraft, except public aircraft, leaving the
United States or the U.S. Virgin Islands are required to clear if they
carry passengers and/or merchandise for hire or take aboard or
discharge passengers and/or merchandise for hire in a foreign area. See
19 CFR 122.61(a) and (b). These proposed changes are necessary to
effectuate the new requirements regarding the filing of a departure
manifest and electronic clearance for private aircraft prior to
departure for a foreign port or place.
The process of receiving electronic clearance to depart would
operate in substantially the same manner as submission of an arrival
data manifest. Prior to departing the United States, a private aircraft
pilot would submit departure manifest data on all individuals onboard
the aircraft, await CBP's confirmation of receipt of the manifest data,
and await CBP clearance to depart the United States. CBP's clearance,
i.e., permission to depart the United States, would be transmitted to
the pilot from CBP via an electronic data interchange system approved
by CBP.
As with the transmission of arrival data manifests, a private
aircraft pilot that chooses not to transmit required notice of
departure, departure manifests by means of a CBP-approved interactive
[[Page 53399]]
electronic transmission system must make batch manifest transmissions
in accordance with CBP policy as discussed earlier in section III.A.3.,
entitled ``Method of Transmitting Information to CBP.''
E. Landing Rights
CBP currently requires all aircraft arriving at a landing rights
airport to request permission to land, known as landing rights, from
CBP. Given CBP's authority to deny landing rights within the United
States and to restrict landing to airports designated by CBP,\14\ this
NPRM proposes to expressly state CBP's authority to deny permission to
land in the United States and/or limit aircraft landing locations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See 19 U.S.C. 1433(c) and 1644a(b)(1)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Landing Rights Airports
The current provisions of 19 CFR 122.14 do not adequately provide
for when or how the request for permission to land at a landing rights
airport should be given to the director of the port of entry or station
nearest the first place of landing. Under this proposed rule, private
aircraft pilots would seek permission to land at a landing rights
airport when the notice of arrival information is transmitted via a CBP
approved electronic data interchange system no later than 60 minutes
prior to departure from a foreign port or place pursuant to the
proposed language in 19 CFR 122.22. The pilot would then be required to
wait for CBP to transmit a message that landing rights have been
granted at the particular landing rights airport. These requirements
would also apply to private aircraft landing at user fee airports
pursuant to 19 CFR 122.15. This proposed rule would also expressly
provide that CBP may deny landing rights or direct an aircraft to a
landing location.
2. Aircraft Required To Land
This NPRM proposes to clarify CBP's authority to deny permission to
land in the United States and to designate the specific locations at
which unusually high-risk aircraft may land. Currently under 19 CFR
122.32, any aircraft that is coming into the United States from a
foreign location (including Puerto Rico) must land unless exempted by
the Federal Aviation Administration. This proposed rule would expressly
provide that CBP's authority to deny permission to land in the United
States, in addition to the current FAA exemption excusing the
requirement to land, as the two exclusive reasons that an aircraft
coming into the United States from a foreign area shall not land in the
United States.
IV. Regulatory Analyses
A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review)
This proposed rule is not ``economically significant'' under
Executive Order 12866 because it will not result in the expenditure of
more than $100 million in any one year. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) has reviewed this rule under that Order. Comments
regarding the analysis may be submitted by any of the methods described
under the ADDRESSES section of this document.
Currently, pilots of private aircraft must submit information
regarding themselves, their aircraft, and any passengers prior to
arrival into the United States from a foreign airport. Depending on the
location of the foreign airport, the pilot provides the arrival
information 1 hour prior to crossing the U.S. coastline or border
(areas south of the United States) or during the flight (other areas).
The information that would be required for the pilot is similar to what
is already required; it would need to be submitted earlier (60 minutes
prior to departure). No notice of departure information is currently
required for private aircraft departing the United States for a foreign
airport.
CBP estimates that 138,559 private aircraft landed in the United
States in 2006 based on current notice of arrival data. These aircraft
collectively carried 455,324 passengers; including the 138,559 pilots
of the aircraft, this totals 593,883 individuals arriving in the United
States aboard private aircraft. CBP estimates that approximately two-
thirds are U.S. citizens and the remaining one-third is comprised of
non-U.S. citizens.
Table 1 summarizes the 2006 arrival information for the top
airports in the United States that receive private aircraft from
foreign airports. Fort Lauderdale received the most arrivals, with
nearly 10 percent of the U.S. private aircraft arrivals. The top 18
airports received approximately 60 percent of the total. As shown, the
average number of passengers per arrival varies by port; JFK has the
highest passengers per arrival (4.7) while Bellingham, Washington, has
the lowest (1.4). Nationwide, the average number of passengers carried
per arrival is 3.3.
Table 1.--Summary of Arrivals and Passengers Aboard Private Aircraft (2006)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent of Average
Airport Aircraft/pilot Percent of Passenger total passengers
arrivals total aircraft arrivals passengers per arrival
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ft. Lauderdale Intl. Airport, FL 12,831 9 37,848 8% 2.9
West Palm Beach, FL............. 9,031 7 25,109 6 2.8
New York-Newark, Newark, NJ..... 6,464 5 29,779 7 4.6
Miami Airport, FL............... 5,676 4 17,596 4 3.1
Fort Pierce, FL................. 5,216 4 11,376 2 2.2
Otay Mesa, CA................... 4,944 4 18,216 4 3.7
San Juan, PR.................... 4,090 3 10,821 2 2.6
Hidalgo, TX..................... 3,827 3 8,647 2 2.3
Calexico, CA.................... 3,597 3 7,963 2 2.2
JFK Airport, NY................. 3,497 3 16,492 4 4.7
Laredo, TX...................... 3,280 2 10,974 2 3.3
Tucson, AZ...................... 3,013 2 9,059 2 3.0
El Paso, TX..................... 2,548 2 9,544 2 3.7
Houston/Galveston, TX........... 2,534 2 10,850 2 4.3
Seattle, WA..................... 2,529 2 6,238 1 2.5
Brownsville, TX................. 2,303 2 7,027 2 3.1
San Antonio, TX................. 2,185 2 8,520 2 3.9
Bellingham, WA.................. 2,160 2 3,106 1 1.4
Remaining 223 airports.......... 58,834 42 206,159 45 3.5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 53400]]
Total....................... 138,559 100 455,324 100 3.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CBP does not currently compile data for departures, as there are
currently no requirements for private aircraft departing the United
States. For this analysis, we assume that the number of departures is
the same as the number of arrivals.
