Economic Development Administration
International Trade Administration
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Antitrust Division
Federal Aviation Administration
Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, and notice of recently enacted public laws.
To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents electronic mailing list, go to https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USGPOOFR/subscriber/new, enter your e-mail address, then follow the instructions to join, leave, or manage your subscription.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Direct final rule.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its spent fuel storage regulations by revising the Holtec International HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System listing within the “List of approved spent fuel storage casks” to include Revision 1 to Amendment Nos. 0 through 2 to Certificate of Compliance (CoC) No. 1040. Revision 1 to Amendment Nos. 0 through 2 updates the CoC appendix A technical specifications for radiation protection and the associated bases information to clearly articulate the basis for the dose rate limits for the closure lids, modify the dose rate limit values and the description of the location of the dose rate measurements, and make other editorial changes.
This direct final rule is effective April 21, 2025, unless significant adverse comments are received by March 6, 2025. If this direct final rule is withdrawn as a result of such comments, timely notice of the withdrawal will be published in the
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID NRC-2024-0182, at
You can read a plain language description of this direct final rule at
George Tartal, Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards, telephone: 301-415-0016, email:
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2024-0182 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly available information related to this action by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
The NRC encourages electronic comment submission through the Federal rulemaking website (
The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at
If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information
This rule is limited to the changes contained in Revision 1 to Amendment Nos. 0 through 2 to CoC No. 1040 and does not include other aspects of the Holtec International HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System design. The NRC is using the “direct final rule procedure” to issue this revision because it represents a limited and routine change to an existing CoC that is expected to be non-controversial. Adequate protection of public health and safety continues to be reasonably assured. The amendment to the rule will become effective on April 21, 2025. However, if the NRC receives any significant adverse comment on this direct final rule by March 6, 2025, then the NRC will publish a document that withdraws this action and will subsequently address the comments received in a final rule as a response to the companion proposed rule published in the Proposed Rules section of this issue of the
A significant adverse comment is a comment where the commenter explains why the rule would be inappropriate, including challenges to the rule's underlying premise or approach, or would be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. A comment is adverse and significant if:
(1) The comment opposes the rule and provides a reason sufficient to require a substantive response in a notice-and-comment process. For example, a substantive response is required when:
(a) The comment causes the NRC to reevaluate (or reconsider) its position or conduct additional analysis;
(b) The comment raises an issue serious enough to warrant a substantive response to clarify or complete the record; or
(c) The comment raises a relevant issue that was not previously addressed or considered by the NRC.
(2) The comment proposes a change or an addition to the rule, and it is apparent that the rule would be ineffective or unacceptable without incorporation of the change or addition.
(3) The comment causes the NRC to make a change (other than editorial) to the rule, CoC, or technical specifications.
Section 218(a) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended, requires that “[t]he Secretary [of the Department of Energy] shall establish a demonstration program, in cooperation with the private sector, for the dry storage of spent nuclear fuel at civilian nuclear power reactor sites, with the objective of establishing one or more technologies that the [Nuclear Regulatory] Commission may, by rule, approve for use at the sites of civilian nuclear power reactors without, to the maximum extent practicable, the need for additional site-specific approvals by the Commission.” Section 133 of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act states, in part, that “[t]he Commission shall, by rule, establish procedures for the licensing of any technology approved by the Commission under Section 219(a) [sic: 218(a)] for use at the site of any civilian nuclear power reactor.”
To implement this mandate, the Commission approved dry storage of spent nuclear fuel in NRC-approved casks under a general license by publishing a final rule that added a new subpart K in part 72 of title 10 of the
On May 5, 2023, Holtec International (Holtec) submitted a request to the NRC to revise CoC No. 1040 Amendment Nos. 0 through 2. Holtec supplemented its request on the following dates: January 31, 2024, March 4, 2024, and June 26, 2024. Revision 1 to Amendment Nos. 0 through 2 updates CoC No. 1040 appendix A technical specifications for radiation protection and the associated bases information to clearly articulate the basis for the dose rate limits for the closure lids, and to modify the dose rate limit values and the description of the location of the dose rate measurements. This revision also makes other editorial changes. The changes to the aforementioned documents are identified with revision bars in the margin of each document.
As documented in the preliminary safety evaluation report, the NRC performed a safety evaluation of the proposed CoC revision request. The NRC determined that this revision does not reflect a significant change in design or fabrication of the cask. Specifically, the NRC determined that the design of the cask would continue to maintain confinement, shielding, and criticality control in the event of each evaluated accident condition. In addition, any resulting occupational exposure or offsite dose rates from the implementation of Revision 1 to Amendment Nos. 0 through 2 would remain well within the limits specified by 10 CFR part 20, “Standards for Protection Against Radiation.” Thus, the NRC found there will be no significant change in the types or amounts of any effluent released, no significant increase in the individual or cumulative radiation exposure, and no significant increase in the potential for or consequences from radiological accidents.
The NRC determined that the revised HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System design, when used under the conditions specified in the CoC, the technical specifications, and the NRC's regulations, will meet the requirements of 10 CFR part 72; therefore, adequate protection of public health and safety will continue to be reasonably assured. When this direct final rule becomes effective, persons who hold a general license under § 72.210 may, consistent with the license conditions under § 72.212, load spent nuclear fuel into Holtec International HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System casks that meet the criteria of Revision 1 to Amendment Nos. 0 through 2 to CoC No. 1040.
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-113) requires that Federal agencies use technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies unless the use of such a standard is inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. In this direct final rule, the NRC revises the Holtec International HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System design listed in § 72.214, “List of approved spent fuel storage casks.” This action does not constitute the establishment of a standard that contains generally applicable requirements.
Under the “Agreement State Program Policy Statement” approved by the Commission on October 2, 2017, and published in the
The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-274) requires Federal agencies to write documents in a clear, concise, and well-organized manner. The NRC has written this document to be consistent with the Plain Writing Act as well as the Presidential Memorandum, “Plain Language in Government Writing,” published June 10, 1998 (63 FR 31885).
Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, and the NRC's regulations in 10 CFR part 51, “Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions,” the NRC has determined that this direct final rule, if adopted, would not be a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment and, therefore, an environmental impact statement is not required. The NRC has made a finding of no significant impact on the basis of this environmental assessment.
The action is to amend § 72.214 to revise the Holtec International HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System listing within the “List of approved spent fuel storage casks” to include Revision 1 to Amendment Nos. 0 through 2 to CoC No. 1040.
This direct final rule revises the CoC for the Holtec International HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System design within the list of approved spent fuel storage casks to allow power reactor licensees to store spent fuel at reactor sites in casks with the approved modifications under a general license. Specifically, Revision 1 to Amendment Nos. 0 through 2 revises the CoC to update the CoC appendix A technical specifications for radiation protection and the associated bases information to clearly articulate the basis for the dose rate limits for the closure lids, modify the dose rate limit values and the description of the location of the dose rate measurements, and make other editorial changes.
On July 18,1990 (55 FR 29181), the NRC issued an amendment to 10 CFR part 72 to provide for the storage of spent fuel under a general license in cask designs approved by the NRC. The potential environmental impact of using NRC-approved storage casks was analyzed in the environmental assessment for the 1990 final rule. The environmental assessment for this Revision 1 to Amendment Nos. 0 through 2 tiers off of the environmental assessment for the July 18, 1990, final rule. Tiering on past environmental assessments is a standard process under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.
The Holtec International HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System is designed to mitigate the effects of design basis accidents that could occur during storage. Design basis accidents account for human-induced events and the most severe natural phenomena reported for the site and surrounding area. Postulated accidents analyzed for an independent spent fuel storage installation, the type of facility at which a holder of a power reactor operating license would store spent fuel in casks in accordance with 10 CFR part 72, can include tornado winds and tornado-generated missiles, a design basis earthquake, a design basis flood, an accidental cask drop, lightning effects, fire, explosions, and other incidents.
This revision does not reflect a significant change in design or fabrication of the cask. Because there are no significant design or process changes, any resulting occupational exposure or offsite dose rates from the implementation of Revision 1 to Amendment Nos. 0 through 2 would remain well within the 10 CFR part 20 limits. The NRC has also determined that the design of the cask as modified by this rule would maintain confinement, shielding, and criticality control in the event of an accident. Therefore, the proposed changes will not result in any radiological or non-radiological environmental impacts that significantly differ from the environmental impacts evaluated in the environmental assessment supporting the July 18, 1990, final rule. There will be no significant change in the types or significant revisions in the amounts of any effluent released, no significant increase in the individual or cumulative radiation exposures, and no significant increase in the potential for, or consequences from, radiological accidents. The NRC documented its safety findings in the preliminary safety evaluation report.
The alternative to this action is to deny approval of Revision 1 to Amendment Nos. 0 through 2 and not issue the direct final rule. Consequently, any 10 CFR part 72 general licensee that seeks to load spent nuclear fuel into the Holtec International HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System in accordance with the changes described in proposed Revision 1 to Amendment Nos. 0 through 2 would have to request an exemption from the requirements of §§ 72.212 and 72.214. Under this alternative, interested licensees would have to prepare, and the NRC would have to review, a separate exemption request, thereby increasing the administrative burden upon the NRC and the costs to each licensee. The environmental impacts would be the same as the proposed action.
Approval of Revision 1 to Amendment Nos. 0 through 2 to CoC No. 1040 would result in no irreversible and irretrievable commitments of Federal resources.
No agencies or persons outside the NRC were contacted in connection with the preparation of this environmental assessment.
The environmental impacts of the action have been reviewed under the requirements in the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, and the NRC's regulations in subpart A of 10 CFR part 51, “Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions.” Based on the foregoing environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that this direct final rule, “List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: Holtec International HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System, Certificate of Compliance No. 1040, Revision 1 to Amendment Nos. 0 through 2,” will not have a significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, the NRC has determined that an environmental impact statement is not necessary for this direct final rule.
This direct final rule does not contain any new or amended collections of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a request for information or an information collection requirement unless the requesting document displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget control number.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the NRC certifies that this direct final rule will not, if issued, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This direct final rule affects only nuclear power plant licensees and Holtec. These entities do not fall within the scope of the definition of small entities set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act or the size standards established by the NRC (§ 2.810).
On July 18, 1990 (55 FR 29181), the NRC issued an amendment to 10 CFR part 72 to provide for the storage of spent nuclear fuel under a general license in cask designs approved by the NRC. Any nuclear power reactor licensee can use NRC-approved cask designs to store spent nuclear fuel if (1) it notifies the NRC in advance; (2) the spent fuel is stored under the conditions specified in the cask's CoC; and (3) the conditions of the general license are met. A list of NRC-approved cask designs is contained in § 72.214. On March 6, 2015 (80 FR 12073), as corrected (80 FR 15679; March 25, 2015), the NRC issued an amendment to 10 CFR part 72 that approved the Holtec International HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System by adding it to the list of NRC-approved cask designs in § 72.214.
On May 5, 2023, and as supplemented on January 31, 2024, March 4, 2024, and June 26, 2024, Holtec submitted a request to revise the HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System as described in Section IV, “Discussion of Changes,” of this document.
The alternative to this action is to withhold approval of Revision 1 to Amendment Nos. 0 through 2 and to require any 10 CFR part 72 general licensee seeking to load spent nuclear fuel into Holtec International HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System under the changes described in Revision 1 to Amendment Nos. 0 through 2 to request an exemption from the requirements of §§ 72.212 and 72.214. Under this alternative, each interested 10 CFR part 72 licensee would have to prepare, and the NRC would have to review, a separate exemption request, thereby increasing the administrative burden upon the NRC and the costs to each licensee.
Approval of this direct final rule is consistent with previous NRC actions. Further, as documented in the preliminary safety evaluation report and environmental assessment, this direct final rule will have no adverse effect on public health and safety or the environment. This direct final rule has no significant identifiable impact or benefit on other government agencies. Based on this regulatory analysis, the NRC concludes that the requirements of this direct final rule are commensurate with the NRC's responsibilities for public health and safety and the common defense and security. No other available alternative is believed to be as satisfactory; therefore, this action is recommended.
General licensees using CoC amendments that are being revised are required to meet the conditions of the revised CoC. The NRC added a condition to the revised CoC No. 1040 that requires the general licensee to implement the revised CoC within six months and perform written evaluations in accordance with 10 CFR 72.212(b)(5), which establish that the cask will conform to the terms, conditions, and specifications of the revised CoC. The six-month timeframe in the condition is considered a standard timeframe for implementation, consistent with the information in Regulatory Issue Summary 2017-05, “Administration of 10 CFR part 72 Certificate of Compliance Corrections and Revisions.” Additionally, the implementation timeframe was recognized by the applicant and the general licensee using this amendment (ML24178A111).
For the following reasons, the NRC has determined that this direct final rule does not constitute backfitting under 10 CFR 72.62, “Backfitting.” This direct final rule revises Amendment Nos. 0, 1, and 2 of CoC No. 1040 for the HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System, as currently listed in 10 CFR 72.214, “List of approved spent fuel storage casks.” Revision 1 to Amendment Nos. 0, 1, and 2 includes changes to CoC appendix A technical specifications for radiation protection and the associated bases information to clearly articulate the basis for the dose rate limits for the closure lids and modify the dose rate limit values and the description of the location of the dose rate measurements.
Holtec has manufactured casks under existing CoC No. 1040, Amendment Nos. 0, 1, or 2, that are being revised by this final rule. As the vendor, Holtec is not within the scope of the backfitting provisions in 10 CFR 72.62.
Under 10 CFR 72.62, general licensees are entities that are within the scope of the backfitting regulations. However, according to Holtec (ML24178A112), no general licensees are currently storing UMAX systems under CoC No. 1040, Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, which are, in part, the subject of these revisions. Therefore, because CoC No. 1040, Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 are not in use by a licensee, the changes in the revision to CoC No. 1040, Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, which are approved in this direct final rule do not fall within the definition of backfitting under 10 CFR 72.62.
Ameren Missouri at its Callaway Energy Center Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation is the only general licensee using Amendment No. 0 that could be affected by the issuance of Revision 1 to Amendment No. 0. In its letters to Holtec (ML23125A246 and ML24178A113), Ameren Missouri stated that it intends to adopt and implement Revision 1 to Amendment No. 0. Because the licensee voluntarily intends to implement the revision, the issuance of Revision 1 to Amendment No. 0 does not fall within the definition of backfitting under 10 CFR 72.62.
This direct final rule is not a rule as defined in the Congressional Review Act.
The documents identified in the following table are available to interested persons as indicated.
The NRC may post materials related to this document, including public comments, on the Federal rulemaking website at
Administrative practice and procedure, Hazardous waste, Indians, Intergovernmental relations, Nuclear energy, Penalties, Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Spent fuel, Whistleblowing.
For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended; the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553; the NRC is adopting the following amendments to 10 CFR part 72:
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, secs. 51, 53, 57, 62, 63, 65, 69, 81, 161, 182, 183, 184, 186, 187, 189, 223, 234, 274 (42 U.S.C. 2071, 2073, 2077, 2092, 2093, 2095, 2099, 2111, 2201, 2210e, 2232, 2233, 2234, 2236, 2237, 2238, 2273, 2282, 2021); Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, secs. 201, 202, 206, 211 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846, 5851); National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332); Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, secs. 117(a), 132, 133, 134, 135, 137, 141, 145(g), 148, 218(a) (42 U.S.C. 10137(a), 10152, 10153, 10154, 10155, 10157, 10161, 10165(g), 10168, 10198(a)); 44 U.S.C. 3504 note.
Amendment Number 3 [Reserved]
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Airbus SAS Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a full-scale fatigue test that found cracks on the main landing gear (MLG) bay rear skin panel at the stringer run-out at Frame 46 and Stringer 32 on the left-hand and right-hand sides. This AD requires repetitive special detailed inspections (SDIs) of the affected area for cracking and applicable corrective actions, as specified in a European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is incorporated by reference. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective March 11, 2025.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of March 11, 2025.
• For EASA material identified in this AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
• You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195. It is also available at
Tim Dowling, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 206-231-3667; email
The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Airbus SAS Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes; Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes. The NPRM published in the
In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require repetitive SDIs of the affected area for cracking and applicable corrective actions, as specified in EASA AD 2024-0089. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at
The FAA received comments from Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA) and United Airlines, who supported the NPRM without change.
This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on this product. Except for minor editorial changes, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic burden on any operator.
EASA AD 2024-0089 specifies procedures for repetitive SDIs of the MLG bay rear skin panel at the stringer run-out at Frame 46 and Stringer 32 on the left-hand and right-hand sides and applicable corrective actions. Corrective actions include crack repair. This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
The FAA estimates that this AD affects 1,857 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:
The FAA has received no definitive data on which to base the cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this AD.
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.
The FAA is 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.
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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective March 11, 2025.
None.
This AD applies to Airbus SAS Model airplanes specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this AD, certificated in any category, as identified in European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2024-0089, dated April 15, 2024 (EASA AD 2024-0089).
(1) Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, and -133 airplanes.
(2) Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, and -233 airplanes.
(3) Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, and -232 airplanes.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.
This AD was prompted by a full-scale fatigue test that found cracks on the main landing gear (MLG) bay rear skin panel at the stringer run-out at Frame 46 and Stringer 32 on the left-hand and right-hand sides. The FAA is issuing this AD to detect potential fatigue cracking on the MLG bay rear skin panel at the stringer run-out at Frame 46 and Stringer 32 on the left-hand and right-hand sides. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could lead to crack propagation, possibly resulting in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Except as specified in paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD: Comply with all required actions and compliance times specified in, and in accordance with, EASA AD 2024-0089.
(1) Where EASA AD 2024-0089 refers to its effective date, this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
(2) Where paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2024-0089 specifies “If, during any inspection as required by paragraph (1) of this AD, discrepancies are detected, as defined in the SB, before next flight, contact Airbus for approved repair instructions and accomplish those instructions accordingly,” this AD requires replacing that text with “If, during any inspection as required by paragraph (1) of this AD, any cracking is found, before next flight, repair the cracking using a method approved by the Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.”
(3) This AD does not adopt the “Remarks” section of EASA AD 2024-0089.
Although the material referenced in EASA AD 2024-0089 specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement.
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(2)
(3)
For more information about this AD, contact Tim Dowling, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 206-231-3667; email:
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of the material listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this material as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2024-0089, dated April 15, 2024.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) For EASA material identified in this AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
(4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this material at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, visit
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Embraer S.A. Model EMB-135ER, -135KE, -135KL, and -135LR airplanes; and Model EMB-145, -145EP, -145ER, -145LR, -145MP, -145MR, and -145XR airplanes. This AD was prompted by a structural assessment that indicated certain central fuselage longitudinal splices are subjected to fatigue damage on multiple sites due to loose fasteners, which may reduce the structural residual strength below the required levels. This AD requires performing repetitive inspections of certain upper central fuselage longitudinal splices and reporting the inspection results, as specified in an Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (ANAC) AD, which is incorporated by reference. This AD also requires performing corrective actions if necessary. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective March 11, 2025.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of March 11, 2025.
• For ANAC material identified in this AD, contact National Civil Aviation Agency (ANAC), Aeronautical Products Certification Branch (GGCP), Rua Dr. Orlando Feirabend Filho, 230—Centro Empresarial Aquarius—Torre B—Andares 14 a 18, Parque Residencial Aquarius, CEP 12.246-190—São José dos Campos—SP, Brazil; telephone 55 (12) 3203-6600; email
• You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195. It is also available at
Hassan Ibrahim, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: 206-231-3653; email:
The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Embraer S.A. Model EMB-135ER, -135KE, -135KL, and -135LR airplanes; and Model EMB-145, -145EP, -145ER, -145LR, -145MP, -145MR, and -145XR airplanes. The NPRM published in the
In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require performing repetitive inspections of certain upper central fuselage longitudinal splices and reporting the inspection results, as specified in ANAC AD 2024-04-03R01. The NPRM also proposed to require performing corrective actions if necessary. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at
The FAA received a comment from Embraer. The following presents the comment received on the NPRM and the FAA's response.
Embraer requested the FAA withdraw the proposed AD. The commenter stated the proposed AD is based on the occurrence of nonconforming (loose, failed or missing) rivets detected in tests that exceeded applicable regulatory requirements, and there has been no in-service occurrence to prompt the structural assessment used to justify the proposed AD. The commenter stated that the maintenance plan for Model EMB-145 airplanes includes inspection tasks that allow for timely detection of nonconforming rivets. The commenter stated analysis related to working rivets show that the probability of failure of a rivet of fuselage longitudinal splices under operational conditions is less than one percent at 60,000 flight cycles. Embraer added that, assuming the additional inspections are necessary, the proposed inspection times are overly conservative. The commenter added that a significant reduction in the structural residual strength requires the
The FAA disagrees with the request. ANAC, as the state of design authority, has determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to persist based on the data provided. ANAC reviewed current maintenance tasks and stated they are not adequate to address the unsafe condition. The FAA contacted ANAC, who stated an analysis was unable to establish the exact cause of failure; therefore, a conservative course of action is required. The FAA concurs with ANAC's determination. If ANAC later withdraws their AD due to concluding existing inspections are sufficient, the FAA may consider further rulemaking.