Thus, we estimate that 140,000 private aircraft arrivals and
140,000 departures will be affected annually as a result of the rule.
While the current data elements for pilots are very similar to the
proposed requirements, the data elements for passengers are more
extensive. Based on the current information collected and accounting
for proposed changes in the data elements, CBP estimates that one
submission, which includes the arrival information and the passenger
manifest data, will require 15 minutes of time (0.25 hours) for the
pilot to complete. Additionally, CBP estimates that it will require
each of the 460,000 passengers 1 minute (0.017 hours) to provide the
required data to the pilot. These data are all contained on a
passenger's passport or alien registration card and are thus simple to
provide to the pilot.
Currently, arrival information is submitted by radio, telephone, or
other method, or through the FAA's flight notification procedure. Under
the proposed requirements, pilots must submit the arrival and passenger
data through the eAPIS web portal, electronic EDIFACT transmissions, or
an approved alternative transmission medium. For this analysis, we
assume that pilots will use the eAPIS system, as it is a user-friendly
and costless method to submit the required data elements to CBP, and
the pilot need only have access to a computer with web capabilities to
access the system. We also assume that pilots will have access to a
computer and the internet to make the electronic submission. This
analysis in no way precludes a private aircraft operator from
implementing another approved method of transmission; however, we
believe that most pilots, particularly those not traveling for
business, will choose to submit the required data through the least-
cost option: eAPIS.
Currently, private aircraft arriving from areas south of the United
States must provide advance notice of arrival at least one hour before
crossing the U.S. coastline or border. There are no such timing
requirements for other areas. Thus, some pilots and their passengers
may decide that in order to comply with the new requirements, including
submitting information through eAPIS and waiting for a response from
CBP, they must convene at the airport earlier than they customarily
would. We do not have any information on how many, if any, pilots or
passengers would need to change their practices. For this analysis, we
assume that 50 percent of the pilots and passengers would need to
arrive 15 minutes (0.25 hours) earlier than customary. This would
result in 70,000 affected pilots (140,000 arrivals * 0.5) and 231,000
affected passengers (70,000 arrivals * 3.3 passengers per arrival) for
a total of 301,000 individuals affected.
To estimate the costs associated with the time required to input
data into eAPIS, we use the value of an hour of time as reported in the
Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) document on critical values,
$37.20.\15\ This represents a weighted cost for business and leisure
general aviation travelers. CBP believes this is a reasonable
approximation of the average value of a pilot's and traveler's time.
However since this estimate may be an underestimate of the value of
time for general aviation passengers and pilot's engaged in
international travel, CBP requests comments on this estimate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Federal Aviation Administration, 2005. Economic Values for
FAA Investment and Regulatory Decisions, A Guide. Prepared by GRA,
Inc. July 3, 2007. Table ES-1. Per the instructions of this guidance
document (see pages 1-1 and 1-3), this estimate has not been
adjusted for inflation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The cost to submit advance notice of arrival data through eAPIS
would be approximately $1.3 million (140,000 arrivals * 0.25 hours *
$37.20 per hour). Similarly, costs to submit advance notice of
departure data would be $1.3 million, for a total cost for pilots to
submit the required data elements of $2.6 million annually. The cost
for passengers to provide the data to the pilot to be entered into
eAPIS would be approximately $570,000 (920,000 arrivals and departures
* 0.017 hours * $37.20 per hour). Total costs for the eAPIS submissions
would be $3.2 million annually.
To estimate the costs of arriving earlier than customary, we again
use the value of time of $37.20 per hour. As noted previously, we
assume that 301,000 pilots and passengers may choose to arrive 0.25
hours earlier than customary. This would result in a cost of
approximately $2.8 million for arrivals and $2.8 million for
departures, a total of $5.6 million annually (301,000 individuals *
0.25 hours * $37.20 per hour * 2).
Additionally, CBP estimates the potential costs to resolve issues
with passengers that have been designated as ``No Fly'' based on the
eAPIS process. While a law enforcement response is not required under
this proposed rule, CBP estimates the costs for such a response in
order to avoid underestimating the costs of this rule. For the purposes
of this analysis, CBP estimates that on two occasions annually, a
general aviation flight has a passenger that is designated ``No Fly,''
but through the resolution process is downgraded from ``No Fly'' and
the entire traveling party continues on their flight. CBP assumes that
four individuals (the pilot plus three passengers) would be affected by
a one-hour delay to resolve the no-fly designation. CBP also assumes
the resolution process will require 1 hour of law enforcement time at a
TSA-estimated cost of $62.43 per hour. The total annual costs for these
incidents would be approximately $422 [(four individuals * $37.20 * 1
hour + 1 individual * $62.43 * 1 hour) * two incidents].
CBP also estimates the potential costs for pilots and passengers
who may be denied landing rights as a result of their eAPIS submission.
For the purposes of this analysis, CBP estimates that once per year, a
general aviation flight is denied landing rights. CBP again assumes
that four individuals (the pilot plus three passengers) will be
affected, but that the delay will be eight hours to coordinate a law
enforcement response. CBP assumes that four law enforcement personnel
will be involved in the investigation. The total annual costs for this
incident would be approximately $3,188 [(four individuals * $37.20 * 8
hours + 4 individuals * $62.43 * 8 hours) * one incident]. CBP is
seeking comment on the assumptions made for these incident responses.
[[Page 53401]]
The total annual cost of the proposed rule is expected to be $8.8
million. Over 10 years, this would total a present value cost of $66.0
million at a 7 percent discount rate ($77.1 million at a 3 percent
discount rate).
The primary impetus of this rule is the security benefit afforded
by a more timely submission of APIS information. Ideally, the
quantification and monetization of the beneficial security effects of
this regulation would involve two steps. First, we would estimate the
reduction in the probability of a successful terrorist attack resulting
from implementation of the regulation and the consequences of the
avoided event (collectively, the risk associated with a potential
terrorist attack). Then we would identify individuals' willingness to
pay for this incremental risk reduction and multiply it by the
population experiencing the benefit. Both of these steps, however, rely
on key data that are not available for this rule.
In light of these limitations, we conduct a ``breakeven'' analysis
to determine what change in the reduction of risk would be necessary in
order for the benefits of the rule to exceed the costs. Because the
types of attack that could be prevented vary widely in their intensity
and effects, we present a range of potential losses that are driven by
casualty estimates and asset destruction. For example, the average
general aviation aircraft is 3,384 pounds and carries an average of a
little over four people (1 pilot and 3 passengers).\16\ Some general
aviation aircraft, however, are much larger and carry many more people
and thus could have potentially higher casualty losses and property
damages in the event of an incident. We use two estimates of a Value of
a Statistical Life (VSL) to represent an individual's willingness to
pay to avoid a fatality onboard an aircraft, based on economic studies
of the value individuals place on small changes in risk: $3 million per
VSL and $6 million per VSL.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Federal Aviation Administration. 2005. Economic Values for
FAA Investment and Regulatory Decisions, A Guide. Prepared by GRA,
Inc. July 3, 2007. Table ES-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, we present four attack scenarios. Scenario 1 explores
a situation where only individuals are lost (no destruction of physical
property). In this scenario, we estimate the losses if an attack
resulted in 4 (average number of people on a general aviation
aircraft--one pilot, three passengers) to 1,000 casualties but no loss
of physical capital. We acknowledge that this scenario is not
necessarily realistic because an attack that would result in 1,000
casualties would almost certainly also result in loss of physical
assets; however, this scenario provides a useful high end for the risk
reduction probabilities required for the rule to break even.
Scenario 2 explores a situation where individuals are lost and a
lower-value aircraft is destroyed. The value of the aircraft lost,
$94,661, is based on the value from the FAA critical values study cited
previously.\17\ This value is for an aircraft built prior to 1982,
which is a substantial proportion (75 percent) of the general aviation
fleet of aircraft.\18\ Scenario 3 explores a situation where
individuals are lost and a higher-value aircraft is destroyed. The
value of the aircraft lost is $1,817,062 (aircraft built in 1982 and
later).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Federal Aviation Administration. 2005. Economic Values for
FAA Investment and Regulatory Decisions, A Guide. Prepared by GRA,
Inc. July 3, 2007. Table ES-1. This estimate has not been adjusted
for inflation.
\18\ Federal Aviation Administration. 2005. Economic Values for
FAA Investment and Regulatory Decisions, A Guide. Prepared by GRA,
Inc. July 3, 2007. Table 3-14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scenario 4 explores a situation where individuals are lost and
substantial destruction of physical capital is incurred. In this
scenario we again estimate individual lives lost but now consider a
massive loss of physical capital (the 9/11 attack is an example of such
an event).
Casualties are again estimated as before using the two VSL
estimates. To value the loss of capital assets, we use a report from
the Comptroller of the City of New York that estimated $21.8 billion in
physical capital destruction as a result of the 9/11 attacks on the
World Trade Center.\19\ This report also estimates the ``ripple
effects'' of the attack--the air traffic shutdown, lost tourism in New
York City, and long-term economic impacts; however, we do not compare
these secondary impacts to the direct costs of the rule estimated
previously because we do not know the extent to which these losses are
transfers versus real economic losses. In this analysis we compare
direct costs to direct benefits to estimate the risk reduction required
for the rule to break even.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Thompson, Jr., William C. Comptroller, City of New York.
``One Year Later: The Fiscal Impact of 9/11 on New York City.''
September 4, 2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, the impacts in these scenarios would be driven largely by
the number of people aboard the aircraft and the size of the aircraft.
The annual risk reductions required for the proposed rule to break
even are presented in Table 2 for the four attack scenarios, the two
estimates of VSL, and a range of casualties. As shown, depending on the
attack scenario, the VSL, and the casualty level, risk would have to be
reduced less than 1 percent (Scenario 4, 1,000 casualties avoided) to
73.1 percent (Scenario 1, 4 casualties avoided) in order for the
benefits of the rule to exceed the costs to break even.
Table 2.--Annual Risk Reduction Required (%) for Net Costs to Equal Benefits
[Annualized at 7 percent over 10 years]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scenario 4:
Scenario 2: Scenario 3: loss of life
Scenario 1: loss of life loss of life and
Casualties avoided loss of life and aircraft and aircraft catastrophic
only (low value) (high value) loss of
property
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$3M VSL:
4........................................... 73.1 72.6 63.5 < 1
10.......................................... 29.3 29.2 27.6 < 1
100......................................... 2.9 2.9 2.9 < 1
1,000....................................... 0.3 0.3 0.3 < 1
$6M VSL:
4........................................... 36.6 36.4 34.0 < 1
10.......................................... 14.6 14.6 14.2 < 1
100......................................... 1.5 1.5 1.5 < 1
1,000........................................... 0.1 0.1 0.1 < 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 53402]]
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
CBP has prepared this section to examine the impacts of the
proposed rule on small entities as required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA, See 5 U.S.C. 601-612). A small entity may be a
small business (defined as any independently owned and operated
business not dominant in its field that qualifies as a small business
per the Small Business Act); a small not-for-profit organization; or a
small governmental jurisdiction (locality with fewer than 50,000
people).