The FAA revised paragraph (h)(3) of this AD to clarify that any discrepancy (including cracking) that is detected must be repaired. In the NPRM, the FAA inadvertently said that if cracking is found, the discrepancy (including cracking) must be repaired.
This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on this product. Except for minor editorial changes, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic burden on any operator.
ANAC AD 2024-04-03R01 specifies an initial and repetitive external detailed inspections of the upper central fuselage II, III, and IV longitudinal splices to identify loose fasteners, contacting the manufacturer if any discrepancy is found, and reporting the inspection results. Discrepancies include loose fasteners, missing rivets, and any crack, crease, bend, nick, scratch, gouge, dent, abrasion, or structural deformation found in the skin attachments or fasteners. This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
The FAA estimates this AD affects 309 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:
The FAA has received no definitive data on which to base the cost estimates for the corrective actions specified in this AD.
A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for this collection of information is estimated to take approximately 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. All responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to: Information Collection Clearance Officer, Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177-1524.
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.
The FAA is 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.
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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective March 11, 2025.
None.
This AD applies to all Embraer S.A. (Type Certificate previously held by Yaborã Indústria Aeronáutica S.A.; Embraer S.A.; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronáutica S.A. (EMBRAER)) airplanes specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this AD, certificated in any category.
(1) Model EMB-135ER, -135KE, -135KL, and -135LR airplanes.
(2) Model EMB-145, -145EP, -145ER, -145LR, -145MP, -145MR, and -145XR airplanes.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.
This AD was prompted by a structural assessment that indicated certain central fuselage longitudinal splices are subjected to fatigue damage on multiple sites due to loose fasteners, which may reduce the structural residual strength below the required levels. The FAA is issuing this AD to address undetected fatigue damage on certain central fuselage longitudinal splices. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all required actions and compliance times specified in, and in accordance with, Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (ANAC) AD 2024-04-03R01, effective May 31, 2024 (ANAC AD 2024-04-03R01).
(1) Where ANAC AD 2024-04-03R01 refers to its effective date, this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
(2) Where paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of ANAC AD 2024-04-03R01 specify the initial compliance time for the external detailed inspection, for this AD, the initial compliance time for doing the external detailed inspection is prior to the accumulation of 44,000 total flight cycles, or within 500 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.
(3) Where paragraph (b)(3) of ANAC AD 2024-04-03R01 specifies “If any discrepancies are found, contact Embraer,” this AD requires replacing that text with “If any discrepancy (including cracking) is detected during an inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, repair the discrepancy (including cracking) before further flight using a method approved by the Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA; or ANAC; or Embraer's ANAC Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.”
(4) Paragraph (d) of ANAC AD 2024-04-03R01 specifies to report inspection results to ANAC and Embraer within a certain compliance time. For this AD, report inspection results after each inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD at the applicable times specified in paragraph (h)(4)(i) or (ii) of this AD.
(i) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the inspection.
(ii) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the effective date of this AD.
(5) This AD does not adopt paragraph (e) of ANAC AD 2024-04-03R01.
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(2)
For more information about this AD, contact Hassan Ibrahim, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: 206-231-3653; email:
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the material listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this material as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (ANAC) AD 2024-04-03R01, effective May 31, 2024.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) For ANAC material identified in this AD, contact ANAC, Aeronautical Products Certification Branch (GGCP), Rua Dr. Orlando Feirabend Filho, 230—Centro Empresarial Aquarius—Torre B—Andares 14 a 18, Parque Residencial Aquarius, CEP 12.246-190—São José dos Campos—SP, Brazil; telephone 55 (12) 3203-6600; email
(4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this material at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, visit
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Britten-Norman Aerospace Ltd. Model BN-2, BN-2A, BN-2A-2, BN-2A-3, BN-2A-6, BN-2A-8, BN-2A-9, BN-2A-20, BN-2A-21, BN-2A-26, BN-2A-27, BN-2B-20, BN-2B-21, BN-2B-26, BN-2B-27, BN-2T, BN2T-4R, and BN2T-4S airplanes; and certain Model BN2A MK. III, BN2A MK. III-2, and BN2A MK. III-3 airplanes. This AD was prompted by the determination that, in order to ensure the continued structural integrity of certain landing gear and associated components, it is necessary to require removal of these components from service prior to exceeding established fatigue lives. This AD
This AD is effective March 11, 2025.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of March 11, 2025.
• For Britten-Norman material identified in this AD, contact Britten-Norman Aerospace Ltd., Bembridge Airport, Bembridge, Isle of Wight, UK, PO35 5PR; phone: +44 20 3371 4000; email:
• You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (817) 222-5110. It is also available at
Beenal Desai, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: (609) 485-9930; email:
The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to Britten-Norman Aerospace Ltd. Model BN-2, BN-2A, BN-2A-2, BN-2A-3, BN-2A-6, BN-2A-8, BN-2A-9, BN-2A-20, BN-2A-21, BN-2A-26, BN-2A-27, BN-2B-20, BN-2B-21, BN-2B-26, BN-2B-27, BN-2T, BN2T-4R, and BN2T-4S (Islander) airplanes; and Model BN2A MK. III, BN2A MK. III-2, and BN2A MK. III-3 (Trislander) airplanes, fitted with landing gear and associated components manufactured by Fairey Hydraulics Ltd (FHL) and Britten-Norman Aircraft (BNA). The NPRM published in the
In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require determining the number of landings on affected MLGs, NLGs, and associated components; removing from service any part that has reached or exceeded the established fatigue life and installing a replacement part; and prohibiting the installation of any affected part unless the number of landings for that part is below the established fatigue life. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products. Exceeding the established fatigue life, if not addressed, could result in failure of the structural integrity of the landing gear and associated components, which could result in damage to the airplane and injury to occupants.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at
The FAA received comments from one individual commenter. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.
The commenter stated that in the United States landings are not required to be tracked on general aviation or commercial use non turbo prop airplanes. The commenter also mentioned that AD 2002-25-03, Amendment 39-12978 (67 FR 76106, December 11, 2002) provides a calculation of 3 landings per flight hour to calculate the number of landings, but this calculation is not realistic for all airplane operations and should be re-evaluated. The commenter explained it is difficult to take off and land three times in an hour with taxi, loading, and unloading of passengers and cargo. The commenter stated that if a routine flight was 30 minutes to an hour, then 1 or 2 landings for 1 flight hour should be considered by the FAA. The FAA infers that the commenter is requesting that the NPRM be revised to include a method for calculating landings per flight hour.
The FAA partially agrees with the commenter's request. The FAA acknowledges that landings are not required to be tracked on domestic general aviation airplanes. The compliance time for this AD is based on the number of landings because the affected MLGs, NLGs, and associated components that are showing fatigue are used during landing operations.
The FAA revised paragraph (h)(1) of this AD to specify how to calculate for an unknown number of landings and requires using 3 landings per 1 hour time-in-service (TIS). The FAA disagrees with using the calculation of 1 or 2 landings per 1 hour TIS because the 3 landings per 1 hour TIS calculation is a conservative estimate and has been used in previous ADs. The FAA received information from Britten-Norman that supported using a calculation of 3 landings per 1 hour TIS. In addition, Britten-Norman does not have any data to substantiate decreasing the number of landings to 1 or 2 landings per 1 hour TIS. The FAA disagrees with referring to “flight hours” and is referring to TIS because “flight hours” are not defined in FAA regulations but TIS is defined in FAA regulations and is used with respect to maintenance records.
The commenter requested that the FAA allow a 30-percent increase of the fatigue life values specified in Tables 1, 2, and 3 of Section 6 in Britten-Norman Service Bulletin SB 298, Issue 3, dated July 7, 2023 (Britten-Norman SB 298, Issue 3). The commenter stated that other countries allow the affected airplanes to operate with heavier gross weights than the United States allows, which reduces the fatigue lives of the affected components by shortening them. The commenter suggested a periodic eddy current inspection to determine the fatigue life value.
The FAA disagrees with both the commenter's request for a 30-percent fatigue life value increase and the commenter's suggestion to use a periodic eddy current inspection to determine the fatigue life value. The commenter did not provide substantiating data to support the requested changes. Britten-Norman provided the fatigue lives for the affected MLGs, NLGs, and associated components for the worldwide fleet based on its analysis of the unsafe condition and does not have data to substantiate increasing the fatigue life by 30-percent. The FAA agrees with this determination for airplanes on the U.S. registry. Operators may submit a proposal, with substantiating data, for revised requirements that affect the fatigue life value by requesting an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) using the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD.
The FAA has not changed this AD regarding this comment.
The commenter stated that operating environments and conditions should also be considered when establishing compliance times. The commenter explained that these are excellent cargo and passenger airplanes and are flown all over the world in remote places with short, unimproved runways of dirt and gravel. The commenter stated that these are extreme operating conditions that most airplanes do not encounter and the comparison between airplanes operated in the United States and airplanes operated in other countries are not equal.
The FAA disagrees with the commenter's request to change the compliance time based on airplane operating environments and conditions. There is no current requirement to track the hours spent flying in different conditions. Additionally, operators may not know an airplane's entire flight or maintenance history. Without this detailed knowledge of each airplane, it would be impossible for the FAA to develop a special set of inspections based on airplane operating environments and conditions. However, operators may submit a proposal, with substantiating data, for revised requirements by requesting an AMOC using the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD.
The FAA has not changed this AD regarding this comment.
The commenter requested that the MLG, NLG, and associated components that exceed the fatigue lives specified in in Tables 1, 2, and 3 of Section 6 in Britten-Norman SB 298, Issue 3, be allowed to continue to be used in service until replacement parts are available. The commenter referred to paragraph 2, “Corrective Action,” of UK CAA AD G-2023-0001, which states “Any main or nose landing gear or component which exceed the fatigue life stated in Tables 1, 2 or 3 must be withdrawn from service immediately.” The commenter stated that if replacement parts are not available then the proposed AD would not only ground the fleet but close businesses that rely on these airplanes.
The FAA disagrees with allowing parts that exceed the fatigue life to be allowed in-service until replacement parts are available. While the FAA acknowledges the commenter's concern regarding immediately removing parts that exceed the specified fatigue lives from service, this AD does not require immediately removing from service affected parts that exceed the specified fatigue lives. Paragraph (h)(2) of this AD provides a grace period of 30 days after the effective date of this AD for replacing affected parts that exceed the specified fatigue lives. Britten-Norman has confirmed that the landing gear is still in production and spares are available. To the extent replacement parts may not be available, the FAA cannot base its AD action on whether replacement parts are available or can be produced. While every effort is made to avoid grounding airplanes, the FAA must address the unsafe condition. Operators may submit a proposal for revised requirements, with substantiating data, by requesting an AMOC using the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD.
The FAA has not changed this AD regarding this comment.
These products have been approved by the aviation authority of another country and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products. Except for minor editorial changes and any changes described previously, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes increase the economic burden on any operator.
The FAA reviewed Britten-Norman SB 298, Issue 3. This material provides procedures for identifying the affected MLGs, NLGs, and associated components that need to have the number of landings tracked and provides the associated fatigue life. This material also specifies to remove from service any affected part that exceeds the specified fatigue life.
This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
The FAA estimates that this AD affects 87 airplanes of U.S. registry.
The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:
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.
The FAA is 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.
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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective March 11, 2025.
None.
This AD applies to Britten-Norman Aerospace Ltd. airplanes, certificated in any category, fitted with Fairey Hydraulics Ltd or Britten-Norman Aircraft landing gear and associated landing gear components, identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this AD.
(1) Model BN-2, BN-2A, BN-2A-2, BN-2A-3, BN-2A-6, BN-2A-8, BN-2A-9, BN-2A-20, BN-2A-21, BN-2A-26, BN-2A-27, BN-2B-20, BN-2B-21, BN-2B-26, BN-2B-27, BN-2T, BN2T-4R, and BN2T-4S airplanes.
(2) Model BN2A MK. III, BN2A MK. III-2, and BN2A MK. III-3 airplanes.
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 3200, Landing Gear System.
This AD was prompted by the determination that in order to ensure the continued structural integrity of certain landing gear and associated components, it is necessary to require removal of these components from service prior to exceeding established fatigue lives. Exceeding the established fatigue life, if not addressed, could result in failure of the structural integrity of the landing gear and associated components, which could result in damage to the airplane and injury to occupants.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
For the purpose of this AD:
(1) An “affected part” is a main landing gear (MLG), nose landing gear (NLG), or component identified in Table 1, 2, or 3 of Section 6 in Britten-Norman SB 298, Issue 3, dated July 7, 2023 (Britten-Norman SB 298, Issue 3).
(2) A “part eligible for installation” is an MLG, NLG, or component with a part that has been established to be below the associated fatigue life identified in Table 1, 2, or 3 of Section 6 in Britten-Norman SB 298, Issue 3.
(1) Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, determine the number of landings accumulated on the affected parts. For an unknown number of landings, calculate the number based on 3 landings per 1 hour time-in-service.
(2) Before accumulating the number of landings (fatigue life) associated with the applicable affected part as identified in Table 1, 2, or 3 of Section 6 in Britten-Norman SB 298, Issue 3, or within the next 30 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, replace any affected part with a part eligible for installation.
(3) Thereafter, replace any affected part with a part eligible for installation before accumulating the fatigue life, as identified in Table 1, 2, or 3 of Section 6 in Britten-Norman SB 298, Issue 3.
As of the effective date of this AD, do not install a MLG, NLG, or associated component unless it is a part eligible for installation.
The Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the International Validation Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (k) of this AD or email to:
For more information about this AD, contact Beenal Desai, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: (609) 485-9930; email:
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of the material listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this material as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Britten-Norman Service Bulletin SB 298, Issue 3, dated July 7, 2023.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) For Britten-Norman material identified in this AD, contact Britten-Norman Aerospace Ltd., Bembridge Airport, Bembridge, Isle of Wight, UK, PO35 5PR; phone: +44 20 3371 4000; email:
(4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (817) 222-5110.
(5) You may view this material at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, visit
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule; request for comments.
The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Leonardo S.p.a. Model A109E, A109K2, A109S, AB412, AB412 EP, AB139, and AW139 helicopters. This AD was prompted by a report that certain rescue hoist cable assemblies may be equipped with a defective ball end. This AD requires inspecting certain rescue hoist cable assemblies and, depending on the results, replacing the rescue hoist cable assembly. This AD also allows installing certain rescue hoist cable assemblies and certain rescue hoists provided its requirements are met. These actions are specified in a European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is incorporated by reference. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective February 19, 2025.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of February 19, 2025.
The FAA must receive comments on this AD by March 21, 2025.
You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
• For EASA material identified in this AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; phone: +49 221 8999 000; email:
• You may view this material at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (817) 222-5110. It is also available at
Eric Rivera, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: (847) 294-7166; email:
The FAA invites you to send any written data, views, or arguments about this final rule. Send your comments to an address listed under the
Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR 11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this AD contain commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to this AD, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing CBI as “PROPIN.” The FAA will treat such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public docket of this AD. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Eric Rivera, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: (847) 294-7166; email:
EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2024-0228, dated November 29, 2024 (EASA AD 2024-0228) (also referred to as the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition on Leonardo S.p.A. Model AB412, AB412EP, A109E, A109K2, A109S, AB139, and AW139 helicopters. The
The FAA is issuing this AD to detect and address defective rescue hoist cable assembly ball ends. This unsafe condition, if not addressed, could lead to failure of the rescue hoist cable assembly, possibly resulting in injuries to a human load, or to persons on ground.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at
The FAA reviewed EASA AD 2024-0228, which requires, for helicopters with certain rescue hoists installed, a one-time inspection of the rescue hoist cable assembly and, depending on the results, replacing the rescue hoist cable assembly. EASA AD 2024-0228 also allows installing certain rescue hoist cable assemblies on any helicopter provided it is new (never previously installed on a rescue hoist) and allows installing certain rescue hoists on any helicopter provided it passes its required inspection.
This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
These products have been approved by the aviation authority of another country and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it has notified the FAA about the unsafe condition described in the MCAI. The FAA is issuing this AD after determining that the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other products of these same type designs.
This AD requires accomplishing the actions specified in EASA AD 2024-0228, described previously, as incorporated by reference, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this AD.
In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD process, the FAA developed a process to use some civil aviation authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result, EASA AD 2024-0228 is incorporated by reference in this AD. This AD requires compliance with EASA AD 2024-0228 in its entirety through that incorporation, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this AD. Using common terms that are the same as the heading of a particular section in EASA AD 2024-0228 does not mean that operators need comply only with that section. For example, where the AD requirement refers to “all required actions and compliance times,” compliance with this AD requirement is not limited to the section titled “Required Action(s) and Compliance Time(s)” in EASA AD 2024-0228. Material required by EASA AD 2024-0228 for compliance will be available at
Section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 551
An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD without providing an opportunity for public comments prior to adoption. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies forgoing notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because the rescue hoist assembly is essential during rescue operations and failure of this assembly could result in a failed rescue attempt and injury to a person being lifted or persons on the ground. Additionally, the FAA has no information pertaining to the extent of the defect in the rescue hoist assembly that may currently exist in helicopters or how quickly the condition may propagate to failure, therefore, the initial actions required by this AD must be accomplished before next rescue hoist operation. Accordingly, notice and opportunity for prior public comment are impracticable and contrary to the public interest pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b).
In addition, the FAA finds that good cause exists pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days, for the same reasons the FAA found good cause to forgo notice and comment.
The requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) do not apply when an agency finds good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 to adopt a rule without prior notice and comment. Because the FAA has determined that it has good cause to adopt this rule without prior notice and comment, RFA analysis is not required.
The FAA estimates that this AD affects up to 422 helicopters of U.S. registry. Labor rates are estimated at $85 per work-hour. Based on these numbers, the FAA estimates that operators may incur the following costs to comply with this AD.
Inspecting a rescue hoist cable assembly will take 2 work-hours for an estimated cost of $170 per helicopter and up to $71,740 for the U.S. fleet. If required, replacing a rescue hoist cable assembly will take 1 work-hours and parts will cost $10,218 for an estimated cost of $10,303 per helicopter.
The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate. According to the manufacturer, however, some of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected operators.
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.
The FAA is 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.
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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866, and
(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective February 19, 2025.
None.
This AD applies to Leonardo S.p.a. Model A109E, A109K2, A109S, AB412, AB412 EP, AB139, and AW139 helicopters, certificated in any category.
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 2500, Cabin Equipment/Furnishings.
This AD was prompted by a report that certain rescue hoist cable assemblies may be equipped with a defective ball end. The FAA is issuing this AD to detect and address defective rescue hoist cable assembly ball ends. This unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in failure of the rescue hoist cable assembly, in-flight failure of the rescue hoist, and subsequent injury to a person being lifted or to persons on the ground.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Except as specified in paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD: Comply with all required actions and compliance times specified in, and in accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency AD 2024-0228, dated November 29, 2024 (EASA AD 2024-0228).
(1) Where EASA AD 2024-0228 refers to its effective date, this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
(2) Where EASA AD 2024-0228 defines the “affected rescue hoist,” this AD requires replacing that definition with “Any rescue hoist, as identified in Table 2 of EASA AD 2024-0228, either manufactured, repaired, or overhauled by Breeze-Eastern's main facility in Whippany, New Jersey before April 8, 2024 and which has not had the rescue hoist cable replaced since then, and any rescue hoist, as identified in Table 2 of EASA AD 2024-0228, if the date of manufacture, repair, or overhaul cannot be determined.”
(3) Where paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2024-0228 states “any discrepancy is detected, as defined in the ASB,” this AD requires replacing that text with “there is any gouging.”
(4) This AD does not adopt the “Remarks” section of EASA AD 2024-0228.
Although the material referenced in EASA AD 2024-0228 specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD does not require that action.
Special flight permits may be issued under 14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199 to operate the helicopter to a location where the requirements of this AD can be accomplished provided that the rescue hoist is not used.
(1) The Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the International Validation Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (l) of this AD. Information may be emailed to:
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local Flight Standards District Office/certificate holding district office.
For more information about this AD, contact Eric Rivera, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: (847) 294-7166; email:
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of the material listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this material as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2024-0228, dated November 29, 2024.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) For EASA material identified in this AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; phone: +49 221 8999 000; email:
(4) You may view this material at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (817) 222-5110.
(5) You may view this material at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, visit
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all The Boeing Company Model 787-8, 787-9, and 787-10 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report of operators receiving No. 1 flight compartment windows that may not meet type design requirements for withstanding a bird impact. This AD requires replacing affected No. 1 flight compartment windows and prohibits the installation
This AD is effective March 11, 2025.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of March 11, 2025.
• For Boeing material identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; website
• You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195. It is also available at
Joseph Hodgin, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone: 206-231-3962; email:
The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all The Boeing Company Model 787-8, 787-9, and 787-10 airplanes. The NPRM published in the
The FAA received comments from three commenters, Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA), Boeing Commercial Airplanes, and United Airlines, who supported the NPRM without change.
The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered any comments received, and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products. Except for minor editorial changes, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic burden on any operator.
The FAA reviewed Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB560010-00 RB, Issue 001, dated December 13, 2023. This material specifies procedures for determining whether a left or right No. 1 flight compartment window with certain part numbers and serial numbers is installed and for replacing any window that has an affected part number and serial number.
This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
The FAA estimates that this AD affects 152 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:
The FAA estimates the following costs to do any replacement that would be required based on the results of the inspection. The agency has no way of determining the number of airplanes that might need these replacements or how many replacements each airplane may require:
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.
The FAA is 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.
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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective March 11, 2025.
None.
This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 787-8, 787-9, and 787-10 airplanes, certificated in any category.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 56, Windows.
This AD was prompted by a report that certain No.1 flight compartment windows may not meet type design requirements for withstanding a bird impact due to the elimination of a witness test specimen and process changes that affect main bondline strength. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent a window from spalling in the event of a high-energy bird impact. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in injuries to crew that may affect continued safe flight and landing.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
For airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB560010-00 RB, Issue 001, dated December 13, 2023: Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD, at the applicable times specified in the “Compliance” paragraph of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB560010-00 RB, Issue 001, dated December 13, 2023, do all applicable actions identified in, and in accordance with, the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB560010-00 RB, Issue 001, dated December 13, 2023.
Where the “Boeing Recommended Compliance Time” column in the tables under the “Compliance” paragraph of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB560010-00 RB, Issue 001, dated December 13, 2023, uses the phrase “the Issue 001 date of the Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB560010-00 RB,” this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
As of the effective date of this AD, do not install on any airplane a No. 1 flight compartment window part number 190800-11, -12, -13, -14, -15, -16, -19, or -20, with a serial number listed in Appendix A of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB560010-00 RB, Issue 001, dated December 13, 2023.
(1) The Manager, AIR-520, Continued Operational Safety Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (k)(1) of this AD. Information may be emailed to:
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD if it is approved by The Boeing Company Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, AIR-520, Continued Operational Safety Branch, FAA, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.
(1) For more information about this AD, contact Joseph Hodgin, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone: 206-231-3962; email:
(2) Material identified in this AD that is not incorporated by reference is available at the address specified in paragraphs (l)(3) of this AD.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of the material listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this material as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB560010-00 RB, Issue 001, dated December 13, 2023.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) For the material identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; telephone 562-797-1717; website
(4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this material at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, visit
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
The FAA is superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2019-14-13, which applies to all The Boeing Company Model 767-200, -300, -300F, and -400ER series airplanes. AD 2019-14-13 required identifying the part number, and the serial number if applicable, of the Captain's and First Officer's seats, and performing applicable on-condition actions for affected seats. AD 2019-14-13 also required a one-time detailed inspection and repetitive checks of the horizontal movement system (HMS) of the Captain's and First Officer's seats, and applicable on-condition actions. AD 2019-14-13 also provided an optional terminating action for the repetitive actions for certain seats. This AD was prompted by reports of uncommanded fore and aft movement of the Captain's and First Officer's seats. This AD retains the actions in AD 2019-14-13 and adds an inspection of previously omitted part numbers. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective March 11, 2025.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of March 11, 2025.
• For Boeing material identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Boulevard, MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; phone 562-797-1717; website
• You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195. It is also available at
Courtney Tuck, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; phone 206-231-3986; email
The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2019-14-13, Amendment 39-19691 (84 FR 38855, August 8, 2019) (AD 2019-14-13). AD 2019-14-13 applied to all The Boeing Company Model 767-200, -300, -300F, and -400ER series airplanes. The NPRM published in the
The FAA received comments from Air Line Pilots Association, International, Boeing, United Airlines, United Parcel Service Co., and three individuals, who supported the NPRM without change.
The FAA received additional comments from Aviation Partners Boeing, Delta Airlines, and an individual. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.
A individual commenter requested that the FAA provide a phased compliance period for smaller carriers and operators to allow them to plan inspections, repairs, and parts replacement without causing significant operational disruptions, especially for smaller fleets that may lack immediate access to specialized parts and labor.
The FAA disagrees to provide a phased compliance period for smaller carriers. The compliance time set is standard across the entire affected fleet to ensure an adequate level of safety and is not dependent on the fleet size of each operator. The FAA has not changed this AD as a result of this comment.
An individual commenter requested for the FAA to enhance the clarity of acceptable methods of compliance for operators using alternative maintenance programs. The commenter would like more concrete examples of compliance pathways, such as best practices for tracking seat conditions and recurring HMS inspections, to foster consistency across operators. The commenter added that it would also be helpful to publish detailed service guidelines on aligning seat part replacements with standard maintenance cycles to prevent unnecessary downtime.
The FAA disagrees. Best practices and service guidelines to resolve the unsafe condition identified in an AD are typically provided by service information generated by the design approval holder. Operators may request approval of alternative methods of compliance with the requirements of an AD provided the alternative methods address the unsafe condition and provide an adequate level of safety. Guidance on requirements and best practices can be found in FAA Orders and Manuals. The FAA has not changed this AD as a result of this comment.
Aviation Partners Boeing stated that the installation of winglets per Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) ST01920SE does not affect compliance with the proposed actions.
The FAA agrees with the commenter that STC ST01920SE does not affect the accomplishment of the manufacturer's service instructions, as noted in paragraph (c)(2) of the proposed AD. Therefore, the installation of STC ST01920SE does not affect the ability to
The applicability in paragraph (c)(1) of the proposed AD included all Model 767-200, -300, -300F, and -400ER series airplanes. Delta Airlines noted that Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletins 767-25-0539 and 767-25-0549, both Revision 2, dated January 27, 2023, refer only to Ipeco Captain's and First Officer's seats. Delta requested a revision to the applicability of the proposed AD to be more specific by limiting the applicability to those airplanes equipped with powered Ipeco Captain's and First Officer's seat part number series 3A090 and 3A258 as specified in the “Compliance,” paragraph of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-25-0539, Revision 2, dated January 27, 2023.
The FAA disagrees to revise paragraph (c) as suggested by Delta Airlines. All airplanes are included because it is required per paragraph (g) to inspect the part number, and serial number as applicable, of the Captain's and First Officer's seats to determine if the on-condition actions are applicable. The FAA has not changed this AD as a result of this comment.
In the proposed AD, the first two column headings in figure 1 to paragraph (j) were “Installation per Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin” and “And installation per IPECO Service Bulletin.” Since these documents are provided for guidance to the operators on how to comply with a safety issue, those column headings have been changed in this AD to “Actions done in accordance with Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin” and “Actions done in accordance with Ipeco Service Bulletin,” respectively.
The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered any comments received, and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products. Except for minor editorial changes, and any other changes described previously, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic burden on any operator.
The FAA reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-25-0539, Revision 2, dated January 27, 2023. This material specifies procedures for identification of the part number, and the serial number if applicable, of the Captain's and First Officer's seats, and applicable on-condition actions. On-condition actions include an inspection of each seat's fore and aft and vertical manual control levers for looseness, installation of serviceable seats, and a seat operational test after any cable adjustment. This material also adds Ipeco seat part numbers 3A258-0007-01-1Z, 3A258-0008-01-1Z, 3A258-0041-01-1Z, 3A258-0042-01-1Z, and 3A090-0078-04-1. This material also adds Ipeco seat part numbers 3A090-0078-03-1 and 3A090-0078-05-1, that were previously removed in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-25-0539, Revision 1, dated January 9, 2014.
The FAA also reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-25-0549, Revision 2, dated January 27, 2023. This material specifies procedures for a detailed inspection and repetitive checks of the HMS (including for any Artus part and amendment numbers of the horizontal actuator of the HMS) for the Captain's and First Officer's seats for findings (
This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
The FAA estimates that this AD affects 694 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:
The FAA estimates the following costs to do any on-condition actions that will be required. The FAA has no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these on-condition actions:
The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable the FAA to provide cost estimates for the optional terminating action for the repetitive checks specified in this AD.
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.
The FAA is 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.
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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective March 11, 2025.
This AD replaces AD 2019-14-13, Amendment 39-19691 (84 FR 38855, August 8, 2019) (AD 2019-14-13).
(1) This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 767-200, -300, -300F, and -400ER series airplanes, certificated in any category.
(2) Installation of Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) ST01920SE does not affect the ability to accomplish the actions required by this AD. Therefore, for airplanes on which STC ST01920SE is installed, a “change in product” alternative method of compliance (AMOC) approval request is not necessary to comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 39.17.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 25, Equipment/furnishings.
This AD was prompted by reports of uncommanded fore and aft movement of the Captain's and First Officer's seats. The FAA is issuing this AD to address uncommanded fore and aft movement of the Captain's and First Officer's seats. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in an uncommanded fore or aft seat movement during a critical part of a flight, such as takeoff or landing, and could cause a flight control obstruction or unintended flight control input, which could result in the loss of the ability to control the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Except as specified in paragraphs (i) and (j) of this AD: At the applicable time specified in the “Compliance,” paragraph of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-25-0539, Revision 2, dated January 27, 2023, do an inspection to determine the part number, and serial number as applicable, of the Captain's and First Officer's seats, and all applicable on-condition actions, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-25-0539, Revision 2, dated January 27, 2023. A review of airplane maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of this inspection if the part number and serial number of the Captain's and First Officer's seats can be conclusively determined from that review.
Except as specified by paragraphs (i) and (j) of this AD: At the applicable times specified in the “Compliance,” paragraph of Boeing Special Attention Bulletin 767-25-0549, Revision 2, dated January 27, 2023, do all applicable actions identified as “RC” (required for compliance) in, and in accordance with, the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Bulletin 767-25-0549, Revision 2, dated January 27, 2023. Actions identified as terminating action in Boeing Special Attention Bulletin 767-25-0549, Revision 2, dated January 27, 2023, terminate the applicable required actions of this AD, provided the terminating action is done in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-25-0549, Revision 2, dated January 27, 2023.
(1) Where the “Compliance” paragraph of Boeing Special Attention Bulletin 767-25-0549, Revision 2, dated January 27, 2023,
(2) Where the “Compliance” paragraph of Boeing Special Attention Bulletin 767-25-0549, Revision 2, dated January 27, 2023, refers to the Revision 2 date of the service bulletin, this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
(3) Where the “Compliance” paragraph of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-25-0539, Revision 2, dated January 27, 2023, refers to within 72 months after the original issue date of the service bulletin, this AD requires using within 36 months after September 12, 2019 (the effective date of AD 2019-14-13).
(4) Where the “Compliance” paragraph of Boeing Special Attention Bulletin 767-25-0539, Revision 2, dated January 27, 2023, refers to the Revision 2 date of the service bulletin, this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
If the airplane records show that an Ipeco Captain's or First Officer's seat meets all criteria specified in any row in figure 1 to paragraph (j) of this AD, the actions specified in paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD are not required for that seat.
(1) The Manager, AIR-520, Continued Operational Safety Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (l) of this AD. Information may be emailed to:
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD if it is approved by The Boeing Company Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, AIR-520, Continued Operational Safety Branch, FAA, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.
(4) AMOCs approved for AD 2019-14-13 are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-25-0539, Revision 2, dated January 27, 2023, and Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-25-0549, Revision 2, dated January 27, 2023, that are required by paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD.
(5) For service information that contains steps that are labeled as Required for Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs (k)(5)(i) and (ii) of this AD apply.
(i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply with the AD. If a step or substep is labeled “RC Exempt,” then the RC requirement is removed from that step or substep. An AMOC is required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and identified figures.
(ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC steps, including substeps and identified figures, can
For more information about this AD, contact Courtney Tuck, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; phone 206-231-3986; email
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the material listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this material as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-25-0539, Revision 2, dated January 27, 2023.
(ii) Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 767-25-0549, Revision 2, dated January 27, 2023.
(3) For Boeing material identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Boulevard, MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600; phone 562-797-1717; website
(4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this material at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, visit
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Airbus SAS Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, B4-622, B4-605R, B4-622R, C4-605R Variant F, F4-605R, and F4-622R airplanes; Model A310 series airplanes; Model A318, A319, A320, and A321 series airplanes; Model A330-200, -200 Freighter, and -300 series airplanes; Model A330-841 and -941 airplanes; and Model A340-211, -212, -213, -311, -312, -313, -541, and -642 airplanes. This AD was prompted by chemical oxygen generators that failed to activate in service and during maintenance activities. This AD requires replacing affected oxygen generators and prohibits the installation of affected parts, as specified in a European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is incorporated by reference. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective March 11, 2025.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of March 11, 2025.
• For EASA material identified in this AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
• You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195. It is also available at
Dan Rodina, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 206-231-3225; email
The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Airbus SAS Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, B4-622, B4-605R, B4-622R, C4-620, C4-605R Variant F, F4-605R and F4-622R airplanes, Model 300 F4-608ST airplanes, Model A310-203, -203C, -204, -221, -222, -304, -308, -322, -324, and -325 airplanes, Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes, Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, -133, -151N, -153N, and -171N airplanes, Model A320-211, -212, -214, -215, -216, -231, -232, -233, -251N, -252N, -253N, -271N, -272N, and -273N airplanes, Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, -232, -251N, -252N, -253N, -271N, -272N, -251NX, -252NX, -253NX, -271NX, and -272NX airplanes, Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, -243, -223F, -243F, -301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342, -343, -743L, -841, and -941 airplanes, and Model A340-211, -212, -213, -311, -312, -313, -541, -542, -642, and -643 airplanes. Model A300 F4-608ST, A300 C4-620, A310-203C, A310-308, A320-215, A330-743L, A340-542, and A340-643 airplanes are not certificated by the FAA and are not included on the U.S. type certificate data sheet; this AD therefore does not include those airplanes in the applicability. The NPRM published in the
In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require replacing affected oxygen generators, as specified in EASA AD 2023-0209. The NPRM also proposed to prohibit the installation of affected parts. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
Since the FAA issued the NPRM, EASA superseded EASA AD 2023-0209
The FAA has confirmed that there are no Model A321-253NY airplanes on the U.S. Register, and no new actions are required by EASA AD 2024-0198. Therefore, the FAA has revised paragraphs (g) and (h)(1) of this AD to refer to EASA AD 2024-0198.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at
The FAA received comments from Delta Air Lines (Delta) and United Airlines (United). The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to each comment.
Delta and United requested removal of the requirement to return affected oxygen generators to Collins Aerospace, as specified in paragraph (h)(3) of the proposed AD. Delta stated that oxygen generators removed before the effective date of the AD will have already been shipped for offsite disposal in accordance with Delta's procedures,
Delta added that the service information referenced in EASA AD 2023-0209 specifies to return affected oxygen generators to Collins Aerospace with the instruction “DO NOT activate the generator (it must be shipped not activated, but secured with safety pin, for the purpose of the investigation).” Delta stated that this instruction will result in significant changes to current procedures that comply with DOT HM224B and hazardous waste disposal requirements, and may also infringe on some state-specific hazardous waste requirements.
United concurred with the requirements of the proposed AD, except for the requirement to ship affected oxygen generators to the original equipment manufacturer (OEM). United stated that transporting discrepant oxygen generators increases the risk to an operator of being noncompliant with HAZMAT/DG regulations.
The FAA agrees to remove the requirement to return affected oxygen generators to Collins Aerospace due to the risk of noncompliance with HAZMAT/DG regulations. Although EASA has indicated that returning affected parts will help determine the cause of the unsafe condition, the FAA has determined that the data obtained from the returned parts does not outweigh the risk of noncompliance with HAZMAT/DG regulations. Therefore, paragraph (h)(4) of this AD has been revised to only require reporting inspection results to the OEM.
Delta requested that an exception be added to specify the applicable AMM task required to replace affected generators for oxygen container/generator removal and installation. Paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2023-0209 specifies replacing affected parts in accordance with the instructions of the AOT. The AOT referenced in EASA AD 2023-0209 requires in paragraph 5.6 that operators remove and replace the affected oxygen generator in accordance with Collins Aerospace Service Bulletin XXCXX-35-001, dated October 6, 2023, and AMM instructions for removal/installation of the emergency oxygen generators. Because both instructions are required for compliance, and because the instructions do not provide the exact same instructions, Delta stated it is difficult to determine which instructions to follow. Delta asserted that AMM tasks for removing the affected units provide standard practices to effectively replace the oxygen generator, and no additional instructions from the Collins service bulletin are necessary. Additionally, many operators, including Delta, have supplemental type certificates (STCs) for interior modifications that might involve replacing the oxygen container with an oxygen panel or some other part label. These STCs will have separate instructions from those called out in the AOT, but they can still contain affected oxygen generators and therefore must be inspected.
The FAA agrees with the request, for the reasons provided by the commenter. The replacement required by this AD can be done using the applicable AMM task for oxygen container/generator removal and installation. The FAA has added paragraph (h)(4) to this AD to specify that where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2024-0198 specifies a method of compliance for removal and installation of the oxygen container/generator in accordance with the service information or aircraft maintenance manual, for this AD, either method is acceptable.
Paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2023-0209 specified replacing affected parts in accordance with “the instructions of the AOT,
The FAA provides the following clarification. The FAA acknowledges that paragraph (i)(3) of the proposed AD should also have included an exception to paragraph (h)(2) of the proposed AD
Delta requested that an exception be added to the proposed AD to allow operators to identify affected units by the part number (PN) and date of manufacture, instead of the part number and serial number as specified in EASA AD 2023-0209. EASA AD 2023-0209 defines an affected part as “any chemical oxygen generator having part number (PN) E63320-00, PN E63340-00 or PN E63440-00 and a serial number (SN) BEBJF002-XXX, BEBJ-F007-XXX, BEBJ-F008-XXX or BEBJ-F011-XXX (where `XXX' represents any numerical sequence and is the specific number of this generator).” Delta stated that Collins Aerospace, Airbus, and EASA have verified that the list of affected oxygen generator part numbers and serial numbers correspond to units manufactured in 2010. Delta asserted that chemical oxygen generators are life limited by the FAA and therefore tracked based on the date of manufacture. Therefore, Delta requested using the conservative criterion of the date of manufacturer to identify affected oxygen generators.
The FAA disagrees with the request. The FAA has found no clear correlation between the date of manufacture and the OEM's serial number. Therefore, to ensure that all affected units are correctly identified, operators must use serial numbers, as specified in EASA AD 2024-0198.
Delta requested that an additional exception be added to the proposed AD to further clarify parts eligible for installation, using the EASA AD definition of serviceable part: “any oxygen generator, eligible for installation, which is not an affected part.” Delta noted, however, that paragraph 5.6 of the AOT requires that an affected generator be replaced by an unaffected oxygen generator “with the same PN,” with no requirement that it should not be an affected part and restricting it to the same part number.
The FAA agrees with the request. The FAA has revised paragraph (h)(3) of this AD to specify to replace each affected part with an oxygen generator, eligible for installation, which is not an affected part.
This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on this product. Except for minor editorial changes, and any other changes described previously, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic burden on any operator.
EASA AD 2024-0198 specifies procedures for replacing affected oxygen generators, which includes reporting and returning affected parts to the manufacturer. EASA AD 2024-0198 also prohibits the installation of affected parts. This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in
The FAA estimates that this AD affects 1,975 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:
A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for this collection of information is estimated to take approximately 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. All responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to: Information Collection Clearance Officer, Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177-1524.
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.
The FAA is 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.
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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective March 11, 2025.
None.
This AD applies to all Airbus SAS airplanes, certificated in any category, identified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (8) of this AD.
(1) Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, B4-622, B4-605R, B4-622R, C4-605R Variant F, F4-605R, and F4-622R airplanes.
(2) Model A310-203, -204, -221, -222, -304, -322, -324, and -325 airplanes.
(3) Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -122 airplanes.
(4) Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132, -133, -151N, -153N, and -171N airplanes.
(5) Model A320-211, -212, -214, -216, -231, -232, -233, -251N, -252N, -253N, -271N, -272N, and -273N airplanes.
(6) Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -213, -231, -232, -251N, -252N, -253N, -271N, -272N, -251NX, -252NX, -253NX, -271NX, -272NX, and A321-253NY airplanes.
(7) Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, -223F, -243, -243F, -301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342, -343, -841, and -941 airplanes.
(8) Model A340-211, -212, -213, 311, -312, -313, -541, and -642 airplanes.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 35, Oxygen.
This AD was prompted by reported occurrences of chemical oxygen generators failing to activate in service and during maintenance activities. The FAA is issuing this AD to address poor reactivity of the start powder used inside the affected oxygen generators. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could lead to a reduction of the available oxygen capacity of the airplane and could result in injury to airplane occupants.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all required actions and compliance times specified in, and in accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2024-0198, dated October 18, 2024 (EASA AD 2024-0198).
(1) Where EASA AD 2024-0198 refers to December 6, 2023 (the effective date of EASA AD 2023-0209, dated November 22, 2023), this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
(2) Where EASA AD 2024-0198 refers to its effective date, this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
(3) Where paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2024-0198 specifies to “replace each affected part with a serviceable part in accordance with the instructions of the AOT,” this AD requires replacing that text with “replace each affected part with an oxygen generator, eligible for installation, which is not an affected part, in accordance with paragraph 5.6 of the AOT.”
(4) Where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2024-0198 specifies a method of compliance for removal and installation of the oxygen container/generator in accordance with the service information or aircraft maintenance manual, for this AD, either method is acceptable.
(5) The service information referenced in EASA AD 2024-0198 specifies to report inspection results to Airbus and return affected oxygen generators to Collins Aerospace. For this AD, reporting inspection results is required at the applicable time specified in paragraph (h)(5)(i) or (ii) of this AD, but returning affected oxygen generators to Collins Aerospace is not required by this AD.