When considering the impacts on small entities for the purpose of
complying with the RFA, CBP consulted the Small Business
Administration's guidance document for conducting regulatory
flexibility analysis. Per this guidance, a regulatory flexibility
analysis is required when an agency determines that the rule will have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
that are subject to the requirements of the rule. We do not have
information on the number of pilots and passengers traveling for
business versus leisure or how many businesses, regardless of size,
would be affected by the proposed requirements. Those private
individuals who are flying for leisure, rather than business, would not
be considered small entities because individuals are not considered
small entities. Some of the affected pilots and passengers are flying
for business purposes; however, we do not know if these businesses are
small entities or not. This rule may thus affect a substantial number
of small entities.
In any case, the cost to submit data to CBP through eAPIS would be,
at most, approximately $50 per submission ($9.30 for the APIS
submission; $9.30 * 3.3 passengers + $9.30 * 1 pilot for potential
early arrival). CBP believes such an expense would not rise to the
level of being a ``significant economic impact.'' We welcome comments
on our assumptions. If we do not receive comments that demonstrate that
the rule results in significant economic impacts, we may certify that
this action does not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities during the final rule.
Comments regarding the analysis may be submitted by any of the
methods described under the ADDRESSES section of this document.
C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA),
enacted as Public Law 104-4 on March 22, 1995, requires each Federal
agency, to the extent permitted by law, to prepare a written assessment
of the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final agency
rule that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100
million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year.
Section 204(a) of the UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1534(a), requires the Federal
agency to develop an effective process to permit timely input by
elected officers (or their designees) of State, local, and tribal
governments on a ``significant intergovernmental mandate.'' A
``significant intergovernmental mandate'' under the UMRA is any
provision in a Federal agency regulation that will impose an
enforceable duty upon state, local, and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, of $100 million (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one
year. This rule would not result in such an expenditure.
D. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 requires CBP to develop a process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
Policies that have federalism implications are defined in the Executive
Order to include rules that 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.'' CBP has analyzed the proposed rule in
accordance with the principles and criteria in the Executive Order and
have determined that it does not have federalism implications or a
substantial direct effect on the States. The proposed rule requires
private aircraft arriving in the United States from a foreign location
or departing the United States to a foreign port or location to comply
with notice of arrival requirements, passenger manifest requirements,
and permission to land at landing rights airports. States do not
conduct activities with which this rule would interfere. For these
reasons, this proposed rule would not have sufficient federalism
implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact
statement.
E. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
This rule meets the applicable standards set forth in sections 3(a)
and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988. That Executive Order requires
agencies to conduct reviews, before proposing legislation or
promulgating regulations, to determine the impact of those proposals on
civil justice and potential issues for litigation. The Order requires
that agencies make reasonable efforts to ensure that a regulation
clearly identifies preemptive effects, effects on existing Federal laws
and regulations, any retroactive effects of the proposal, and other
matters. CBP has determined that this regulation meets the requirements
of Executive Order 12988 because it does not involve retroactive
effects, preemptive effects, or other matters addressed in the Order.
F. National Environmental Policy Act
CBP has evaluated this rule for purposes of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). CBP
has determined that an environmental statement is not required, since
this action is non-invasive and there is no potential impact of any
kind. Record of this determination has been placed in the rulemaking
docket.
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
There are two proposed collections of information in this document.
The proposed collection is contained in 19 CFR 122.22. This information
would be used by CBP to further improve the ability of CBP to identify
high-risk individuals onboard private aircraft so as to prevent
terrorist acts and ensure aircraft and airport safety and security. The
likely respondents and/or record keepers are individuals and
businesses. Under Sec. 122.22 a private aircraft pilot would be
required to file an advance arrival manifest on all individuals via an
electronic data interchange system approved by CBP no later than 60
minutes prior to the aircraft departing to the United States from a
foreign port or location. Additionally, a private aircraft pilot would
be required to file an advance departure manifest on all individuals
onboard a private aircraft through an electronic data interchange
system approved by CBP no later than 60 minutes prior to that aircraft
departing from the United States to a foreign port or location. eAPIS
is one of several CBP approved electronic data interchange systems that
private aircraft pilots will use to transmit information about all of
the individuals aboard an aircraft.
The collection of information encompassed within this proposed rule
has been submitted to the OMB for review in accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507). An agency may not
conduct, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of
information unless the collection of information
[[Page 53403]]
displays a valid control number assigned by OMB.
Estimated Burden Requirements for Pilots of Private Aircraft Under
Sec. 122.22
Estimated annual reporting and/or recordkeeping burden: 70,000
hours.
Estimated average annual burden per respondent/recordkeeper: 30
minutes (0.50) hours.
Estimated number of respondents and/or recordkeepers: 140,000.
Estimated annual frequency of responses: 2.
Estimated Burden Requirements for Passengers
Estimated annual reporting and/or recordkeeping burden: 7820.
Estimated reporting burden per respondent/or recordkeeping burden:
1 minute.
Estimated number of respondents and/or recordkeepers: 460,000.
Estimated annual frequency of responses: 1.
Comments on the collection of information should be sent to the
Office of Management and Budget, Attention: Desk Officer of the
Department of Homeland Security, Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Washington, DC 20503. Comments should be submitted within the
timeframe that comments are due regarding the substance of the
proposal.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection is necessary
for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy
of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of the
information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of
the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on respondents, including through the use of
automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology; and (e) estimates of capital or startup costs and costs of
operations, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide
information.
H. Privacy Statement
A Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) for APIS was updated on August 8,
2007 and posted on the DHS Web site. In conjunction with the APIS Pre-
departure final rule published in the Federal Register on August 23,
2007 (72 FR 48320), a System of Records Notice was published in the
Federal Register on that same date (72 FR 48349). In light of the
amendments to the regulations proposed in this document, CBP is in the
process of updating the APIS PIA. Additionally, CBP and the DHS Privacy
Office are currently reviewing the APIS SORN to determine if any
amendments are needed to ensure privacy compliance for APIS.
Accordingly, if it is determined that amendments are necessary, an
update to the SORN will be published.
DHS is seeking comment on the privacy impacts of the expansion of
the population that will be covered by this rule. Presently, the
Advanced Passenger Information System (APIS) System of Records Notice
(SORN) published in the Federal Register on August 23, 2007 (72 FR
48349) would cover this population. The APIS SORN currently covers the
collection of APIS information in both the commercial and private
aircraft context. Comments will be considered and addressed in the
development of this final rule, additionally any updates to the APIS
SORN required by the rule or DHS's analysis of the comments from this
NPRM will be incorporated into the APIS SORN prior to the collection of
personally identifiable information under the rule.
V. Signing Authority
The signing authority for these amendments falls under 19 CFR
0.2(a). Accordingly, this document is signed by the Secretary of
Homeland Security (or his delegate).
VI. Proposed Regulatory Amendments
List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 122
Air carriers, Aircraft, Airports, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures.
Amendments to the Regulations
For the reasons stated in the preamble, it is proposed to amend
part 122 of title 19, Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR part 122) as
follows:
PART 122--AIR COMMERCE REGULATIONS
1. The general authority citation for part 122 and the specific
authority citations for sections 122.12, 122.14, 122.22, 122.23,
122.24, 122.26, 122.32, 122.61 and 122.154 continue to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 58b, 66, 1431, 1433, 1436,
1448, 1459, 1590, 1594, 1623, 1624, 1644, 1644a, 2071 note.
2. Revise Sec. 122.0 to read as follows:
Sec. 122.0 Scope.
(a) Applicability. The regulations in this part relate to the entry
and clearance of aircraft and the transportation of persons and cargo
by aircraft, and are applicable to all air commerce. They do not apply
to Guam, Midway, American Samoa, Wake, Kingman Reef, Johnston Island,
and other insular possessions of the United States not specified
herein. They do apply to the U.S. Virgin Islands as stated in subpart N
(Sec. Sec. 122.41 through 122.144), and Cuba as stated in subpart O
(Sec. Sec. 122.151 through 122.158).
(b) Authority of Other Agencies. Nothing in this part is intended
to divest or diminish authority and operational control that are vested
in the FAA or any other agency, particularly with respect to airspace
and aircraft safety.
3. Amend Sec. 122.12 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 122.12 Operation of international airports.
* * * * *
(c) FAA rules; denial of permission to land.--(1) Federal Aviation
Administration. International airports must follow and enforce any
requirements for airport operations, including airport rules that are
set out by the Federal Aviation Administration in 14 CFR part 91.
(2) Customs and Border Protection. CBP, based on security or other
risk assessments, may limit the locations where aircraft entering the
United States from a foreign port or place may land. Consistent with
Sec. 122.0(b) of this Title, CBP has the authority to deny permission
to land in the United States, based upon security or other risk
assessments.
(3) Commercial aircraft. Permission to land at an international
airport may be denied to a commercial aircraft if advance electronic
information for incoming foreign cargo aboard the aircraft has not been
received as provided in Sec. 122.48a, except in the case of emergency
or forced landings.
(4) Private Aircraft. Permission to land at an international
airport will be denied if the pilot of a private aircraft arriving from
a foreign port or place fails to submit an electronic manifest and
notice of arrival pursuant to Sec. 122.22, except in the case of
emergency or forced landings.
* * * * *
4. Revise Sec. 122.14 to read as follows:
Sec. 122.14 Landing rights airports.
(a) Permission to land. Permission to land at a landing rights
airport may be given as follows:
(1) Scheduled flight. The scheduled aircraft of a scheduled airline
may be allowed to land at a landing rights airport. Permission is given
by the director of the port, or his representative, at the port nearest
to which first landing is made.
[[Page 53404]]
(i) Additional flights, charters or changes in schedule--(A)
Scheduled aircraft. If a new carrier plans to set up a new flight
schedule, or an established carrier makes changes in its approved
schedule, landing rights may be granted by the port director.
(ii) Additional or charter flight. If a carrier or charter operator
wants to begin operating or to add flights, application shall be made
to the port director for landing rights. All requests shall be made not
less than 48 hours before the intended time of arrival, except in
emergencies. If the request is oral, it shall be put in writing before
or at the time of arrival.
(2) Private aircraft. The pilots of private aircraft are required
to secure permission to land from CBP following transmission of the
advance notice of arrival via an electronic data interchange system
approved by CBP, pursuant to Sec. 122.22. Prior to departure as
defined in section 122.22(a), from a foreign port or place, the pilot
of a private aircraft must receive a message from CBP that landing
rights have been granted for that aircraft at a particular airport.
(3) Other aircraft. Following advance notice of arrival pursuant to
Sec. 122.31, all other aircraft may be allowed to land at a landing
rights airport by the director of the port of entry or station nearest
the first place of landing.
(4) Denial or withdrawal of landing rights. Permission to land at a
landing rights airport may be denied or permanently or temporarily
withdrawn for any of the following reasons:
(i) Appropriate and/or sufficient Federal Government personnel are
not available;
(ii) Proper inspectional facilities or equipment are not available
at, or maintained by, the requested airport;
(iii) The entity requesting the landing rights has a history of
failing to abide by appropriate instructions given by a CBP officer;
(iv) Reasonable grounds exist to believe that applicable Federal
rules and regulations pertaining to safety, including cargo safety and
security, CBP, or other inspectional activities may not be adhered to;
(v) The granting of the requested landing rights would not be in
the best interests of the Government; or
(vi) CBP has deemed it necessary to deny landing rights to an
aircraft.
(5) Appeal of denial or withdrawal of landing rights for commercial
scheduled aircraft as defined in 122.1(d). In the event landing rights
are denied or subsequently permanently withdrawn by CBP, within 30 days
of such decision, the affected party may file a written appeal with the
Assistant Commissioner, Office of Field Operations, Headquarters.
(6) Emergency or forced landing. Permission to land is not required
for an emergency or forced landing (covered under Sec. 122.35).