(i) If the affected oxygen generator was replaced on or after the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 40 days after the replacement.
(ii) If the affected oxygen generator was replaced before the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 40 days after the effective date of this AD.
(6) This AD does not adopt the “Remarks” section of EASA AD 2024-0198.
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(2)
(3)
For more information about this AD, contact Dan Rodina, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 206-231-3225; email
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the material listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this material as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2024-0198, dated October 18, 2024.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) For EASA AD material identified in this AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
(4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this material at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, visit
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain CFM International, S.A. (CFM) Model LEAP-1A and LEAP-1C engines. This AD was prompted by an investigation of an in-flight shut down event that revealed the aft arm of the high-pressure turbine (HPT) rotor interstage seal had failed. This AD requires removal from service and replacement of the HPT rotor interstage seal for LEAP-1A engines. Since the HPT rotor interstage seal part number is interchangeable between LEAP-1A and LEAP-1C engines, this AD also prohibits installation of these affected parts onto any LEAP-1A or LEAP-1C engine. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective March 11, 2025.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of March 11, 2025.
• For CFM material identified in this AD, contact CFM, GE Aviation Fleet Support, 1 Neumann Way, M/D Room 285, Cincinnati, OH 45215; phone: (877) 432-3272; email:
• You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (817) 222-5110. It is also available at
Mehdi Lamnyi, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; phone: (781) 238-7743; email:
The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain CFM Model LEAP-1A and LEAP-1C engines. The NPRM published in the
The FAA received comments from Airline Pilots Association International (ALPA), StandardAero, an individual commenter, and an anonymous commenter. All commenters supported the NPRM without change.
The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety requires adopting the AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products. Except for minor editorial changes, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM.
The FAA reviewed the following CFM material:
• CFM Service Bulletin (SB) LEAP-1A-72-00-0525-01A-930A-D, Issue 002-00, dated June 28, 2024, which provides the serial numbers (S/Ns) of the affected HPT rotor interstage seals for LEAP-1A engines.
• CFM SB LEAP-1C-72-00-0124-01A-930A-D, Issue 001-00, dated September 5, 2024, which provides the S/Ns of the affected HPT rotor interstage seals that are excluded from installation onto LEAP-1C engines.
This material also includes instructions for removal and installation of the HPT rotor interstage seal. This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
The FAA estimates that this AD affects 56 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry.
The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:
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.
The FAA is 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.
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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective March 11, 2025.
None.
This AD applies to the following CFM International, S.A. (CFM) engines:
(1) Model LEAP-1A23, LEAP-1A24, LEAP-1A24E1, LEAP-1A26, LEAP-1A26CJ, LEAP-1A26E1, LEAP-1A29, LEAP-1A29CJ, LEAP-1A30, LEAP-1A32, LEAP-1A33, LEAP-1A33B2, and LEAP-1A35A engines.
(2) Model LEAP-1C28, LEAP-1C30, and LEAP-1C30B1 engines.
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 7250, Turbine Section.
This AD was prompted by an investigation of an in-flight shut down event that revealed the aft arm of the high-pressure turbine (HPT) rotor interstage seal had failed. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent failure of the HPT rotor interstage seal. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in failure of one or more engines, loss of thrust control, and loss of the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
(1) For LEAP-1A engines having an HPT rotor interstage seal installed with a part number (P/N) and serial number (S/N) listed in Table 1 of CFM Service Bulletin (SB) LEAP-1A-72-00-0525-01A-930A-D, Issue 002-00, dated June 28, 2024 (CFM SB LEAP-1A-72-00-0525-01A-930A-D Issue 002-00), at the next engine shop visit or before exceeding the applicable cyclic threshold in table 1 to paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, whichever occurs first after the effective date of this AD, remove the affected HPT rotor interstage seal from service and replace with a part eligible for installation.
(2) For LEAP-1A engines having an HPT rotor interstage seal installed with a P/N and S/N listed in Table 2 of CFM SB LEAP-1A-72-00-0525-01A-930A-D Issue 002-00, at the next piece part exposure or before exceeding the applicable cyclic threshold in table 1 to paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, whichever occurs first after the effective date of this AD, remove the affected HPT rotor interstage seal from service and replace with a part eligible for installation.
(1) After the effective date of this AD, do not install an HPT rotor interstage seal having a P/N and S/N listed in Table 1 or Table 2 of CFM SB LEAP-1A-72-00-0525-01A-930A-D Issue 002-00, in any LEAP-1A engine.
(2) After the effective date of this AD, do not install an HPT rotor interstage seal having a P/N and S/N listed in Table 1 of CFM SB LEAP-1C-72-00-0124-01A-930A-D, Issue 001-00, dated September 5, 2024, in any LEAP-1C engine.
For the purpose of this AD:
(1) “LEAP-1A engines” are CFM Model LEAP-1A23, LEAP-1A24, LEAP-1A24E1, LEAP-1A26, LEAP-1A26CJ, LEAP-1A26E1, LEAP-1A29, LEAP-1A29CJ, LEAP-1A30, LEAP-1A32, LEAP-1A33, LEAP-1A33B2, LEAP-1A35A engines.
(2) “LEAP-1C engines” are CFM Model LEAP-1C28, LEAP-1C30, and LEAP-1C30B1 engines.
(3) A “part eligible for installation” is any HPT rotor interstage seal having a P/N and S/N that is not listed in Table 1 or Table 2 of CFM SB LEAP-1A-72-00-0525-01A-930A-D Issue 002-00.
(4) An “engine shop visit” is the induction of an engine into the shop for maintenance involving the separation of major mating engine flanges, except for the separation of engine flanges solely for the purposes of transportation without subsequent engine maintenance.
(5) A “piece-part exposure” is when the HPT rotor interstage seal is separated from the HPT rotor assembly.
(1) The Manager, AIR-520 Continued Operational Safety Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of AIR-520 Continued Operational Safety Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (k) of this AD and email to:
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.
For more information about this AD, contact Mehdi Lamnyi, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; phone: (781) 238-7743; email:
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the material listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this material as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) CFM Service Bulletin LEAP-1A-72-00-0525-01A-930A-D, Issue 002-00, dated June 28, 2024.
(ii) CFM Service Bulletin LEAP-1C-72-00-0124-01A-930A-D, Issue 001-00, dated September 5, 2024.
(3) For CFM material identified in this AD, contact CFM, GE Aviation Fleet Support, 1 Neumann Way, M/D Room 285, Cincinnati, OH 45215; phone: (877) 432-3272; email:
(4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (817) 222-5110.
(5) You may view this material at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, visit
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
The FAA is superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2022-11-01, which applied to certain Airbus SAS Model A300 series airplanes; Model A300 B4-600, B4-600R, and F4-600R series airplanes; and Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes (collectively called Model A300-600 series airplanes). AD 2022-11-01 required a detailed inspection (DET) of the main landing gear (MLG) support rib 5 lower flange, a fluorescent penetrant inspection (FPI) around the spot facing of certain fastener holes if necessary, and applicable corrective actions. This AD was prompted by the determination that additional airplanes are affected by the unsafe condition. This AD continues to require the actions in AD 2022-11-01 and adds airplanes to the applicability, as specified in a European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is incorporated by reference. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective March 11, 2025.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of March 11, 2025.
• For EASA material identified in this AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
• You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195. It is also available at
Dan Rodina, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: 206-231-3225; email:
The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2022-11-01, Amendment 39-22051 (87 FR 32292, May 31, 2022) (AD 2022-11-01). AD 2022-11-01 applied to certain Airbus SAS Model A300 and A300-600 series airplanes. AD 2022-11-01 required a one-time DET of the MLG support rib 5 lower flange, inboard and outboard of rib 5, on the right-hand and left-hand sides (
The NPRM published in the
Also, since the FAA issued AD 2022-11-01, FAA Type Certificate A35EU was updated to remove Airbus SAS Model A300 B2-1A, B2-1C, B2K-3C, and B2-203 airplanes. The FAA therefore has removed those airplanes from the applicability of this AD.
In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to continue to require the actions in AD 2022-11-01 and add airplanes to the applicability, as specified in EASA AD 2024-0145. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at
The FAA received comments from two commenters, The Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA) and FedEx Express, who supported the NPRM without change.
The unsafe condition in paragraph (e) of this AD has been revised to include the action that prompted this AD.
This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on this product. Except for minor editorial changes, and any other changes described previously, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic burden on any operator.
EASA AD 2024-0145 specifies procedures for a one-time DET of the affected area, a one-time FPI around the spot facing of certain fastener holes in the affected area if no crack is detected during the DET, and obtaining and following approved repair instructions if any crack is found during the DET or FPI. EASA AD 2024-0145 also updated the applicability of affected airplanes.
This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
The FAA estimates that this AD affects 124 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:
The FAA estimates the following costs to replace any cracked rib that are required, based on the results of any required actions and repair status. The FAA has no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need this on-condition action:
The FAA has received no definitive data on which to base the cost estimates for the repair specified in this AD.
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.
The FAA is 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.
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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective March 11, 2025.
This AD replaces AD 2022-11-01, Amendment 39-22051 (87 FR 32292, May 31, 2022).
This AD applies to Airbus SAS airplanes identified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (5) of this AD, certificated in any category, as identified in European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2024-0145, dated July 23, 2024 (EASA AD 2024-0145).
(1) Model A300 B4-2C, B4-103, and B4-203 airplanes.
(2) Model A300 B4-601, B4-603, B4-620, and B4-622 airplanes.
(3) Model A300 B4-605R and B4-622R airplanes.
(4) Model A300 C4-605R Variant F airplanes.
(5) Model A300 F4-605R and F4-622R airplanes.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.
This AD was prompted by reports of cracking in the main landing gear (MLG) support rib 5 lower flange, inboard and outboard of rib 5, on the right-hand and left-hand sides, and the determination that additional airplanes are affected by the unsafe condition. The FAA is issuing this AD to address cracking of the MLG support rib 5 lower flange. This condition, if not detected and corrected, could affect the structural integrity of the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all required actions and compliance times specified in, and in accordance with, EASA AD 2024-0145.
(1) Where EASA AD 2024-0145 refers to August 31, 2021 (the effective date of EASA AD 2021-0190), this AD requires using July 5, 2022 (the effective date of AD 2022-11-01, Amendment 39-22051 (87 FR 32292, May 31, 2022)).
(2) Where EASA AD 2024-0145 refers to its effective date, this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
(3) Where paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2024-0145 specifies to “accomplish those instructions accordingly” if any crack is detected, for this AD if any crack is detected, the crack must be repaired before further flight using a method approved by the Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
(4) This AD does not adopt the “Remarks” section of EASA AD 2024-0145.
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(i) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
(ii) Airbus Statement of Airworthiness Compliance (ASAC) 80955386/006/2021, Issue 1, dated August 25, 2021; and ASAC 80955386/024/2022, Issue 1, dated February 25, 2022, are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD for the airplanes identified in those ASACs only.
(2)
(3)
For more information about this AD, contact Dan Rodina, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: 206-231-3225; email:
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of the material listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this material as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2024-0145, dated July 23, 2024.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) For EASA material identified in this AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
(4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this material at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, visit
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule; request for comments.
The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
This AD is effective February 19, 2025.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of February 19, 2025.
The FAA must receive comments on this AD by March 21, 2025.
You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
• For EASA material identified in this AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; phone: +49 221 8999 000; email:
• You may view this material at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (817) 222-5110. It is also available at
Eric Rivera, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: (847) 294-7166; email:
The FAA invites you to send any written data, views, or arguments about this final rule. Send your comments to an address listed under the
Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR 11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this AD contain commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to this AD, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing CBI as “PROPIN.” The FAA will treat such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public docket of this AD. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Eric Rivera, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: (847) 294-7166; email:
EASA which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD 2024-0244, dated December 13, 2024 (EASA AD 2024-0244) (also referred to as the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition on Airbus Helicopters Model AS 332 L, AS 332 L1, SA 365 N, SA 365 N1, AS 365 N3, SA 365 C1, SA 365 C2, and SA 365 C3 helicopters. The MCAI states the manufacturer reported that a defective testing tool was used during production, repair, and overhaul of certain recue hoist cable assemblies resulting in assemblies equipped with a defective ball end.
The FAA is issuing this AD to detect and address defective rescue hoist cable assembly ball ends. This unsafe condition, if not addressed, could lead to failure of the rescue hoist cable assembly, possibly resulting in injuries to a human load, or to persons on ground.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at
The FAA reviewed EASA AD 2024-0244, which requires, for helicopters with certain rescue hoists installed, a one-time inspection of the rescue hoist cable assembly and, depending on the results, replacing the rescue hoist cable assembly. EASA AD 2024-0244 also allows installing certain rescue hoist cable assemblies on any helicopter provided it is new (never previously installed on a rescue hoist) and allows installing certain rescue hoists on any helicopter provided it passes its required inspection.
This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
These products have been approved by the aviation authority of another country and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it has notified the FAA about the unsafe condition described in the MCAI. The FAA is issuing this AD after determining that the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other products of these same type designs.
This AD requires accomplishing the actions specified in EASA AD 2024-
In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD process, the FAA developed a process to use some civil aviation authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result, EASA AD 2024-0244 is incorporated by reference in this AD. This AD requires compliance with EASA AD 2024-0244 in its entirety through that incorporation, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this AD. Using common terms that are the same as the heading of a particular section in EASA AD 2024-0244 does not mean that operators need comply only with that section. For example, where the AD requirement refers to “all required actions and compliance times,” compliance with this AD requirement is not limited to the section titled “Required Action(s) and Compliance Time(s)” in EASA AD 2024-0244. Material required by EASA AD 2024-0244 for compliance will be available at
The MCAI applies to Model SA 365 C3 helicopters, whereas this AD does not because that model is not FAA type-certificated.
Section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 551
An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD without providing an opportunity for public comments prior to adoption. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies forgoing notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule because the rescue hoist assembly is essential during rescue operations and failure of this assembly could result in a failed rescue attempt and injury to a person being lifted or persons on the ground. Additionally, the FAA has no information pertaining to the extent of the defect in the rescue hoist assembly that may currently exist in helicopters or how quickly the condition may propagate to failure, therefore, the initial actions required by this AD must be accomplished before next rescue hoist operation. Accordingly, notice and opportunity for prior public comment are impracticable and contrary to the public interest pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b).
In addition, the FAA finds that good cause exists pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days, for the same reasons the FAA found good cause to forgo notice and comment.
The requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) do not apply when an agency finds good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 to adopt a rule without prior notice and comment. Because the FAA has determined that it has good cause to adopt this rule without prior notice and comment, RFA analysis is not required.
The FAA estimates that this AD affects up to 227 helicopters of U.S. registry. Labor rates are estimated at $85 per work-hour. Based on these numbers, the FAA estimates that operators may incur the following costs to comply with this AD.
Inspecting a rescue hoist cable assembly will take 2 work-hours for an estimated cost of $170 per helicopter and up to $38,590 for the U.S. fleet. If required, replacing a rescue hoist cable assembly will take 1 work-hours and parts will cost $10,218 for an estimated cost of $10,303 per helicopter.
The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate. According to the manufacturer, however, some of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected operators.
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.
The FAA is 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.
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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866, and
(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective February 19, 2025.
None.
This AD applies to Airbus Helicopters Model AS332L, AS332L1, AS 365 N3, SA-365C1, SA-365C2, SA-365N, and SA-365N1 helicopters, certificated in any category.
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 2500, Cabin Equipment/Furnishings.
This AD was prompted by a report that certain rescue hoist cable assemblies may be equipped with a defective ball end. The FAA is issuing this AD to detect and address defective rescue hoist cable assembly ball ends. This unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in failure of the rescue hoist cable assembly, in-flight failure of the rescue hoist, and subsequent injury to a person being lifted or to persons on the ground.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Except as specified in paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD: Comply with all required actions and compliance times specified in, and in accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency AD 2024-0244, dated December 13, 2024 (EASA AD 2024-0244).
(1) Where EASA AD 2024-0244 refers to its effective date, this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
(2) Where EASA AD 2024-0244 defines the “affected rescue hoist,” this AD requires replacing that definition with “Any rescue hoist, as identified in Table 2 of EASA AD 2024-0244, either manufactured, repaired, or overhauled by Breeze-Eastern's main facility in Whippany, New Jersey before April 8, 2024 and which has not had the rescue hoist cable replaced since then, and any rescue hoist, as identified in Table 2 of EASA AD 2024-0244, if the date of manufacture, repair, or overhaul cannot be determined.”
(3) Where paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2024-0244 states “any discrepancy is detected, as defined in the ASB,” this AD requires replacing that text with “there is any gouging.”
(4) This AD does not adopt the “Remarks” section of EASA AD 2024-0244.
Although the material referenced in EASA AD 2024-0244 specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD does not require that action.
Special flight permits may be issued under 14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199 to operate the helicopter to a location where the requirements of this AD can be accomplished provided that the rescue hoist is not used.
(1) The Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the International Validation Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (l) of this AD. Information may be emailed to:
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local Flight Standards District Office/certificate holding district office.
For more information about this AD, contact Eric Rivera, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: (847) 294-7166; email:
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of the material listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this material as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2024-0244, dated December 13, 2024.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) For EASA material identified in this AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; phone: +49 221 8999 000; email:
(4) You may view this material at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (817) 222-5110.
(5) You may view this material at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, visit
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
The FAA is superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2021-10-02, which applied to all Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes. AD 2021-10-02 required repetitive general visual inspections of the left- and right-hand elevator torque tube bearings for any sand, dust, or corrosion; repetitive functional tests of the elevator control system; and replacement of the elevator torque tube bearings if necessary. This AD continues to require certain actions in AD 2021-10-02 and requires revising the existing maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate a new airworthiness limitation. This AD was prompted by a determination that a new airworthiness limitation is necessary. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective March 11, 2025.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of March 11, 2025.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain other publications listed in this AD as of July 29, 2021 (86 FR 33088, June 24, 2021).
• For Bombardier material identified in this AD, contact Bombardier Business
• You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195. It is also available at
Gabriel Kim, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7300; email
The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2021-10-02, Amendment 39-21535 (86 FR 33088, June 24, 2021) (AD 2021-10-02). AD 2021-10-02 applied to all Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes. AD 2021-10-02 required repetitive general visual inspections of the left- and right-hand elevator torque tube bearings for any sand, dust, or corrosion; repetitive functional tests of the elevator control system; and replacement of the elevator torque tube bearings if necessary. The FAA issued AD 2021-10-02 to address sand contamination and corrosion of the elevator torque tube bearings, which could lead to binding or seizure of the bearings, and potentially lead to a reduction in or loss of airplane pitch control.
The NPRM published in the
In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to continue to require certain actions in AD 2021-10-02. In the NPRM, the FAA also proposed to require revising the existing maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate a new airworthiness limitation. The FAA is issuing this AD to address sand contamination and corrosion of the elevator torque tube bearings, which could lead to binding or seizure of the bearings, and potentially lead to a reduction in or loss of airplane pitch control.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at
The FAA received a comment from an anonymous commenter who supported the NPRM without change.
The FAA received an additional comment from Bombardier. The following presents the comment received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to that comment.
Bombardier requested a revision to paragraph (g) of the proposed AD to accommodate airplanes on which the identification data plate no longer specifies the date of manufacture. Bombardier stated that, for airplanes with serial numbers 60042 and 60045 and subsequent, the airplane identification data plate no longer specifies the date of manufacture. Instead, Bombardier added, the date of manufacture is identified in an airplane's technical records such as a technical log or technical logbook. Bombardier explained that the date in the technical records is validated by a Bombardier Minister's Delegate-Manufacturing (MDM), and that it believed this to be equivalent to the date on the identification data plate. Bombardier stated that it applied for and received a global alternative method of compliance (AMOC) for AD 2021-10-02 that contains the requested change.
The FAA agrees. The date of manufacture found either on the identification data plate of the airplane or in the airplane technical logbook may be used to determine when inspections required in paragraph (g) of this AD must be performed. The FAA has revised paragraph (g) of this AD accordingly. The FAA has also revised paragraph (l) of this AD to clarify that AMOCs approved previously for AD 2021-10-02 are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of paragraph (g) of this AD.
This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on this product. Except for minor editorial changes, and any other changes described previously, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic burden on any operator.
The FAA reviewed the following Bombardier temporary revisions:
• Bombardier Global Express, BD-700 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Temporary Revision 5-2-53, dated March 31, 2023 (for Model BD-700-1A10 airplanes);
• Bombardier Global Express XRS, BD-700 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Temporary Revision 5-2-15, dated March 31, 2023 (for Model BD-700-1A10 airplanes);
• Bombardier Global 6000, GL 6000 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Temporary Revision 5-2-20, dated March 31, 2023 (for Model BD-700-1A10 airplanes);
• (Bombardier) Global 6500, GL 6500 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Temporary Revision 5-2-3, dated March 31, 2023 (for Model BD-700-1A10 airplanes);
• Bombardier Global 5000, BD-700 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Temporary Revision 5-2-21, dated March 31, 2023 (for Model BD-700-1A11 airplanes);
• Bombardier Global 5000, GL 5000 Featuring Global Vision Flight Deck—Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Temporary Revision 5-2-20, dated March 31, 2023 (for Model BD-700-1A11 airplanes); and
• (Bombardier) Global 5500, Time Limits/Maintenance Checks GL 5500 Temporary Revision, 5-2-3, dated March 31, 2023 (for Model BD-700-1A11 airplanes).