(b) Payment of expenses. In the case of an arrival at a location
outside the limits of a port of entry, the owner, operator or person in
charge of the aircraft must pay any added charges for inspecting the
aircraft, passengers, employees and merchandise when landing rights are
given (see Sec. Sec. 24.17 and 24.22(e) of this chapter).
5. Revise Sec. 122.22 to read as follows:
Sec. 122.22 Electronic manifest requirement for all individuals
onboard private aircraft arriving in and departing from the United
States; notice of arrival and departure information.
(a) Definitions. For purposes of this section:
Departure. ``Departure'' means the point at which the aircraft is
airborne and the aircraft is en route directly to its destination.
Departure Information. ``Departure Information'' refers to the data
elements that are required to be electronically submitted to CBP
pursuant to paragraph (c)(4) of this section.
Pilot. ``Pilot'' means the individual(s) responsible for operation
of an aircraft while in flight.
Travel Document. ``Travel Document'' means U.S. Department of
Homeland Security approved travel documents.
United States. ``United States'' means the continental United
States, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands of
the United States.
(b) Electronic manifest requirement for all individuals onboard
private aircraft in the U.S.; notice of arrival.
(1) General requirement. The private aircraft pilot is responsible
for ensuring the notice of arrival and manifest information regarding
each individual onboard the aircraft are transmitted to CBP. The pilot
is responsible for submitting this information, but may authorize
another party to submit the information on their behalf. All data must
be transmitted to CBP by means of an electronic data interchange system
approved by CBP and must set forth the information specified in this
section. All data pertaining to the notice of arrival for the aircraft
and the manifest data regarding each individual onboard the aircraft
must be transmitted at the same time via an electronic data interchange
system approved by CBP.
(2) Time for submission. The private aircraft pilot is responsible
for ensuring that the information specified in paragraphs (b)(3) and
(b)(4) of this section is transmitted to CBP:
(i) No later than 60 minutes prior to departure of the aircraft; or
(ii) For flights not originally destined to the United States but
diverted to a U.S. port due to an emergency, no later than 30 minutes
prior to arrival; in cases of non-compliance, CBP will take into
consideration that the carrier was not equipped to make the
transmission and the circumstances of the emergency situation.
(3) Manifest data required. For private aircraft arriving in the
United States the following identifying information for each individual
onboard the aircraft must be submitted:
(i) Full name (last, first, and, if available, middle);
(ii) Date of birth;
(iii) Gender (F=female; M=male);
(iv) Citizenship;
(v) Country of residence;
(vi) Status onboard the aircraft;
(vii) Travel document type (e.g. P=passport; A=alien registration
card);
(viii) Passport number, if a passport is required or approved DHS
travel document;
(ix) Passport/Travel document country of issuance;
(x) Passport (or other DHS approved travel document) expiration
date;
(xi) Alien registration number, where applicable;
(xii) Address while in the United States (number and street, city,
state, and zip code). This information is required for all travelers
and crew onboard the aircraft;
(xiii) Redress number, if available.
(4) Notice of arrival. The advance notice of arrival must include
the following that applies to the aircraft:
(i) Aircraft registration number;
(ii) Type of Aircraft;
(iii) Call sign (if available);
(iv) Decal number;
(v) Place of last departure;
(vi) Date of aircraft arrival;
(vii) Estimated time of arrival;
(viii) Estimated time and location of crossing U.S. border/
coastline;
(ix) Name of intended U.S. airport of first landing (as listed in
122.24 if applicable, unless an exemption has been granted under
122.25, or the aircraft was inspected by CBP Officers in the U.S.
Virgin Islands);
(x) Owner/Lessee's name (last, first, and, if available, middle);
(xii) Owner/Lessee's address (number and street, city, state, zip
code, country, telephone no., fax no., and e-mail address);
(xii) Pilot/Private aircraft pilot name;
(xiii) Pilot license number;
(xiv) Pilot street address (number and street, city, state, zip
code, country,
[[Page 53405]]
telephone no., fax no., and e-mail address);
(xv) Country of issuance of pilot's license;
(xvi) Operator name (last, first, and if available, middle);
(xvii) Operator street address (number and street, city, state, zip
code, country, telephone no., fax no., and e-mail address);
(xviii) Transponder code (beacon number);
(xix) Color;
(xx) Complete Itinerary (foreign airports landed at within past 24
hours prior to landing in United States);
(xxi) 24-hour Point of contact (e.g., broker, dispatcher, repair
shop) name and phone number.
(5) Reliable facilities. When reliable means for giving notice are
not available (for example, when departure is from a remote place) a
landing must be made at a foreign place where notice can be sent prior
to coming into the United States.
(6) Permission to depart. Prior to departure from the foreign port
or place, the pilot of a private aircraft must receive a message from
DHS approving departure for the United States, or following any
instructions contained therein prior to departure.
(7) Changes to manifest. The private aircraft pilot is obligated to
make necessary changes to the arrival manifest after transmission of
the manifest to CBP. If changes are necessary, an updated and amended
manifest must be resubmitted. If a subsequent manifest is submitted
less than 60 minutes prior to departure, the private aircraft pilot
must resubmit the arrival manifest and receive approval from CBP for
the amended manifest containing the added or amended information before
allowing the aircraft to depart the foreign location, or the aircraft
may be, as appropriate, denied clearance to depart, diverted from
arriving in the United States, or denied permission to land in the
United States. If a subsequent amended manifest is submitted by the
pilot, any approval to depart the foreign port or location previously
granted by CBP as a result of the original manifest's submission is
invalid.
(c) Electronic manifest requirement for all individuals onboard
private aircraft departing from the United States; departure
information.
(1) General requirement. The private aircraft pilot is responsible
for ensuring that information regarding private aircraft departing the
United States, and manifest data for all individuals onboard the
aircraft is timely transmitted to CBP. The pilot is responsible for
submitting this information, but may authorize another party to submit
the information on their behalf. All data must be transmitted to CBP by
means of an electronic data interchange system approved by CBP, and
must set forth the information specified in paragraph (c)(3). All data
pertaining to the aircraft, and all individuals on board the aircraft
must be transmitted at the same time.