This material specifies an airworthiness limitation for a certification maintenance requirement. These documents are distinct since they
This AD also requires the following material, which the Director of the Federal Register approved for incorporation by reference as of July 29, 2021 (86 FR 33088, June 24, 2021).
• Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-1A11-27-041, Revision 1, dated December 7, 2020.
• Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-083, Revision 1, dated December 7, 2020.
• Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-5012, Revision 1, dated December 7, 2020.
• Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-5503, Revision 1, dated December 7, 2020.
• Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-6012, Revision 1, dated December 7, 2020.
• Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-6503, Revision 1, dated December 7, 2020.
This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
The FAA estimates that this AD affects 461 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:
The FAA has determined that revising the maintenance or inspection program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator, although the agency recognizes that this number may vary from operator to operator. Since operators incorporate maintenance or inspection program changes for their affected fleet(s), the FAA has determined that a per-operator estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane estimate. Therefore, the agency estimates the average total cost per operator to be $7,650 (90 work-hours × $85 per work-hour).
The FAA estimates the total cost per operator for the new actions to be $7,650 (90 work-hours × $85 per work-hour).
The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-condition actions that would be required based on the results of any required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need this on-condition action:
The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate. According to the manufacturer, however, some or all of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected operators.
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.
The FAA is 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.
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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective March 11, 2025.
This AD replaces AD 2021-10-02, Amendment 39-21535 (86 FR 33088, June 24, 2021) (AD 2021-10-02).
This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes, certificated in any category, having serial numbers 9002 through 60081 inclusive.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Time Limits/Maintenance Checks; 27, Flight Controls.
This AD was prompted by a determination that a new airworthiness limitation is necessary. The FAA is issuing this AD to address sand contamination and corrosion of the elevator torque tube bearings, which could lead to binding or seizure of the bearings, and potentially lead to a reduction in or loss of airplane pitch control.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (g) of AD 2021-10-02, with a change to table 1 to paragraph (g), which identifies the airplane marketing designation instead of the serial number range, and a change to add an additional source for identifying the date of airplane manufacture. Within 36 months from July 29, 2021 (the effective date of AD 2021-10-02) or within 63 months from the date of airplane manufacture, as identified on the identification data plate of the airplane or in the airplane technical logbook, whichever occurs later: Do a general visual inspection of the left- and right-hand elevator torque tube bearings for any sand, dust, or corrosion; perform a functional test of the elevator control system; and do all applicable corrective actions; in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of paragraphs 2.B., 2.C., and 2.D. of the applicable material specified in table 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD. Applicable corrective actions must be done before further flight. Repeat the general visual inspection and functional test thereafter at intervals not to exceed 63 months. Accomplishing the revision of the existing maintenance or inspection program required by paragraph (i) of this AD terminates the requirements of this paragraph.
Although the material identified in table 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement.
Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the existing maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate the information specified in the applicable temporary revision identified in table 2 to paragraph (i) of this AD. The initial compliance time for doing the task is at the time specified in the applicable temporary revision identified in table 2 to paragraph (i) of this AD, or within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later. Accomplishing the revision of the existing maintenance or inspection program required by this paragraph terminates the actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD.
After the existing maintenance or inspection program has been revised as required by paragraph (i) of this AD, no alternative actions (
(1) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before July 29, 2021 (the effective date of AD 2021-10-02) using the applicable material specified in paragraphs (k)(1)(i) through (vi) of this AD, which are not incorporated by reference in this AD.
(i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-1A11-27-041, dated July 23, 2020.
(ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-083, dated July 23, 2020.
(iii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-5012, dated July 23, 2020.
(iv) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-5503, dated July 23, 2020.
(v) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-6012, dated July 23, 2020.
(vi) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-6503, dated July 23, 2020.
(2) This paragraph provides credit for the initial and repetitive inspection actions required by paragraph (i) of this AD if those actions were performed before the effective date of this AD using the applicable material identified in table 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD, which were incorporated by reference in AD 2021-10-02.
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(i) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
(ii) AMOCs approved previously for AD 2021-10-02, are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of paragraph (g) of this AD.
(2)
(1) For more information about this AD, contact Gabriel Kim, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7300; email
(2) Material identified in this AD that is not incorporated by reference is available at the address specified in paragraph (n)(5) of this AD.
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the material listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this material as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(3) The following material was approved for IBR on March 11, 2025.
(i) (Bombardier) Global 5500, GL 5500 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Temporary Revision, 5-2-3, dated March 31, 2023.
(ii) (Bombardier) Global 6500, GL 6500 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Temporary Revision 5-2-3, dated March 31, 2023.
(iii) Bombardier Global 5000, BD-700 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Temporary Revision 5-2-21, dated March 31, 2023.
(iv) Bombardier Global 5000, GL 5000 Featuring Global Vision Flight Deck Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Temporary Revision 5-2-20, dated March 31, 2023.
(v) Bombardier Global 6000, GL 6000 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Temporary Revision 5-2-20, dated March 31, 2023.
(vi) Bombardier Global Express, BD-700 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Temporary Revision 5-2-53, dated March 31, 2023.
(vii) Bombardier Global Express XRS, BD-700 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Temporary Revision 5-2-15, dated March 31, 2023.
(4) The following material was approved for IBR on July 29, 2021 (86 FR 33088, June 24, 2021).
(i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-1A11-27-041, Revision 1, dated December 7, 2020.
(ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-083, Revision 1, dated December 7, 2020.
(iii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-5012, Revision 1, dated December 7, 2020.
(iv) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-5503, Revision 1, dated December 7, 2020.
(v) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-6012, Revision 1, dated December 7, 2020.
(vi) Bombardier Service Bulletin 700-27-6503, Revision 1, dated December 7, 2020.
(5) For Bombardier material identified in this AD, contact Bombardier Business Aircraft Customer Response Center, 400 Côte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone 514-855-2999; email
(6) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(7) You may view this material at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, visit
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
The FAA is superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2022-16-06, which applied to certain Airbus SAS Model A330-200, A330-200 Freighter, A330-300, and A330-900 series airplanes; and all Model A340-200 and A340-300 series airplanes. AD 2022-16-06 required modifying the trimmable horizontal stabilizer actuator (THSA) installation, implementing the electrical load sensing device (ELSD) wiring provisions, and installing and activating the ELSD. This AD was prompted by tests that demonstrated that when the upper secondary load path (SLP) of the THSA is engaged, the THSA might not stall, with consequently no indication of SLP engagement, and by the recent determination that the required actions of AD 2022-16-06 cannot be accomplished on certain airplanes. This AD continues to require the actions in AD 2022-16-06 with revised procedures, and also requires additional actions for certain airplanes, as specified in a European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is incorporated by reference. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective March 11, 2025.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of March 11, 2025.
• For EASA material identified in this AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
• You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195. It is also available at
Vladimir Ulyanov, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: 206-231-3229; email:
The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2022-16-06, Amendment 39-22135 (87 FR 51588, August 23, 2022) (AD 2022-16-06). AD 2022-16-06 applied to certain Airbus SAS Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, -223F, -243, -243F, -301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342, -343, and -941 airplanes; and all Model A340-211, -212, -213, -311, -312, and -313 airplanes. AD 2022-16-06 required modifying the THSA installation, implementing the ELSD wiring provisions, and installing and activating the ELSD. The FAA issued AD 2022-16-06 to address damage on the upper THSA SLP attachment with consequent mechanical disconnection of the THSA, possibly resulting in loss of control of the airplane.
The NPRM published in the
In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to continue to require modifying the THSA installation, implementing the ELSD wiring provisions, and installing and activating the ELSD, as specified in FAA AD 2022-16-06 and EASA AD 2022-0039, with revised procedures and additional actions, as specified in EASA AD 2024-0016. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at
The FAA received a comment from the Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA), who supported the NPRM without change.
The FAA received an additional comment from Delta Air Lines (Delta). The following presents that comment and the FAA's response.
The proposed AD would adopt EASA AD 2024-0016, which requires certain actions in accordance with a specific revision of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3237, depending on the airplane serial number, and allows use of later-approved revisions. Delta requested that the FAA clarify the effect of any potential changes, including rework, that are proposed to be included in the forthcoming Revision 03 of Service Bulletin A330-27-3237. According to Delta, Airbus has indicated that Revision 03 will require additional work for any airplane modified by Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3237, Revision 01, dated June 20, 2023, or Revision 02, dated February 9, 2024. Delta added that Airbus planned to issue Revision 03 by the end of June 2024.
The FAA provides the following clarification. Revision 03 of Airbus Service Bulletin A330-27-3237 has not been released by Airbus. EASA has informed the FAA of ongoing discussions with Airbus regarding the scope of additional work, the timeline for release of Revision 03 of that service bulletin, and a potential revision to EASA AD 2024-0016. If EASA issues a new AD because it is determined that additional work is needed to address the unsafe condition, then the FAA may consider further rulemaking at that time. This AD requires accomplishing the actions specified in EASA AD 2024-0016. The specific revisions of the service bulletins referenced in EASA AD 2024-0016, as well as later-approved revisions of those service bulletins, are acceptable methods of compliance for accomplishing the requirements of this AD. If an operator elects to use a later-approved revision of a service bulletin, then all the actions identified as “RC” (required for compliance) in that service bulletin must be accomplished, unless alternative actions are approved under the provisions of paragraph (i) of this AD. The FAA has not changed this AD as a result of this comment.
This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received, and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on this product. Except for minor editorial changes, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic burden on any operator.
EASA AD 2024-0016 specifies procedures for installing and activating the ELSD and wiring provisions, and doing additional work that includes additional instructions and corrections for certain airplanes. This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
The FAA estimates that this AD affects 120 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:
According to the manufacturer, some or all of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected individuals. The FAA does not control warranty coverage for affected individuals. As a result, the FAA has included all known costs in the cost estimate.
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.
The FAA is 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.
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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective March 11, 2025.
This AD replaces AD 2022-16-06, Amendment 39-22135 (87 FR 51588, August 23, 2022) (AD 2022-16-06).
This AD applies to Airbus SAS airplanes specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this AD, certificated in any category, as identified in European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2024-0016, dated January 11, 2024 (EASA AD 2024-0016).
(1) Model A330-201, -202, -203, -223, -223F, -243, -243F, -301, -302, -303, -321, -322, -323, -341, -342, -343, and -941 airplanes.
(2) Model A340-211, -212, -213, -311, -312, and -313 airplanes.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27, Flight Controls.
This AD was prompted by tests that demonstrated that when the upper secondary load path (SLP) of the trimmable horizontal stabilizer actuator (THSA) is engaged, the THSA might not stall, with consequently no indication of SLP engagement, and by the recent determination that the required actions of AD 2022-16-06 cannot be accomplished on certain airplanes. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent damage on the upper THSA SLP attachment with consequent mechanical disconnection of the THSA, that could result in loss of control of the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all required actions and compliance times specified in, and in accordance with, EASA AD 2024-0016.
(1) Where EASA AD 2024-0016 refers to “22 March 2022 [the effective date of EASA AD 2022-0039],” this AD requires using September 27, 2022 (the effective date of AD 2022-16-06).
(2) Where EASA AD 2024-0016 refers to its effective date, this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
(3) Where paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2024-0016 applies to airplanes in “Group 1,” this AD requires replacing that text with “Group 1 airplanes, except as specified in paragraph (3)”.
(4) This AD does not adopt the “Remarks” section of EASA AD 2024-0016.
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(i) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
(ii) AMOCs approved previously for AD 2022-16-06 are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of EASA AD 2024-0016 that are required by paragraph (g) of this AD.
(2)
(3)
For more information about this AD, contact Vladimir Ulyanov, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: 206-231-3229; email:
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of the material listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this material as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2024-0016, dated January 11, 2024.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) For EASA material identified in this AD, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
(4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this material at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, visit
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain DAHER AEROSPACE (DAHER) Model TBM 700 airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports of wear of the inner flap actuator drive nut. This AD requires cleaning and lubricating the internal actuator rods, measuring the play between the drive nuts and the internal actuator rods, and if any play is found, replacing the drive nuts. This AD also allows replacing the drive nuts with certain other design drive nuts as
This AD is effective March 11, 2025.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of March 11, 2025.
• For Daher Aerospace material identified in this AD, contact DAHER, Customer Support, Airplane Business Unit, Tarbes Cedex 9, France; phone: (833) 826-2273; email:
• You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (817) 222-5110. It is also available at
Fred Guerin, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: (206) 231-2346; email:
The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain DAHER Model TBM 700 airplanes. The NPRM published in the
In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require cleaning and lubricating the internal actuator rods, measuring the play between the drive nuts and the internal actuator rods, and if any play was found, replacing the drive nuts. The proposed AD also allowed replacing the drive nuts with certain other design drive nuts as terminating action for the proposed requirements.
You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at
The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of the costs to the public.
These products have been approved by the aviation authority of another country and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products. Except for minor editorial changes, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM.
The FAA reviewed Daher Aerospace Service Bulletin SB 70-118 Revision 3, dated December 2023. This material specifies procedures for cleaning and lubricating the internal actuator rods, measuring the play between the drive nut and the internal actuator rods, and replacing the drive nut.
This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
The FAA estimates that this AD will affect 807 airplanes of U.S. registry.
The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:
If, during any measurement for play, no discrepancy is found, operators have the option to replace the LH and RH drive nuts. If, during any measuring for play, any discrepancy is found, the LH and RH drive nuts must be replaced. Replacing the LH and RH drive nuts would be terminating action for the repetitive cleaning, lubricating, and measuring play. The FAA estimates the following costs for replacing the LH and RH drive nuts:
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.
The FAA is 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.
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.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective March 11, 2025.
None.
This AD applies to DAHER AEROSPACE (type certificate previously held by SOCATA) (DAHER) Model TBM 700 airplanes, all serial numbers, certificated in any category, except those with DAHER Modification (MOD) 70-0777-27 installed during production.
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 2750, TE Flap Control System; 2752, TE Flap Actuator.
This AD was prompted by reports of wear of the inner flap actuator drive nut. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent wear of the drive nut threading on the internal actuator flaps. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in improper play between the actuator threaded rod and the drive nut, which could result in loss of flap control and consequent reduced or loss of control of the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
(1) Clean and lubricate the left-hand (LH) and right-hand (RH) internal actuator rods in accordance with Paragraph C. in the Description of Accomplishment Instructions of Daher Aerospace Service Bulletin SB 70-118 Revision 3, dated December 2023 (Daher SB 70-118) within the compliance times identified in paragraph (g)(1)(i) or (ii) of this AD, whichever occurs later.
(i) Before the accumulation of 400 hours time-in-service (TIS) or 12 months, whichever occurs first, since the first installation of a LH and RH inner flap actuator, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 400 hours TIS or 12 months, whichever occurs first.
(ii) Within 10 hours TIS after the effective date of this AD and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 400 hours TIS or 12 months, whichever occurs first.
(2) Within the compliance time identified in paragraph (g)(2)(i) or (ii) of this AD, whichever occurs later, and thereafter, at intervals not to exceed 400 hours TIS or 12 months, whichever occurs first, for each inner flap actuator, measure the play between the drive nut and the internal actuator rod in accordance with Section A, Paragraphs (1) through (9), in the Description of Accomplishment Instructions of Daher SB 70-118. Where Section A, Paragraph (3), in the Description of Accomplishment Instructions of Daher SB 70-118 specifies “With the help of a second operator” this AD requires this action be performed by persons authorized under 14 CFR 43.3.
(i) 3,000 hours TIS since first installation of the inner flap actuator on your airplane.
(ii) 400 hours TIS or 12 months, whichever occurs first since the last play measurement accomplished for that inner flap actuator in accordance with Section A, Paragraphs (1) through (9), in the Description of Accomplishment Instructions of Daher SB 70-118.
(3) If, during any measurement required by paragraph (g)(2) of this AD, any play is found, as identified in Section A, Paragraphs (8)(b) and (9)(b), of the Description of Accomplishment Instructions, Daher SB 70-118, before further flight, accomplish the applicable corrective actions in accordance with Section A, Paragraphs (10) through (15) and (17), and Section C, Paragraph (1), in the Description of Accomplishment Instructions of Daher SB 70-118. Where Section B, Paragraph (4), in the Description of Accomplishment Instructions of Daher SB 70-118, specifies to discard an old drive nut, this AD requires removing the old drive nut from service.
(4) If, during any measurement as required by paragraph (g)(2) of this AD, no play is found, as identified in Section A, Paragraphs (8)(a) and (9)(a), in the Description of Accomplishment Instructions of Daher SB 70-118, before further flight, accomplish the actions in accordance with Section A, Paragraphs (13) through (15) and (17), and Section C, Paragraph (1), in the Description of Accomplishment Instructions of Daher SB 70-118.
Replacing the drive nuts in accordance with Section B, Paragraphs (1) through (10), in the Description of Accomplishment Instructions of Daher SB 70-118, constitutes terminating action for all of the actions required by paragraphs (g)(1) and (2) of this AD, provided, after that replacement, no LH flap actuator having part number (P/N) 1-5295-B or RH flap actuator having P/N 2-5295-B is installed. Where Section B, Paragraph (4) in the Description of Accomplishment Instructions of Daher SB 70-118, specifies to discard an old drive nut, this AD requires removing the old drive nut from service.
The Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the International Validation Branch, mail it to the address identified in paragraph (j) of this AD or email to:
For more information about this AD, contact Fred Guerin, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: (206) 231-2346; email:
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of the material listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this material as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Daher Aerospace Service Bulletin SB 70-118, Revision 3, dated December 2023.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) For Daher Aerospace material identified in this AD, contact DAHER, Customer Support, Airplane Business Unit, Tarbes Cedex 9, France; phone: (833) 826-2273; email:
(4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (817) 222-5110.
(5) You may view this material at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, visit
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
This action amends Very High Frequency Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Federal Airways V-9, V-78, V-341, and V-430, and Canadian Area Navigation (RNAV) Route T-765; and establishes United States (U.S.) RNAV Route T-490. The FAA is taking this action due to the planned decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Iron Mountain, MI (IMT), VOR/Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME) navigational aid (NAVAID). The Iron Mountain VOR is being decommissioned in support of the FAA's VOR Minimum Operational Network (MON) program.
Effective date 0901 UTC, April 17, 2025. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order JO 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.
A copy of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), all comments received, this final rule, and all background material may be viewed online at
FAA Order JO 7400.11J, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at
Colby Abbott, Rules and Regulations Group, Policy Directorate, Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20597; telephone: (202) 267-8783.
The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it modifies the National Airspace System (NAS) as necessary to preserve the safe and efficient flow of air traffic.
The FAA published an NPRM for Docket No. FAA-2024-2458 in the
Subsequent the NPRM, the FAA published a rule for Docket No. FAA-2024-1048 in the
VOR Federal Airways are published in paragraph 6010(a), United States Area Navigation Routes are published in paragraph 6011, and Canadian Area Navigation Routes are published in paragraph 6013 of FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 on an annual basis. This document amends the current version of that order, FAA Order JO 7400.11J, dated July 31, 2024, and effective September 15, 2024. FAA Order JO 7400.11J is publicly available as listed in the
FAA Order JO 7400.11J lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.
This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by amending VOR Federal Airways V-9, V-78, V-341, and V-430, and Canadian RNAV Route T-765; and establishing U.S. RNAV Route T-490. This action is required due to the planned decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Iron Mountain, MI, VOR/DME NAVAID. The ATS route actions are described below.
The NAVAID radials listed in the VOR Federal airway descriptions in the regulatory text of this final rule are unchanged and stated in degrees True north.
The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore: (1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
The FAA has determined that this action amending VOR Federal Airways V-9, V-78, V-341, and V-430, and Canadian RNAV Route T-765; and establishing U.S. RNAV Route T-490 due to the planned decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Iron Mountain, MI, VOR/DME NAVAID, qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321
Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(f); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.
From Leeville, LA; Mc Comb, MS; INT Mc Comb 004° and Magnolia, MS 194° radials; Magnolia; Sidon, MS; Marvell, AR; INT Marvell 326° and Walnut Ridge, AR 187° radials; Walnut Ridge; Farmington, MO; St. Louis, MO; to Spinner, IL. From Janesville, WI; Madison, WI; Oshkosh, WI; to Green Bay, WI.
From Gopher, MN; INT Gopher 091° and Eau Claire, WI, 290° radials; Eau Claire; to Rhinelander, WI. From Pellston, MI; Alpena, MI; INT Alpena 232° and Saginaw, MI, 353° radials; to Saginaw.
From Cedar Rapids, IA; Dubuque, IA; Madison, WI; Oshkosh, WI; to Green Bay, WI.
From Cut Bank, MT; 10 miles, 74 miles 55 MSL, Havre, MT; 14 miles, 100 miles 50 MSL, Glasgow, MT; INT Glasgow 100° and Williston, ND, 263° radials; 22 miles, 33 miles 55 MSL, Williston; to Minot, ND. From Grand Forks, ND; Thief River Falls, MN; INT Thief River Falls 122° and Grand Rapids, MN, 292° radials; Grand Rapids; Duluth, MN; to Ironwood, MI.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule.
This action amends Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface for Kinston, NC, by adding airspace for Lenoir Memorial Hospital Heliport, Kinston, NC. This action also updates the coordinates for Kinston Regional Jetport at Stallings Field, Kinston, NC. Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at this airport.
Effective 0901 UTC, April 17, 2025. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order JO 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.
A copy of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), all comments received, this final rule, and all background material may be viewed online at
FAA Order JO 7400.11J, Airspace Designations, and Reporting Points, as well as subsequent amendments, can be viewed online at
Marc Ellerbee, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; telephone: (404) 305-5589.
The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority, as it amends Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface in Kinston, NC.
The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking for Docket No. FAA 2024-1979 in the
Class E airspace is published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 on an annual basis. This document amends the current version of that order, FAA Order JO 7400.11J, dated July 31, 2024, and effective September 15, 2024. FAA Order JO 7400.11J is publicly available as listed in the
This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by amending Class E airspace by adding airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6-mile radius of the Lenoir Memorial Hospital Heliport, Kinston, NC. This action also updates the coordinates for Kinston Regional Jetport at Stallings Field, Kinston, NC. Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of instrument flight rules (IFR) operations in the area.
The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore: (1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,” paragraph 5-6.5a. This airspace action is not expected to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant the preparation of an environmental assessment.
Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(f); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.
That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.7-mile radius of Kinston Regional Jetport at Stallings Field, within 2.5 miles on each side of the Kinston VORTAC 047° radial, extending from the 6.7-mile radius to 7 miles northeast of the VORTAC, and within a 6-mile radius of Lenoir Memorial Hospital Heliport.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Proposed rule.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend its spent fuel storage regulations by revising the Holtec International HI-STORM UMAX Canister Storage System listing within the “List of approved spent fuel storage casks” to include Revision 1 to Amendment Nos. 0 through 2 to Certificate of Compliance (CoC) No. 1040. Revision 1 to Amendment Nos. 0 through 2 updates the CoC appendix A technical specifications for radiation protection and the associated bases information to clearly articulate the basis for the dose rate limits for the closure lids, modify the dose rate limit values and the description of the location of the dose rate measurements, and make other editorial changes.
Submit comments by March 6, 2025. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date.
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID NRC-2024-0182, at
You can read a plain language description of this proposed rule at
George Tartal, Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards, telephone: 301-415-0016, email:
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2024-0182 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly available information related to this action by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
The NRC encourages electronic comment submission through the Federal rulemaking website (
The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at
If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.
Because the NRC considers this action to be non-controversial, the NRC is publishing this proposed rule concurrently with a direct final rule in the Rules and Regulations section of this issue of the
A significant adverse comment is a comment where the commenter explains why the rule would be inappropriate, including challenges to the rule's underlying premise or approach, or would be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. A comment is adverse and significant if:
(1) The comment opposes the rule and provides a reason sufficient to require a substantive response in a notice-and-comment process. For example, a substantive response is required when:
(a) The comment causes the NRC to reevaluate (or reconsider) its position or conduct additional analysis;
(b) The comment raises an issue serious enough to warrant a substantive response to clarify or complete the record; or
(c) The comment raises a relevant issue that was not previously addressed or considered by the NRC.
(2) The comment proposes a change or an addition to the rule, and it is apparent that the rule would be ineffective or unacceptable without incorporation of the change or addition.
(3) The comment causes the NRC to make a change (other than editorial) to the rule, CoC, or technical specifications.
For a more detailed discussion of the proposed rule changes and associated analyses, see the direct final rule published in the Rules and Regulations section of this issue of the
Section 218(a) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended, requires that “[t]he Secretary [of the Department of Energy] shall establish a demonstration program, in cooperation with the private sector, for the dry storage of spent nuclear fuel at civilian nuclear power reactor sites, with the objective of establishing one or more technologies that the [Nuclear Regulatory] Commission may, by rule, approve for use at the sites of civilian nuclear power reactors without, to the maximum extent practicable, the need for additional site-specific approvals by the Commission.” Section 133 of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act states, in part, that “[t]he Commission shall, by rule, establish procedures for the licensing of any technology approved by the Commission under Section 219(a) [sic: 218(a)] for use at the site of any civilian nuclear power reactor.”
To implement this mandate, the Commission approved dry storage of spent nuclear fuel in NRC-approved casks under a general license by publishing a final rule that added a new subpart K in part 72 of title 10 of the
The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-274) requires Federal agencies to write documents in a clear, concise, and well-organized manner. The NRC has written this document to be consistent with the Plain Writing Act as well as the Presidential Memorandum, “Plain Language in Government Writing,” published June 10, 1998 (63 FR 31885). The NRC requests comment on the proposed rule with respect to clarity and effectiveness of the language used.
The documents identified in the following table are available to interested persons as indicated.
The NRC may post materials related to this document, including public comments, on the Federal rulemaking website at
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed special conditions.
This action proposes special conditions for the Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation (Gulfstream) Model GVII-G400 airplane. This airplane will have a novel or unusual design feature when compared to the state of technology envisioned in the airworthiness standards for transport-category airplanes. This design feature is a high-speed protection system. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for this design feature. These special conditions contain the additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards.
Send comments on or before March 21, 2025.
Send comments identified by Docket No. FAA-2024-2442 using any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
Todd Martin, Airframe (P&S) Section, AIR-622, Technical Policy Branch, Policy and Standards Division, Aircraft Certification Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 2200 South 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone 206-231-3210; email
The FAA invites interested people to take part in this rulemaking by sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposed special conditions, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data.
The FAA will consider all comments received by the closing date for comments and will consider comments filed late if it is possible to do so without incurring delay. The FAA may change these special conditions based on the comments received.
Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in the following paragraph, and other information as described in title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 11.35, the FAA will post all comments received without change to
Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to these special conditions contain commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to these special conditions, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing CBI as “PROPIN.” The FAA will treat such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and the indicated comments will not be placed in the public docket of these proposed special conditions. Send submissions containing CBI to the individual listed in the For Further Information Contact section above. Comments the FAA receives, which are not specifically designated as CBI, will be placed in the public docket for these proposed special conditions.
On June 30, 2020, Gulfstream applied for an amendment to Type Certificate No. T00021AT to include the new Model GVII-G400 airplane. The Gulfstream Model GVII-G400 airplane, which is a derivative of the Model GVII-G500 airplane currently approved under Type Certificate No. T00021AT, is a twin-engine, transport-category, business jet, with a maximum seating for 19 passengers, and a maximum take-off weight of 73,500 pounds.
Under the provisions of 14 CFR 21.101, Gulfstream must show that the Model GVII-G400 airplane meets the applicable provisions of the regulations listed in Type Certificate No. T00021AT, or the applicable regulations in effect on the date of application for the change, except for earlier amendments as agreed upon by the FAA.
If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness regulations (
Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which they are issued. Should the type certificate
In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special conditions, the Gulfstream Model GVII-G400 airplane must comply with the exhaust-emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34, and the noise-certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36.
The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in accordance with § 11.38, and they become part of the type certification basis under § 21.101.
The Gulfstream Model GVII-G400 airplane will incorporate the following novel or unusual design feature:
The GVII-G400 is equipped with a high-speed protection system that limits nose down pilot authority at speeds above V
Section 25.335(b)(1) is an analytical envelope condition which was originally adopted in part 4b of the Civil Air Regulations in order to provide an acceptable speed margin between design cruise speed and design dive speed. Flutter clearance design speeds and airframe design loads are impacted by the design dive speed. While the initial condition for the upset specified in the rule is 1g level flight, protection is afforded for other inadvertent overspeed conditions as well. Section 25.335(b)(1) is intended as a conservative enveloping condition for potential overspeed conditions, including non-symmetric ones. To establish that potential overspeed conditions are enveloped, the applicant must demonstrate that any reduced speed margin based on the high-speed protection system will not be exceeded in inadvertent or gust induced upsets resulting in initiation of the dive from non-symmetric attitudes; or that the airplane is protected by the flight control laws from getting into non-symmetric upset conditions. The applicant must conduct a demonstration that includes a comprehensive set of conditions as described below.
A special condition is proposed in lieu of § 25.335(b)(1). Section 25.335(b)(2), which also addresses the design dive speed, is applied separately. Advisory Circular 25.335-1A, “Design Dive Speed,” dated September 29, 2000, provides an acceptable means of compliance to § 25.335(b)(2).
These special conditions contain the additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards.
As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to Gulfstream Model GVII-G400 airplane. Should Gulfstream apply at a later date for a change to the type certificate to include another model incorporating the same novel or unusual design feature, these special conditions would apply to that model as well.
This action affects only the certain novel or unusual design feature on the Gulfstream Model GVII-G400 airplane. It is not a rule of general applicability.
Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, and 44704.
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of the type certification basis for Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation Model GVII-G400 airplanes.
(1) In lieu of compliance with § 25.335(b)(1), if the flight control system includes functions that act automatically to initiate recovery before the end of the 20 second period specified in § 25.335(b)(1), V
(a) From an initial condition of stabilized flight at V
(b) From any likely level cruise speed up to V
(2) Any failure of the high-speed protection system that would affect the speed margin determined by paragraph (1) must be improbable (occur at a rate less than 10-5 per flight hour).
(3) Failures of the system must be annunciated to the pilots, and flight manual instructions must be provided to reduce the maximum operating speeds, V
(4) Master minimum equipment list (MMEL) relief for the high-speed protection system may be considered by the FAA Flight Operations Evaluation Board (FOEB) provided that the flight manual instructions indicate reduced maximum operating speeds as described in paragraph (3), and that no additional hazards are introduced with the high-speed protection system inoperative. In addition, the cockpit display of the reduced operating speeds, as well as the overspeed warning for exceeding those speeds, must be equivalent to that of the normal airplane with the high-speed protection system operative.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Proposed rule; withdrawal.
The FAA is withdrawing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that proposed to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2023-08-04, which applies to certain The Boeing Company Model 787-8, 787-9, and 787-10 airplanes. The NPRM was prompted by reports of a loss of water pressure during flight and water leaks that affected multiple pieces of electronic equipment, and by the discovery that some clamshell couplings did not have the required safety strap. The NPRM would have required inspecting all door 1 and door 3 lavatory and galley potable water systems for missing or incorrectly installed clamshell couplings, inspecting all clamshell couplings for the presence and correct installation of safety straps at door 1 and door 3 lavatories and galleys with a potable water system, and performing applicable on-condition actions. The NPRM would have also prohibited the installation of affected parts at inspection locations and removed Model 787-10 airplanes from the applicability. Since issuance of the NPRM, the FAA has determined that the identified service information may not adequately address the unsafe condition on one of the galleys, and Model 787-10 airplanes should be included in the applicability. Accordingly, the NPRM is withdrawn.
As of February 4, 2025, the proposed rule, which was published in the
Courtney Tuck, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone: 206-231-3986; email:
The FAA issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2023-08-04, Amendment 39-22419 (88 FR 33823, May 25, 2023) (AD 2023-08-04). AD 2023-08-04 applied to certain The Boeing Company Model 787-8, 787-9, and 787-10 airplanes. The NPRM was published in the
The proposed actions were intended to address water leaks and water migration to critical flight equipment, which may affect the continued safe flight and landing of the airplane.
Since issuance of the NPRM, Boeing advised the FAA that an inspection area is missing from Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB250299-00 RB, Issue 001, dated July 31, 2023(as specified in paragraph (j) of the proposed AD). As a result, the NPRM may not adequately address the unsafe condition on one of the galleys. Specifically, Task 3, Figure 10, needs to be updated to add an inspection area to the FWD galley located at Door 1. According to Boeing, the current figure specifies inspection of only Detail K, the area above the galley carts, so Detail L will be added in a revised requirements bulletin to specify an inspection of the area behind all of the galley carts. Boeing anticipates release of the revised bulletin in the middle of 2025.
Since the NPRM does not address the unsafe condition and the unsafe condition still exists, the FAA is withdrawing the NPRM and considering additional rulemaking to require the revised service information. The FAA has determined that any new AD will be issued within the timeframe established by the safety assessment.
Withdrawal of the NPRM constitutes only such action and does not preclude the FAA from further rulemaking on this issue, nor does it commit the FAA to any course of action in the future.
The FAA received comments from United Airlines, the Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA), and an individual, who supported the NPRM without change.
The FAA also received a comment from The Boeing Company. The following presents the comment received on the NPRM and the FAA's response to the comment.
Boeing noted that some Model 787-10 airplanes could be in storage or are otherwise inactive and requested that
The FAA agrees that the applicability of the NPRM did not include Model 787-10 airplanes. Those airplanes had been removed from the applicability of the proposed AD because Boeing had originally stated that Model 787-10 airplanes were delivered with safety-strap clamshell couplings on affected potable water lines, so those airplanes were not included in Boeing Requirements Bulletin B787-81205-SB250299-00 RB, Issue 001, dated July 31, 2023 (the service information specified in paragraph (j) of the proposed AD). Accordingly, the NPRM stated that Model 787-10 airplanes were no longer subject to the unsafe condition and therefore not included in the applicability. However, as Boeing stated, there is a possibility that some Model 787-10 airplanes may have been in storage and not inspected as required by AD 2023-08-04 (and restated in retained paragraph (g) of the proposed AD). Therefore, if appropriate, those airplanes will be included in future rulemaking that addresses the unsafe condition. Because the NPRM is withdrawn, no further action is necessary for this NPRM.
Upon further consideration, the FAA has determined that the NPRM would not adequately address the identified unsafe condition. Accordingly, the NPRM is withdrawn. AD 2023-08-04 remains in effect unless it is later superseded.
Since this action only withdraws an NPRM, it is neither a proposed nor a final rule. This action therefore is not covered under Executive Order 12866, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, or DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979).
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a determination that new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary. This proposed AD would require revising the existing maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 21, 2025.
You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
• For Bombardier material identified in this proposed AD, contact Bombardier Business Aircraft Customer Response Center, 400 Côte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; phone 514-855-2999; email
• You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
Mark Taylor, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: 516-228-7300; email:
The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under the
Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR 11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each
Transport Canada, which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Transport Canada AD CF-2023-65, dated October 3, 2023 (Transport Canada AD CF-2023-65) (also referred to after this as the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes. The MCAI states that new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations have been developed.
The FAA is proposing this AD to address new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations. Failure to adhere to the specified airworthiness limitations could adversely affect the stability and controllability of the airplane on landing and could result in damage to the airplane. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at
The FAA reviewed the following Bombardier documents:
• Part 2, “Airworthiness Limitations,” of Bombardier Global Express Time Limits/Maintenance Checks (TLMC), Publication No. BD-700 TLMC, Revision 35, dated December 19, 2023. (For obtaining this part of Bombardier Global Express TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 TLMC, use Document Identification No. GL 700 TLMC.)
• Part 2, “Airworthiness Limitations,” of Bombardier Global Express XRS TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 XRS TLMC, Revision 22, dated December 19, 2023. (For obtaining this part of Bombardier Global Express XRS TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 XRS TLMC, use Document Identification No. GL XRS TLMC.)
• Part 2, “Airworthiness Limitations,” of Bombardier Global 6000 TLMC, Publication No. GL 6000 TLMC, Revision 16, dated December 19, 2023.
• Part 2, “Airworthiness Limitations,” of Bombardier Global 6500 TLMC, Publication No. GL 6500 TLMC, Revision 5, dated December 19, 2023.
• Part 2, “Airworthiness Limitations,” of Bombardier Global 5000 TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 TLMC, Revision 26, dated December 19, 2023. (For obtaining this part of Bombardier Global 5000 TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 TLMC, use Document Identification No. GL 5000 TLMC.)
• Part 2, “Airworthiness Limitations,” of Bombardier Global 5500 TLMC, Publication No. GL 5500 TLMC, Revision 5, dated December 19, 2023.
• Part 2, “Airworthiness Limitations,” of Bombardier Global 5000 TLMC, Publication No. GL 5000 GVFD TLMC, Revision 16, dated December 19, 2023.
This material specifies new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations for safe life limits (for certain main landing gear and nose landing gear components) and certification maintenance requirements (for the shock strut axle and service door, pitch trim actuator, and nose landing gear shock-strut assembly to retraction-actuator main-fitting joint). These documents are distinct since they apply to different airplane models in different configurations. This material is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in the
This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, the FAA has been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and material referenced above. The FAA is proposing this AD because the FAA evaluated all the relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.
This proposed AD would require revising the existing maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations.
This proposed AD would require revisions to certain operator maintenance documents to include new actions (
Although the applicability of Transport Canada AD CF-2023-65 includes Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 airplane having serial number 9001, that airplane is not included on the U.S. type certificate data sheet. Therefore, the applicability of this proposed AD does not include that airplane.
The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would affect 484 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:
The FAA has determined that revising the maintenance or inspection program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator, although the agency recognizes that this number may vary from operator to operator. Since operators incorporate maintenance or inspection program changes for their affected fleet(s), the FAA has determined that a per-operator estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane estimate. Therefore, the agency estimates the average total cost per operator to be $7,650 (90 work-hours × $85 per work-hour).
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.
The FAA is 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
The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive (AD) by March 21, 2025.
None.
This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc., Model BD-700-1A10 and BD-700-1A11 airplanes, certificated in any category, having serial numbers (S/Ns) 9002 through 9879 inclusive, 9998, and 60001 through 60065 inclusive.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Time Limits/Maintenance Checks.
This AD was prompted by a determination that new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary. The FAA is issuing this AD to address new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations. Failure to adhere to the specified airworthiness limitations could adversely affect the stability and controllability of the airplane on landing and could result in damage to the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Within 60 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the existing maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate the information specified in the tasks identified in table 1 to paragraph (g) of this AD, of Part 2, “Airworthiness Limitations,” of the applicable time limits/maintenance checks (TLMC) manual identified in table 2 of this AD. The initial compliance time for doing the tasks is at the time specified in the applicable TLMC manual identified in table 2 to paragraph (g) of this AD, or within 60 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, except as provided by paragraph (h) of this AD.
For Task No. 32-33-01-112 of section 5-10-20, “Time Limits—Supplementary Limitations,” of Part 2, “Airworthiness Limitations,” of the applicable TLMC manual identified in table 2 of this AD: The initial compliance time for doing this task is at the applicable compliance time specified in paragraph (h)(1) or (2) of this AD, or within 60 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.
(1) For airplanes that have accomplished Task No. 32-33-01-111, of section 5-10-20, “Time Limits—Supplementary Limitations,” of Part 2, “Airworthiness Limitations,” of the applicable TLMC manual identified in table 2 of this AD, as of the effective date of this AD: Within 1,500 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, or within 1,500 flight cycles (
(2) For airplanes that have not accomplished Task No. 32-33-01-111, of section 5-10-20, “Time Limits—Supplementary Limitations,” of Part 2, “Airworthiness Limitations,” of the applicable TLMC manual identified in table 2 of this AD, as of the effective date of this AD: Within 1,500 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, or before the accumulation of 1,500 total flight cycles (
After the existing maintenance or inspection program has been revised as required by paragraphs (g) of this AD, no alternative actions (
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(2)
For more information about this AD, contact Mark Taylor, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone: 516-228-7300; email:
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of the material listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this material as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Part 2, “Airworthiness Limitations,” of Bombardier Global Express Time Limits/Maintenance Checks (TLMC), Publication No. BD-700 TLMC, Revision 35, dated December 19, 2023.
(ii) Part 2, “Airworthiness Limitations,” of Bombardier Global Express XRS TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 XRS TLMC, Revision 22, dated December 19, 2023.
(iii) Part 2, “Airworthiness Limitations,” of Bombardier Global 6000 TLMC, Publication No. GL 6000 TLMC, Revision 16, dated December 19, 2023.
(iv) Part 2, “Airworthiness Limitations,” of Bombardier Global 6500 TLMC, Publication No. GL 6500 TLMC, Revision 5, dated December 19, 2023.
(v) Part 2, “Airworthiness Limitations,” of Bombardier Global 5000 TLMC, Publication No. BD-700 TLMC, Revision 26, dated December 19, 2023.
(vi) Part 2, “Airworthiness Limitations,” of Bombardier Global 5500 Time Limits/Maintenance Checks, Publication No. GL 5500 TLMC, Revision 5, dated December 19, 2023.
(vii) Part 2, “Airworthiness Limitations,” of Bombardier Global 5000 TLMC, Publication No. GL 5000 GVFD TLMC, Revision 16, dated December 19, 2023.
(3) For Bombardier material identified in this AD, contact Bombardier Business Aircraft Customer Response Center, 400 Côte-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Québec H4S 1Y9, Canada; phone 514-855-2999; email
(4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 206-231-3195.
(5) You may view this material at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, visit
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
This action proposes to amend the Class E airspace at Marysville, OH. The FAA is proposing this action as the result of an airspace review conducted due to the decommissioning of the Marysville nondirectional beacon (NDB). This action will bring the airspace into compliance with FAA orders and support instrument flight rule (IFR) procedures and operations.