(2) Time for submission. The private aircraft pilot must transmit
the electronic data required under paragraphs (c)(3) and (c)(4) of this
section to CBP no later than 60 minutes prior to departing the United
States.
(3) Manifest data required. For private aircraft departing the
United States the following identifying information for all individuals
onboard the aircraft must be submitted:
(i) Full name of all individuals onboard the aircraft (last, first,
and, if available, middle);
(ii) Date of birth;
(iii) Gender (F=female; M=male);
(iv) Citizenship;
(v) Country of residence;
(vi) Status on board the aircraft;
(vii) Travel document type (e.g. P=passport; A=alien registration
card);
(viii) Passport number, if a passport is required, or approved DHS
travel document;
(ix) Passport/Travel document country of issuance, if such a
document is required;
(x) Passport/Travel document expiration date, if such a document is
required;
(xi) Alien registration number, where applicable;
(xii). Address while in the United States (number and street, city,
state, and zip code). This information is required for all travelers
and crew onboard the aircraft;
(xiii) Redress number, if available.
(4) Notice of Departure information. For private aircraft departing
the United States, the following departure information must be
submitted:
(i) Aircraft registration number;
(ii) Type of Aircraft;
(iii) Call sign (if available);
(iv) Decal number;
(v) Place of last departure;
(vi) Date of aircraft departure;
(vii) Estimated time of departure;
(viii) Estimated time and location of crossing U.S. border/
coastline;
(ix) Name of intended foreign airport of first landing;
(x) Owner/Lessee's name (last, first, and, if available, middle);
(xi) Owner/Lessee's street address (number and street, city, state,
zip code, country, telephone no., fax no., and e-mail address);
(xii) Pilot/Private aircraft pilot name (last, first and, if
available, middle);
(xiii) Pilot license number;
(xiv) Pilot street address (number and street, city, state, zip
code, country, telephone no., fax no., and e-mail address);
(xv) Country of issuance of pilot's license;
(xvi) Operator name (last, first, and if available, middle):
(xvii) Operator street address (number and street, city, state, zip
code, country, telephone no., fax no., and e-mail address);
(xviii) 24-hour Point of contact (e.g., broker, dispatcher, repair
shop) name and phone number;
(xix) Transponder code (beacon number);
(xx) Color;
(xxi) Complete itinerary (intended foreign airport destinations for
24 hours following departure).
(5) Permission to depart. Prior to departure from the foreign port
or place, the pilot of a private aircraft must receive a message from
DHS approving departure for the United States, or following any
instructions contained therein prior to departure.
(6) Changes to manifest. The private aircraft pilot is obligated to
make necessary changes to the manifest data after transmission of the
manifest to CBP. If changes are necessary, an updated and amended
manifest must be resubmitted. If a subsequent manifest is submitted
less than 60 minutes prior to departure, the private aircraft pilot
must resubmit the arrival manifest and receive approval from CBP for
the amended manifest containing the added or amended information before
allowing the aircraft to depart the U.S. location, or the aircraft may
be, as appropriate, denied clearance to depart from the United States.
If a subsequent, amended manifest is submitted by the pilot, any
clearance previously granted by CBP as a result of the original
manifest's submission is invalid.
7. Amend Sec. 122.23 by revising the section heading and the
heading of paragraph (a), the introductory text of paragraph (a)(1) and
paragraph (b). The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 122.23 Certain aircraft arriving from areas south of the U.S.
(a) Application. (1) This section sets forth particular
requirements for certain aircraft arriving from south of the United
States. This section is applicable to all aircraft except:
* * * * *
(b) Notice of arrival. All aircraft described in paragraph (a) of
this section arriving in the Continental
[[Page 53406]]
United States via the U.S./Mexican border or the Pacific Coast from a
foreign place in the Western Hemisphere south of 33 degrees north
latitude, or from the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Coast from a place in
the Western Hemisphere south of 30 degrees north latitude, from any
place in Mexico, from the U.S. Virgin Islands, or (notwithstanding the
definition of ``United States'' in 122.1(1)) from Puerto Rico (if
conducting flight rules ), must furnish a notice of intended arrival.
Private aircraft must transmit an advance notice of arrival as set
forth in Sec. 122.22 of this part. Other than private aircraft, all
aircraft to which this section applies must communicate to CBP notice
of arrival at least one hour before crossing the U.S. coastline by
telephone, radio, other method or the Federal Aviation Administration
in accordance with paragraph (c) of this section.
8. Amend Sec. 122.24 by revising the section heading, paragraph
(a), the heading to paragraph (b) and removing all of the text of
paragraph (b) except for the table. The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 122.24 Landing requirements for certain aircraft arriving from
areas south of U.S.
(a) In general. Certain aircraft arriving from areas south of the
United States that are subject to 122.23 are required to furnish a
notice of intended arrival in compliance with Sec. 122.23. Subject
aircraft must land for CBP processing at the nearest designated airport
to the border or coastline crossing point as listed under paragraph (b)
unless exempted from this requirement in accordance with Sec. 122.25.
In addition to the requirements of this section, pilots of aircraft to
which Sec. 122.23 is applicable must comply with all other landing and
notice of arrival requirements. This requirement shall not apply to
those aircraft which have not landed in foreign territory or are
arriving directly from Puerto Rico or if the aircraft was inspected by
CBP officers in the U.S. Virgin Islands.
(b) List of designated airports.
* * * * *
9. Amend Sec. 122.25 to replace the term ``private aircraft,''
wherever it appears with the term ``an aircraft subject to 122.23.''
10. Revise Sec. 122.26 to read as follows:
Sec. 122.26 Entry and clearance.