Comments must be received on or before March 21, 2025.
Send comments identified by FAA Docket No. FAA-2024-2114 and Airspace Docket No. 24-AGL-19 using any of the following methods:
FAA Order JO 7400.11J, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at
Rebecca Shelby, Federal Aviation Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone (817) 222-5857.
The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would amend the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Union County Airport, Marysville, OH, to support IFR operations at this airport.
The FAA invites interested persons to participate in this rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters should submit only one time if comments are filed electronically, or commenters should send only one copy of written comments if comments are filed in writing.
The FAA will file in the docket all comments it receives, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, the FAA will consider all comments it received on or before the closing date for comments. The FAA will consider comments filed after the comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without incurring
An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the internet at
You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office (see the
Class E airspace is published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 on an annual basis. This document proposes to amend the current version of that order, FAA Order JO 7400.11J, dated July 31, 2024, and effective September 15, 2024. These updates would be published subsequently in the next update to FAA Order JO 7400.11. That order is publicly available as listed in the
FAA Order JO 7400.11J lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting points.
The FAA is proposing an amendment to 14 CFR part 71 by modifying the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface to within a 6.7-mile (increased from a 6.3-mile) radius of Union County Airport, Marysvillle, OH; removing the Marysville NDB and associated extension; adding an extension 2 miles each side of the 263° bearing from the airport extending from the 6.7-mile radius of the airport to 9.8 miles west of the airport; removing the exclusionary language as it is no longer required; and removing the city associated with the airport in the airspace legal description to comply with changes to FAA Order JO 7400.2P, Procedures for Handling Airspace Matters.
This action is the result of an airspace review conducted as part of the decommissioning of the Marysville NDB and to support IFR operations at this airport.
The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore: (1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures” prior to any FAA final regulatory action.
Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(f); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.
That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.7-mile radius of the Union County Airport; and within 2 miles each side of the 263° bearing from the airport extending from the 6.7-mile radius to 9.8 miles west of the airport.
Civil Rights Cold Case Records Review Board.
Notice.
The Civil Rights Cold Case Records Review Board received 201 pages of records from the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) related to four civil rights cold case incidents to which the Review Board assigned the unique identifiers 2024-003-032, 2024-003-036, 2024-003-056, and 2024-003-059. NARA proposed seven (7) postponements of disclosure in records related to incident 2024-003-059. NARA did not propose postponements in the other records. On January 24, 2025, the Review Board rejected the proposed postponements and determined that all 201 pages of records should be publicly disclosed in the Civil Rights Cold Case Records Collection. By issuing this notice, the Review Board complies with section 7(c)(4) of the Civil Rights Cold Case Records Collection Act of 2018 that requires the Review Board to publish in the
Stephannie Oriabure, Chief of Staff, Civil Rights Cold Case Records Review Board, 1800 F Street NW, Washington, DC 20405, (771) 221-0014,
The Department of Commerce will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, on or after the date of publication of this notice. We invite the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed and continuing information collections, which helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. Public comments were previously requested via the
EDA is seeking an extension of the series of checklists and templates that constitute EDA's post-approval construction tools and the Standard Terms and Conditions for Construction Projects. These checklists and templates, as well as any special conditions incorporated into the terms and conditions at the time of award, supplement the requirements that apply to EDA-funded construction projects.
This information collection request may be viewed at
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be submitted within 30 days of the publication of this notice on the following website
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
The U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that sales of chlorinated isocyanurates (chlorinated isos) from Spain were not sold in the United States at less than normal value during the period of review (POR), June 1, 2022, through May 31, 2023.
Applicable February 4, 2025.
Mark Hoadley, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3148.
On July 9, 2024, Commerce published in the
We invited interested parties to comment on the
The products covered by the
In the
Ercros S.A. (Ercros) and Electroquimica de Hernani, S.A. (EHER) that are zero, and we did not calculate any margins which are not zero,
Normally, Commerce will disclose to the parties in a proceeding the calculations performed in connection with the final results within five days of any public announcement or, if there is no public announcement, within five days of the date of publication of the notice of final results in the
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), Commerce has determined in these final results of this review, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise during the POR.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we calculated importer-specific
In accordance with Commerce's “automatic assessment” practice, for entries of subject merchandise that entered the United States during the POR that were produced by each respondent for which it did not know that its merchandise was destined to the United States, Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate (
Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after the date of publication of these final results of review in the
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of chlorinated isos from Spain entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of this notice in the
This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during the POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in Commerce's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to an administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing these final results of administrative review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5).
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
On January 15, 2025, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) issued its final judgment in
Applicable January 24, 2025.
Dusten Hom, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-5075.
On May 4, 2022, Commerce published its
Wheatland Tube appealed Commerce's
In its decision in
Because there is now a final court judgment, Commerce is amending its
Because Hyundai, Husteel, and each of the companies not selected for individual examination listed in the appendix all have a superseding cash deposit rate,
At this time, Commerce remains enjoined by CIT order from liquidating entries that were produced and/or exported by: Husteel; Hyundai; Aju Besteel; Bookook Steel; Chang Won Bending; Dae Ryung; Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engeineering (DSME); Daiduck Piping; Dong Yang Steel Pipe; Dongbu Steel (also known as Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd.); Eew Korea Company; Hyundai Rb; Kiduck Industries; Kum Kang Kind; Kumsoo Connecting; Miju Steel Mfg. (also known as Miju Steel Manufacturing); Nexteel Co., Ltd. (also known as Nexteel); Samkang M&T; Seah Fs; Seah Steel (also known as Seah Steel Corporation); Steel Flower; Vesta Co., Ltd.; and Ycp Co.; and were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the period November 1, 2019 through October 31, 2020. These entries will remain enjoined pursuant to the terms of the injunction during the pendency of any appeals process.
In the event the CIT's ruling is not appealed, or, if appealed, upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, Commerce intends to instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on unliquidated entries of subject merchandise produced and/or exported by the companies listed above in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b). We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review when the importer-specific
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 516A(c) and (e) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice of a public meeting.
The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Gulf Council) and South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (South Atlantic Council) will hold a joint in-person meeting of their Standing Scientific and Statistical Committees (SSCs), followed by an in-person meeting of the Gulf Council's SSC.
The meeting will be held Tuesday, February 25, 2025 through Thursday, February 27, 2025; 8:30 a.m.-5 p.m., EST, daily.
The meeting will take place at the Gulf Council office. Registration information will be available on the Council's website by visiting
Mr. Ryan Rindone, Lead Fishery Biologist, Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council;
The meeting will begin in a Joint Meeting of the Gulf and South Atlantic SSCs with Introductions, and Adoption of the Agenda and Scope of Work. The SSCs will review and discuss the SEDAR 79: Southeastern U.S.
Public comments will be heard at the end of the day, if any.
The Standing SSCs will return in a joint session to review and discuss SEDAR 79: Southeastern U.S.
Following lunch, the Gulf SSC will convene to review and approve summary minutes from its December 2024 webinar meeting. The Gulf SSC will also review the SEDAR 88 Stock Assessment of Gulf
The Gulf SSC will review results from Return `Em Right Studies. They will review: Determination of Predation Mortality, Barotrauma Survival, and Emigration Patterns for Catch-and-released
Following lunch, the Gulf SSC will review: Florida At-sea Observer Data Collection Methods, Results and Analysis; Alabama At-sea Observer Data Collection Methods, Results and Analysis; Mississippi At-sea Observer Data Collection Methods, Results and Analysis; Louisiana and Texas Expansion of At-sea Observer Data Collection Methods, Results and Analysis. These reviews will include presentations, background manuscripts and SSC discussions.
The Gulf SSC will receive an update on Ongoing Projects, review of Best Release Practices Manual for
The Gulf SSC will then review Other Business, including SEDAR 87 Review Workshop Volunteers and SEDAR 98 Assessment Process and Review Workshop Volunteers.
The meeting will also be broadcast via webinar. You may register for the webinar by visiting
The Agenda is subject to change, and the latest version along with other meeting materials will be posted on
Although other non-emergency issues not on the agenda may come before the Scientific and Statistical Committees for discussion, in accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during these meetings. Actions of the Scientific and Statistical Committee will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in the agenda and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under Section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take-action to address the emergency.
These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aid should be directed to Kathy Pereira, (813) 348-1630, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.
The Department of Commerce will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, on or after the date of publication of this notice. We invite the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed, and continuing information collections, which helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. Public comments were previously requested via the
National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service (NESDIS): Send2NCEI web application (currently approved as OMB Control Number: 0648-0024).
National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service: Advanced Tracking and Resource tool for Archive Collections (ATRAC) web application.
National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service: Collection Metadata Editing Tool (CoMET) web application.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS): InPort metadata authoring tool.
Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR): Science Data Information System (SDIS) metadata and data submission tool.
Collecting geospatial metadata is necessary to fully understand, use, and reuse geospatial data since the metadata provides contextual information about data formats, bounding areas, use and access limitations (if any). Geospatial metadata from this information collection also supports multiple search and discovery catalog services, such as
Information will be collected from data producers (primarily university, private industry, and government-funded scientific researchers) in multiple fields of geosciences, biological and atmospheric sciences, and socio-
Two applications in the existing approved collection have had minor changes to their forms. The Send2NCEI application added a license selector. InPort has changed one of the fields from a text field to a drop-down list selector. These changes do not impact the response burden.
This information collection request may be viewed at
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be submitted within 30 days of the publication of this notice on the following website
Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
Notice.
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“Commission” or “CFTC”) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed renewal of a collection of certain information by the agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”), Federal agencies are required to publish notice in the
Comments must be submitted on or before April 7, 2025.
You may submit comments, identified by “OMB Control No. 3038-0094,” by any of the following methods:
• The Agency's website, at
•
•
Please submit your comments using only one method.
Catherine Brescia, Attorney Advisor, Market Participants Division, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW, Washington, DC 20581; (202) 418-6236; email:
Under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501
Section 4d requires Futures Commission Merchants (“FCMs”) to register with the Commission. It further requires FCMs to segregate customer funds. Section 4f requires FCMs to maintain certain levels of capital. Section 4g establishes reporting and recordkeeping requirements for FCMs. Section 4s(j)(2) of the CEA requires each Swap Dealer (“SD”) and Major Swap Participant (“MSP”) to have risk management systems adequate for managing its day-to-day business. Section 4s(j)(4) requires each SD and MSP to have internal systems and procedures to obtain any necessary information to perform any of the functions set forth in Section 4s.
Pursuant to these provisions, the Commission adopted Commission regulation 1.73 which applies to clearing members that are FCMs and Commission regulation 23.609 which applies to clearing members that are SDs
The regulations require clearing members, who are FCMs, SDs, or MSPs to: (1) establish risk-based limits based on position size, order size, margin requirements, or similar factors, and for FCMs, risk-based limits must be established for the proprietary account and in each customer account; (2) screen orders for compliance with the risk-based limits; (3) monitor for adherence to the risk-based limits intra-day and overnight; (4) conduct stress tests under extreme but plausible conditions of all positions at least once per week, and for FCMs, the stress tests must be conducted for all positions in the proprietary account and in each customer account that could pose material risk to the FCM; (5) evaluate its ability to meet initial margin requirements at least once per week; (6) evaluate its ability to meet variation margin requirements in cash at least once per week; (7) evaluate its ability to liquidate the positions it clears, in an orderly manner, and estimate the cost of the liquidation, and for FCMs, the evaluation must be done at least once per quarter and conducted for all positions in the proprietary and customer accounts; and (8) test all lines of credit at least once per year.
Each of these items has been observed by Commission staff as an element of an existing sound risk management program at an FCM, SD, or MSP. The Commission regulations require each FCM, SD, or MSP clearing member to establish written procedures to comply with these regulations and to keep records documenting its compliance.
The information collection obligations imposed by the regulations are necessary to implement certain provisions of the CEA, including ensuring that registrants exercise effective risk management and for the efficient operation of trading venues among FCMs, SDs, and MSPs that are clearing members, in order to maintain financial stability at derivatives clearing organizations (“DCOs”).
With respect to the collection of information, the CFTC invites comments on:
• Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information will have a practical use;
• The accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
• Ways to enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
• Ways to minimize the burden of collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology;
All comments must be submitted in English, or if not, accompanied by an English translation. Comments will be posted as received to
The Commission reserves the right, but shall have no obligation, to review, pre-screen, filter, redact, refuse or remove any or all of your submission from
There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection.
Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of Education.
Notice; withdrawal.
The Department of Education (Department) withdraws the notice inviting applications (NIA) for fiscal year (FY) 2025 for CSP Grants to State Entities.
The NIA published in the
Sareeta Schmitt, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20202-5970. Telephone: (202) 205-0730. Email:
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability and wish to access telecommunications relay services, please dial 7-1-1.
On January 21, 2025, the Department published NIAs for two programs in the CSP in the
The Department intends to announce a new NIA for SE grants, ALN 84.282A
The Department does not expect that withdrawing this NIA will significantly impact our ability to make grant awards for FY 2025 under this competition because the Administration anticipates issuing a new NIA in the near future.
You may also access Department documents published in the
Federal Student Aid (FSA), Department of Education (ED).
Notice.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing a revision of the existing information collection.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before April 7, 2025.
To access and review all the documents related to the information collection listed in this notice, please use
For specific questions related to collection activities, please contact the FAFSA Product Team at
The Department, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. The Department is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.
The determination of need and eligibility are for the following Title IV, HEA, federal student financial assistance programs: the Federal Pell Grant Program; the Campus-Based programs (Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant (FSEOG) and Federal Work-Study (FWS)); the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan (Direct Loan) Program; the Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education (TEACH) Grant; the Children of Fallen Heroes Scholarship; and the Iraq and Afghanistan Service Grant.
Federal Student Aid (FSA), an office of the U.S. Department of Education, subsequently developed an application process to collect and process the data necessary to determine a student's eligibility to receive Title IV, HEA program assistance. The application process involves an applicant's submission of the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA®). After submission and processing of the FAFSA form, an applicant receives a FAFSA Submission Summary, which is a summary of the processed data they submitted on the FAFSA form. The applicant reviews the FAFSA Submission Summary, and, if necessary, will make corrections or updates to their submitted FAFSA data. Institutions of higher education listed by the applicant on the FAFSA form also receive a summary of processed data submitted on the FAFSA form which is called the
ED and FSA seek OMB approval of all application components as a single “collection of information.” The aggregate burden will be accounted for under OMB Control Number 1845-0001. The specific application components, descriptions, and submission methods for each are listed in Table 1.
This information collection also documents an estimate of the annual public burden as it relates to the application process for federal student aid. The Applicant Burden Model (ABM) measures applicant burden through an assessment of the activities each applicant conducts in conjunction with other applicant characteristics and, in terms of burden, the average applicant's experience. Key determinants of the ABM include:
• The total number of applicants that will potentially apply for federal student aid;
• How the applicant chooses to complete and submit the FAFSA form (
• How the applicant chooses to submit any corrections and/or updates (
• The type of FAFSA Submission Summary document the applicant receives (paper or electronic);
• The formula applied to determine the applicant's student aid index (SAI); and
• The average amount of time involved in preparing to complete the application.
The ABM is largely driven by the number of potential applicants for the application cycle. The total application projection for 2026-2027 is based on the projected total enrollment into post-secondary education for Fall 2026. The ABM is also based on the application options available to students and parents. ED accounts for each application component based on analytical tools, survey information and other ED data sources.
For 2026-2027, ED is reporting a net burden decrease of 2,004,707 hours.
Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of Education.
Notice; withdrawal.
The Department of Education (Department) withdraws the notice inviting applications (NIA) for fiscal year (FY) 2025 for CSP CMO Grants.
The NIA published in the
Stephanie S. Jones, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20202-5970.
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability and wish to access telecommunications relay services, please dial 7-1-1.
On January 21, 2025, the Department published NIAs for two programs in the CSP in the
The Department intends to announce a new NIA for CMO Grants, ALN 84.282M in FY 2025. This NIA will unleash innovation, minimize excessive and unnecessary oversight, and lessen the reporting burden for both applicants and grant recipients. By adopting this streamlined approach, the Department is committed to maximizing the impact of its funding efforts while creating a more efficient application process.
The Department does not expect that withdrawing this NIA will significantly impact our ability to make grant awards for FY 2025 under this competition because the Administration anticipates issuing a new NIA in the near future.
You may also access Department documents published in the
Take notice that the commission received the following accounting Request filings:
Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt wholesale generator filings:
Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:
The filings are accessible in the Commission's e-Library system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
Any person desiring to intervene, to protest, or to answer a complaint in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211, 214, or 206 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214, or 385.206) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:
The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners, environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is encouraged to contact OPP at (202) 502-6595 or
Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
Any person desiring to intervene, to protest, or to answer a complaint in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211, 214, or 206 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214, or 385.206) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system (
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:
The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners, environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is encouraged to contact OPP at (202) 502-6595 or
Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
Any person desiring to intervene, to protest, or to answer a complaint in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211, 214, or 206 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214, or 385.206) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the
Any person desiring to protest in any the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date.
The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system (
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:
The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners, environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is encouraged to contact OPP at (202) 502-6595 or
This constitutes notice, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of the receipt of prohibited and exempt off-the-record communications.
Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, September 22, 1999) requires Commission decisional employees, who make or receive a prohibited or exempt off-the-record communication relevant to the merits of a contested proceeding, to deliver to the Secretary of the Commission, a copy of the communication, if written, or a summary of the substance of any oral communication.
Prohibited communications are included in a public, non-decisional file associated with, but not a part of, the decisional record of the proceeding. Unless the Commission determines that the prohibited communication and any responses thereto should become a part of the decisional record, the prohibited off-the-record communication will not be considered by the Commission in reaching its decision. Parties to a proceeding may seek the opportunity to respond to any facts or contentions made in a prohibited off-the-record communication and may request that the Commission place the prohibited communication and responses thereto in the decisional record. The Commission will grant such a request only when it determines that fairness so requires. Any person identified below as having made a prohibited off-the-record communication shall serve the document on all parties listed on the official service list for the applicable proceeding in accordance with Rule 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010.
Exempt off-the-record communications are included in the decisional record of the proceeding, unless the communication was with a cooperating agency as described by 40 CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR 385.2201(e)(1)(v).
The following is a list of off-the-record communications recently received by the Secretary of the Commission. Each filing may be viewed on the Commission's website at
On December 29, 2022, KC Brighton LLC (licensee) filed an application for the surrender of its license for the Brighton Hydroelectric Project No. 3633. The project is located on the Patuxent River in Howard and Montgomery counties, Maryland. The project does not occupy Federal lands.
The licensee proposes to surrender its license after consultation during the relicensing process revealed that the costs of relicensing and anticipated mitigation measures would render the project uneconomic. The licensee proposes to remove all generating equipment, including the equipment diverging from the main penstocks including the turbine, generator, gate valve, and elbow for each unit. The electrical conduit in the powerhouse, the motor controllers, and the generation cables up to the interconnection point would also be removed. Surrender activities would be confined to the powerhouse. No changes to the dam, which is owned by Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC), are proposed. The primary use of WSSC's dam and reservoir is to provide a water source to surrounding counties. No changes to this water supply are proposed as part of surrender. The licensee is not proposing any ground disturbing activities or any changes to the environment in the project area.
Commission staff public noticed the application on December 20, 2023, and solicited comments, motions to intervene, and protests, with the comment period ending on January 19, 2024. In response to the Commission's notice, the Potomac Patuxent Chapter of Trout Unlimited filed comments. The WSSC, which owns the dam, filed a Motion to Intervene.
This notice identifies Commission staff's intention to prepare an environmental assessment (EA) for the project.
The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners, environmental justice communities, Tribal members, and others to access publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is encouraged to contact OPP at (202) 502-6595 or
Any questions regarding this notice may be directed to Kelly Fitzpatrick at 202-502-8435 or
Take notice that the Commission received the following Complaints and Compliance filings in EL Dockets:
Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:
The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system (
Any person desiring to intervene, to protest, or to answer a complaint in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211, 214, or 206 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214, or 385.206) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:
The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners, environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is encouraged to contact OPP at (202) 502-6595 or
The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841
The public portions of the applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, if any, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank(s) indicated below and at the offices of the Board of Governors. This information may also be obtained on an expedited basis, upon request, by contacting the appropriate Federal Reserve Bank and from the Board's Freedom of Information Office at
Comments received are subject to public disclosure. In general, comments received will be made available without change and will not be modified to remove personal or business information including confidential, contact, or other identifying information. Comments should not include any information such as confidential information that would not be appropriate for public disclosure.
Comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors, Ann E. Misback, Secretary of the Board, 20th Street and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20551-0001, not later than March 6, 2025.
1.
1.
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice.
This notice announces the cancellation of the February 6, 2025, virtual public meeting of the Advisory Panel on Outreach and Education (APOE) (the Panel) that was announced in the January 10, 2025,
Hailey Gutzmer, Acting Designated Federal Official, Office of Communications, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 200 Independence Avenue SW, Mailstop 315D.02, Washington, DC 20201, 410-786-1307, or via email at
Additional information about the APOE is available at:
The Acting Administrator of CMS, Jeff Wu, having reviewed and approved this document, authorizes Chyana Woodyard, who is the Federal Register Liaison, to electronically sign this document for purposes of publication in the
U.S. International Trade Commission.