Private aircraft, as defined in Sec. 122.1(h) arriving in the
United States, are not required to formally enter. No later than 60
minutes prior to departure from the United States to a foreign
location, manifest data for all individuals onboard a private aircraft
and departure information must be submitted as set forth in Sec.
122.22(c). Private aircraft must not depart the United States to travel
to a foreign location until CBP confirms receipt of the appropriate
manifest and departure information as set forth in Sec. 122.22(c), and
grants electronic clearance via electronic mail or telephone.
11. Revise Sec. 122.31 to read as follows:
Sec. 122.31 Notice of arrival.
(a) Application. Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this
section, all aircraft entering the United States from a foreign area
shall give advance notice of arrival.
(b) Exceptions for scheduled aircraft of a scheduled airline.
Advance notice is not required for aircraft of a scheduled airline
arriving under a regular schedule. The regular schedule must have been
filed with the port director for the airport where the first landing is
made.
(c) Giving notice of arrival--(1) Procedure.--(i) Private aircraft.
The pilot of a private aircraft must give advance notice of arrival in
accordance with Sec. 122.22 of this part.
(ii) Aircraft arriving from Cuba. Aircraft arriving from Cuba must
follow the advance notice of arrival procedures set forth in Sec.
122.154 in subpart O of this part.
(iii) Certain aircraft arriving from areas south of the United
States. Certain aircraft arriving from areas south of the United States
(other than Cuba) must follow the advance notice of arrival procedures
set forth in Sec. 122.23 of this part.
(iv) Other aircraft. The commander of an aircraft not otherwise
covered by paragraphs (c)(i), (c)(ii) and (c)(iii) of this section must
give advance notice of arrival as set forth in paragraph (d) of this
section. Notice shall be given to the port director at the place of
first landing, either:
(A) Directly by radio, telephone, or other method; or
(B) Through Federal Aviation Administration flight notification
procedure (see International Flight Information Manual, Federal
Aviation Administration).
(2) Reliable facilities. When reliable means for giving notice are
not available (for example, when departure is from a remote place) a
landing shall be made at a place where notice can be sent prior to
coming into the U.S.
(d) Contents of notice. The advance notice of arrival required by
aircraft covered in paragraph (c)(iv) of this section must include the
following information:
(1) Type of aircraft and registration number;
(2) Name of aircraft commander;
(3) Place of last foreign departure;
(4) International airport of intended landing or other place at
which landing has been authorized by CBP;
(5) Number of alien passengers;
(6) Number of citizen passengers; and
(7) Estimated time of arrival.
(e) Time of notice. Notice of arrival as required pursuant to
paragraph (c)(iv) of this section must be furnished far enough in
advance to allow inspecting CBP officers to reach the place of first
landing of the aircraft.
(f) Notice of other Federal agencies. When advance notice is
received, the port director shall inform any other concerned Federal
agency.
12. Revise Sec. 122.32 to read as follows:
Sec. 122.32 Aircraft required to land.
(a) Any aircraft coming into the U.S., from an area outside of the
U.S., is required to land, unless it is denied permission to land in
the U.S. by CBP pursuant to 122.12(c), or is exempted from landing by
the Federal Aviation Administration.
(b) Conditional permission to land. CBP has the authority to limit
the locations where aircraft entering the U.S. from a foreign area may
land. As such, aircraft must land at the airport designated in their
APIS transmission unless instructed otherwise by CBP.
13. In Sec. 122.61 revise the introductory text of paragraph (a)
to read as follows:
Sec. 122.61 Aircraft required to clear.
(a) Private aircraft leaving the United States for a foreign area
are required to clear as set forth in Sec. 122.26. All other aircraft,
except for public aircraft, leaving the United States for a foreign
area, are required to clear if:
* * * * *
14. Amend Sec. 122.154 by adding paragraph (d) below, and revising
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 122.154 Notice of arrival.
(a) Application. All aircraft entering the U.S. from Cuba shall
give advance notice of arrival, unless it is an Office of Foreign
Assets Control (OFAC) approved, scheduled commercial aircraft of a
scheduled airline.
* * * * *
(d) Private Aircraft. In addition to these requirements, private
aircraft must also give notice of arrival pursuant to Sec. 122.22 of
this part.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-18121 Filed 9-17-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
posted by registeredtraveler @ 10:08 AM
0 comments
Links
Previous Posts
- Mass Surveillance in the EU
- Holiday Travel
- Update as of 18Nov2013
- Behavior Detection
- Admit it. . .
- Update
- Competition
- Update
- Surveillance, privacy and history
- Nuclear Terrorism Response Plans
Archives
- May 2005
- June 2005
- July 2005
- August 2005
- September 2005
- October 2005
- November 2005
- December 2005
- January 2006
- February 2006
- March 2006
- April 2006
- May 2006
- June 2006
- July 2006
- August 2006
- September 2006
- October 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- April 2007
- May 2007
- June 2007
- July 2007
- August 2007
- September 2007
- October 2007
- November 2007
- December 2007
- January 2008
- February 2008
- March 2008
- April 2008
- May 2008
- June 2008
- July 2008
- August 2008
- October 2008
- November 2008
- December 2008
- January 2009
- February 2009
- March 2009
- April 2009
- May 2009
- June 2009
- July 2009
- August 2009
- September 2009
- October 2009
- November 2009
- December 2009
- January 2010
- February 2010
- March 2010
- April 2010
- May 2010
- June 2010
- July 2010
- August 2010
- September 2010
- October 2010
- November 2010
- December 2010
- January 2011
- February 2011
- March 2011
- April 2011
- May 2011
- June 2011
- July 2011
- August 2011
- September 2011
- October 2011
- November 2011
- December 2011
- January 2012
- February 2012
- March 2012
- April 2012
- May 2012
- June 2012
- July 2012
- August 2012
- September 2012
- October 2012
- November 2012
- December 2012
- January 2013
- February 2013
- March 2013
- April 2013
- May 2013
- June 2013
- July 2013
- August 2013
- September 2013
- October 2013
- November 2013
- December 2013
- Current Posts