Notice.
Notice is hereby given that on January 28, 2025, the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”) issued an Initial Determination on Violation of Section 337. The ALJ also issued a Recommended Determination on remedy and bonding should a violation be found in the above-captioned investigation. The Commission is soliciting submissions on public interest issues raised by the recommended relief should the Commission find a violation. This notice is soliciting comments from the public and interested government agencies only.
Namo Kim, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3459. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at
Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 provides that, if the Commission finds a violation, it shall exclude the articles concerned from the United States unless, after considering the effect of such exclusion upon the public health and welfare, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, and United States consumers, it finds that such articles should not be excluded from entry. (19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1)). A similar provision applies to cease and desist orders. (19 U.S.C. 1337(f)(1)).
The Commission is soliciting submissions on public interest issues
The Commission is interested in further development of the record on the public interest in this investigation. Accordingly, members of the public and interested government agencies are invited to file submissions of no more than five (5) pages, inclusive of attachments, concerning the public interest in light of the ALJ's Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bonding issued in this investigation on January 28, 2025. Comments should address whether issuance of the recommended remedial orders in this investigation, should the Commission find a violation, would affect the public health and welfare in the United States, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, or United States consumers.
In particular, the Commission is interested in comments that:
(i) explain how the articles potentially subject to the recommended remedial orders are used in the United States;
(ii) identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the United States relating to the recommended orders;
(iii) identify like or directly competitive articles that complainant, its licensees, or third parties make in the United States which could replace the subject articles if they were to be excluded;
(iv) indicate whether complainant, complainant's licensees, and/or third-party suppliers have the capacity to replace the volume of articles potentially subject to the recommended orders within a commercially reasonable time; and
(v) explain how the recommended orders would impact consumers in the United States.
Written submissions must be filed no later than by close of business on February 27, 2025.
Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or before the deadlines stated above pursuant to 19 CFR 210.4(f). Submissions should refer to the investigation number (“Inv. No. 337-TA-1390”) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. (
Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment by marking each document with a header indicating that the document contains confidential information. This marking will be deemed to satisfy the request procedure set forth in Rules 201.6(b) and 210.5(e)(2) (19 CFR 201.6(b) & 210.5(e)(2)). Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. Any non-party wishing to submit comments containing confidential information must serve those comments on the parties to the investigation pursuant to the applicable Administrative Protective Order. A redacted non-confidential version of the document must also be filed simultaneously with any confidential filing and must be served in accordance with Commission Rule 210.4(f)(7)(ii)(A) (19 CFR 210.4(f)(7)(ii)(A)). All information, including confidential business information and documents for which confidential treatment is properly sought, submitted to the Commission for purposes of this investigation may be disclosed to and used: (i) by the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel, solely for cybersecurity purposes. All contract personnel will sign appropriate nondisclosure agreements. All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public inspection on EDIS.
This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in Part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 210).
By order of the Commission.
U.S. International Trade Commission.
Notice.
Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined that respondents (1) NJOY, LLC of Phoenix, Arizona; (2) NJOY Holdings, Inc. of Scottsdale, Arizona; (3) Altria Group, Inc. of Richmond, Virginia; (4) Altria Group Distribution Company of Richmond, Virginia; and (5) Altria Client Services LLC of Richmond, Virginia (collectively, “NJOY”) have violated section 337, by importing, selling for importation, or selling within the United States after importation certain vaporizer devices, cartridges used therewith, and components thereof that infringe claims 1 and 15 of U.S. Patent No. 11,134,722 (“the '722 patent”), claims 1 and 8 of U.S. Patent No. 11,606,981 (“the '981 patent”), claims 27 and 32 of U.S. Patent No. 10,130,123 (“the '123 patent”), and claims 1 and 4 of U.S. Patent No. 10,709,173 (“the '173 patent”). The Commission has determined that the appropriate remedies are a limited exclusion order (“LEO”) against NJOY's infringing products and cease and desist orders (“CDOs”) against each of the NJOY respondents. The Commission has also determined to impose no bond (zero percent bond) for importations of the excluded articles imported during the period of Presidential review. This investigation is hereby terminated.
Richard P. Hadorn, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3179. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at
The Commission instituted this investigation on August 7, 2023, based on a complaint filed by JUUL Labs, Inc. of Washington, DC and VMR Products LLC of San Francisco, California (together, “JLI”). 88 FR 52207 (Aug. 7, 2023). The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (“section 337”) based on the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and/or the sale within the United States after importation of certain vaporizer devices, cartridges used therewith, and components thereof by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. RE49,114 (“the '114 patent”), the '722 patent, the '981 patent, the '123 patent, and the '173 patent.
On April 3, 2024, the Commission terminated the investigation as to the following asserted claims based on partial withdrawal of the complaint: (i) claims 1, 5-7, 29, 30, 36, 80, 89, and 93 of the '114 patent; (ii) claims 16, 18, 29, and 31 of the '123 patent; (iii) claims 3, 8, 14, and 17 of the '722 patent; and (iv) claims 6, 9-11, 17, and 18 of the '981 patent. Order No. 18 (Mar. 6, 2024),
On April 26, 2024, the Commission terminated the investigation as to the following asserted claims based on partial withdrawal of the complaint: (i) claims 43, 44, 76, 77, 81, and 86 (all remaining claims) of the '114 patent, thus terminating the '114 patent in its entirety; (ii) claim 14 of the '123 patent; (iii) claims 2, 3, 6, 7, 15, 16, 18-25, 28, and 30 of the '173 patent; (iv) claims 5, 7, 9-13, 16, and 18-21 of the '722 patent; and (v) claims 2, 5, and 13-16 of the '981 patent. Order No. 21 (Apr. 2, 2024),
On June 18, 2024, the Commission affirmed an initial determination granting summary determination that JLI has satisfied the economic prong of the DI requirement as to the remaining asserted patents,
On August 23, 2024, the ALJ issued a final initial determination (“ID”), which finds a violation of section 337 as to claims 1 and 15 of the '722 patent, claims 1 and 8 of the '981 patent, claims 27 and 32 of the '123 patent, and claims 1 and 4 of the '173 patent. Specifically, the ID finds that: (i) JLI showed that each of these claims have been infringed; (ii) NJOY failed to show that any of these claims is invalid; and (iii) JLI has satisfied the technical prong of the DI requirement as to each of the remaining asserted patents. The ID also includes the ALJ's recommended determination (“RD”) on remedy, the public interest, and bonding. The RD recommends that, should the Commission determine that a violation of section 337 has occurred, the Commission should: (i) issue a LEO against NJOY's infringing products; (ii) issue CDOs against each of the NJOY respondents; and (iii) impose no bond (zero percent bond) for importations of infringing products during the period of Presidential review. The ALJ also found that the statutory public interest factors do not support denying or delaying the recommended relief set forth in the RD.
On September 23, 2024, NJOY filed a motion for leave to file a reply in support of its petition for review addressing certain positions taken by OUII in its response to NJOY's petition. On September 25 and 27, 2024, respectively, OUII and JLI each filed a response opposing NJOY's motion for leave.
On October 24, 2024, the Commission determined to review in part the final ID. 89 FR 89041-44 (Nov. 12, 2024). Specifically, the Commission determined to review (i) the ID's construction of the “pressure sensor” limitations (limitations 27[d] and 27[e]) recited in claim 27 of the '123 patent, and (ii) the ID's findings that the NJOY ACE accused product, the asserted RevB and JAGWAR iterations of the JUUL DI system, and the asserted JUUL2 DI system literally practice limitations 27[d] and 27[e] of claim 27 of the '123 patent under the ID's construction of those limitations.
The Commission also determined to review certain of the ID's findings regarding claim construction and satisfaction of the technical prong of the DI requirement with respect to the '173 patent.
The Commission further determined to reconsider its previous finding that JLI has satisfied the economic prong of the DI requirement with respect to the '123 and '173 patents based on investments related to both the JUUL DI system and the JUUL2 DI system.
The Commission determined not to review the remaining findings in the ID, including the ID's findings of a violation of section 337 as to the '722 and '981 patents.
The Commission's notice requested written submissions (i) from the parties on certain issues under review and (ii) from the parties, interested government agencies, and any other interested persons on the issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding.
On November 7, 2024, JLI, NJOY, and OUII each filed initial briefs with written submissions on the issues under review as well as on remedy, the public interest, and bonding. On November 14, 2024, JLI, NJOY, and OUII each filed reply briefs. Also, between November 5-19, 2024, the Commission received five submissions on the public interest from members of the public.
The Commission, having reviewed the record in this investigation, including the final ID, the parties' petitions and responses thereto, the parties' briefs on the issues under review, remedy, the public interest, and bonding, and the public submissions on remedy, the public interest, and bonding, has determined that NJOY has violated section 337 by importing, selling for importation, or selling within the United States after importation certain vaporizer devices, cartridges used therewith, and components thereof that infringe claims 1 and 15 of the '722 patent, claims 1 and 8 of the '981 patent, claims 27 and 32 of the '123 patent, and claims 1 and 4 of the '173 patent.
Specifically, as to the '123 patent, the Commission: (i) modifies the ID's construction of the “pressure sensor” limitations (limitations 27[d] and 27[e]) recited in claim 27 of the '123 patent; (ii) affirms with modified analysis the ID's findings that the NJOY ACE accused product literally practices the
As to the '173 patent, the Commission: (i) affirms with modified analysis the ID's construction of the term “mouthpiece” recited in claim 1 of the '173 patent; (ii) takes no position on the ID's construction of the term “disposed within” recited in claim 1 of the '173 patent; (iii) takes no position on the ID's finding that the JUUL2 DI system practices claims 1 and 4 of the '173 patent; and (iv) modifies Order No. 22 to vacate and take no position on whether JLI has satisfied the economic prong of the DI requirement as to the '173 patent based on the JUUL2 DI system. Accordingly, the Commission affirms with modified analysis the ID's finding that JLI has shown a violation of section 337 by NJOY as to claims 1 and 4 of the '173 patent.
The Commission has determined that the appropriate remedy is: (i) an LEO prohibiting the importation of certain vaporizer devices, cartridges used therewith, and components thereof that infringe one or more of claims 1 and 15 of the '722 patent, claims 1 and 8 of the '981 patent, claims 27 and 32 of the '123 patent, and claims 1 and 4 of the '173 patent; and (ii) CDOs against each of the NJOY respondents. The Commission has also determined that the public interest factors do not preclude issuance of the remedial orders. The Commission has further determined to impose no bond (zero percent bond) for importations of the excluded articles imported during the period of Presidential review (19 U.S.C. 1337(j)).
The Commission issues its opinion herewith setting forth its determinations on certain issues. This investigation is hereby terminated.
The Commission's orders and opinion were delivered to the President and United States Trade Representative on the day of their issuance.
The Commission vote for this determination took place on January 29, 2025.
The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 210).
By order of the Commission.
United States International Trade Commission.
Notice.
The Commission hereby gives notice of the scheduling of expedited reviews pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”) to determine whether revocation of the antidumping duty orders on uncovered innerspring units from China, South Africa, and Vietnam would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time.
December 9, 2024.
Rachel Devenney (202-205-3172), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (
For further information concerning the conduct of these reviews and rules of general application, consult the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A and B (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subparts A, D, E, and F (19 CFR part 207).
In accordance with §§ 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the rules, each document filed by a party to the reviews must be served on all other parties to the reviews (as identified by either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service must be timely filed. The Secretary will not accept a document for filing without a certificate of service.
By order of the Commission.
Judicial Conference of the United States.
Notice of adjusted dollar amounts.
Certain dollar amounts in the United States Code applicable to bankruptcy cases are adjusted to reflect the change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers for the most recent 3-year period ending immediately before January 1, 2025.
The dollar amounts are adjusted on April 1, 2025.
Gary D. Streeting, Senior Attorney, Judicial Services Office, Administrative Office of the United States Courts, Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building, One Columbus Circle NE, Room 4-270, Washington, DC 20544, Telephone (202) 502-1800, or by email at
Section 104 of title 11, United States Code, provides for an automatic three-year adjustment of dollar amounts in certain sections of titles 11 and 28. Notice is hereby given, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 104(b), that the next such adjustment will occur on April 1, 2025. Effective on that date, the dollar amounts in effect under sections 101(3), 101(18), 101(19A), 101(51D), 109(e), 303(b), 507(a), 522(d), 522(f)(3), 522(f)(4), 522(n), 522(p), 522(q), 523(a)(2)(C), 541(b), 547(c)(9), 707(b), 1182(1), 1322(d), 1325(b), and 1326(b)(3) of title 11, and section 1409(b) of title 28, United States Code, are adjusted as set forth in the chart below to reflect the change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers, published by the Department of Labor, for the 3-year period ending immediately before January 1, 2025, rounded to the nearest $25. This adjustment does not apply with respect to cases commenced before April 1, 2025. Seven Official Bankruptcy Forms (106C, 107, 122A-2, 122C-2, 201, 207, and 410) and two Director's Forms (2000 and 2830) will also be amended to reflect these adjusted dollar amounts.
Notice is hereby given that, on January 8, 2025, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301
Also, Nanjing Decowell Automation Co., Ltd., Nanjing, PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA; Beijing Tianma Intelligent Control Technology Co., Ltd., Beijing, PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA; Hanwha Corporation, Seoul, REPUBLIC OF KOREA; and Perinet GmbH, Berlin, GERMANY, have withdrawn as parties to this venture.
No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and ODVA intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
On June 21, 1995, ODVA filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the
The last notification was filed with the Department on October 18, 2024. A notice was published in the
Notice is hereby given that, on January 3, 2025, pursuant to section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301
Specifically, Access Pediatric LLC, Gainesville, FL; Advanced Telesensors, Inc., Austin, TX; The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation, Inc., Dallas, TX; The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology, Philadelphia, PA; ViVBioTech LLC, Sacramento, CA; Biogenesis, Palo Alto, CA; CARIN Alliance, Washington, DC; CellChorus, Inc., Houston, TX; ELHS Institute, Inc., Palo Alto, CA; Global Coalition on Aging, New York, NY; Handzin, Inc., San Fransisco, CA; Health in her HUE, New York, NY; Landmark Bio PBLLC, Watertown, MA; LastMinute, Inc., Brookline, MA; Netrias LLC, Annapolis, MD; Patientory, Inc., Atlanta, GA; Performance Hypothesis LLC, Atlanta, GA; and SmarTechNexus Foundation, Baltimore, MD have been added as parties to this venture.
No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and the CX Hub intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
On January 11, 2024, the CX Hub filed its original notification pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the
The last notification was filed with the Department on October 1, 2024. A
Notice is hereby given that, on December 10, 2024, pursuant to section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301
No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and ADC intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
On November 11, 2021, ADC filed its original notification pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the
The last notification was filed with the Department on October 1, 2024. A notice was published in the
Notice is hereby given that, on January 6, 2025, pursuant to section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301
No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and MTEC intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
On May 9, 2014, MTEC filed its original notification pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the
The last notification was filed with the Department on October 7, 2024. A notice was published in the
National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.
30-Day notice.
The Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, is submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
The Department of Justice encourages public comment and will accept input until March 6, 2025
If you have additional comments, especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Erica Howell, Social Science Research Analyst, Office on Violence and Victimization Prevention, by email at
The proposed information collection was previously published in the
1.
2.
3.
4.
The “National Study of Interpersonal Violence Experienced by Young Adults,” also known as the Long IVY study, is a critically needed, nationally representative, longitudinal panel survey of interpersonal violence among young adults (ages 18-24) who do and do not attend college. It will examine trajectories of risk and protective factors (at the individual, family, and community levels, including exposure to community violence) that predict victimization and perpetration of interpersonal violence and the recovery of those victimized. Interpersonal violence comprises (1) physical and psychological intimate partner violence, (2) nonconsensual sexual contact, and (3) stalking by current and former intimate partners and non-partners. The study design includes recruiting 17,000 young adults with a goal of retaining 10,000 in the final sample after five annual data collection waves (and interim micro assessments) across six years. The first survey will be administered in the fall of the school year after the participant's high school class graduates, and the final survey will be administered after they turn 23.
At a stage of the lifespan when we are most vulnerable to interpersonal violence, this study will address gaps in knowledge about the experiences of young adults not engaged in post-secondary education and the differences in experiences between groups. The innovative emphasis on identifying risk and protective factors over time will provide new evidence about how best to prevent interpersonal violence, for whom, which subpopulations are most in need of victimization services, and what factors accelerate healing and wellness for those who've been harmed.
The Study of Interpersonal Violence among Young Adults Pilot Project (the current study) will recruit a national probability sample of approximately 5,000 young adults with a goal of retaining 150-168 after a one-time data collection in response to the recruitment form. The form will be administered in the spring/summer of the recruitment year, 2025, and respondents must have either graduated high school or are no longer in high school. Respondents must be age 18 in order to be eligible for recruitment.
5.
6.
If additional information is required, contact Darwin Arceo, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE, Washington, DC 20530.
National Science Foundation.
Notice and request for comments.
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is announcing plans to request OMB's approval to renew this collection. In accordance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we are providing an opportunity for public comment on this action. After obtaining and considering public comment, NSF will prepare a submission requesting OMB clearance for this collection for no longer than three years.
Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding the burden or any other aspect of this collection of information by April 7, 2025.
Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower Ave., Rm. E6347, Alexandria, VA 22314; telephone: (703) 292-7556; email:
Overview of Information Collection: NSF's Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) program funds REU Site grants and REU Supplements to organizations to provide authentic research experiences and related training for postsecondary students in STEM fields.
All NSF Principal Investigators in all programs are required to submit annual and final project reports through the NSF Project Reports System in Research.gov. The REU Program Module is a component of the NSF Project Reports System that is designed to gather basic information about the pool of student applicants and participants in REU Site and REU Supplement projects. The information allows NSF to assess the demand and allocate resources for REU student positions within each discipline, to analyze the types of academic institutions and the educational levels represented by the participants, and to identify the participants for inclusion in periodic program evaluations.
NSF is committed to providing stakeholders with information regarding the expenditure of taxpayer funds on its investments in human capital, including activities such as REU Sites and REU Supplements. If NSF could not collect information about the students who participate in undergraduate research experiences, NSF would have no other means to consistently document the number and diversity of the participants or to identify the participants for inclusion in efforts that gauge the quality of programmatic activities and the long-term effects of the activities on the students. Without the REU Program Module, NSF also would not have information about the competitiveness of the REU opportunities, which informs the management of the program's budget.
This information collection is specific to a subset of NSF grantees. NSF has not consulted with other agencies but has gathered information from its grantee community through attendance at PI conferences. A request for public comments will be solicited through announcement of data collection in the
All NSF Principal Investigators are required to use the project reporting functionality in
If project participants include undergraduate students supported by a Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) Sites grant or by an REU Supplement, then the Principal Investigator is required to complete the REU Program Module in addition to the questions in NSF's standard report template.
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice.
The Commission is noticing a recent Postal Service filing for the Commission's consideration concerning a negotiated service agreement. This notice informs the public of the filing, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps.
Submit comments electronically via the Commission's Filing Online system at
David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202-789-6820.
Pursuant to 39 CFR 3041.405, the Commission gives notice that the Postal Service filed request(s) for the Commission to consider matters related to Competitive negotiated service agreement(s). The request(s) may propose the addition of a negotiated service agreement from the Competitive product list or the modification of an existing product currently appearing on the Competitive product list.
The public portions of the Postal Service's request(s) can be accessed via the Commission's website (
Section II identifies the docket number(s) associated with each Postal Service request, if any, that will be reviewed in a public proceeding as defined by 39 CFR 3010.101(p), the title of each such request, the request's acceptance date, and the authority cited by the Postal Service for each request. For each such request, the Commission appoints an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in the proceeding, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505 and 39 CFR 3000.114 (Public Representative). Section II also establishes comment deadline(s) pertaining to each such request.
The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's request(s) identified in Section II, if any, are consistent with the policies of title 39. Applicable statutory and regulatory requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3632, 39 U.S.C. 3633, 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3035, and 39 CFR part 3041. Comment deadline(s) for each such request, if any, appear in Section II.
Section III identifies the docket number(s) associated with each Postal Service request, if any, to add a standardized distinct product to the Competitive product list or to amend a standardized distinct product, the title of each such request, the request's acceptance date, and the authority cited by the Postal Service for each request. Standardized distinct products are negotiated service agreements that are variations of one or more Competitive products, and for which financial models, minimum rates, and classification criteria have undergone advance Commission review.
1.
2.
3.
None.
This Notice will be published in the
On or prior to August 12, 2024, eight entities filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) applications on Form SBSEF to register as security-based swap execution facilities (“SBSEF(s)”) pursuant to section 3D(a)(1) of the Securites Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act” or “Act”) and 17 CFR 242.803 (“Rule 803”).
Section 3D of the Exchange Act was enacted as part of Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.
On November 2, 2023, the Commission adopted Regulation SE to govern the registration and regulation of SBSEFs as required by section 3D of the Exchange Act.
The Regulation SE rules other than those that implement the statutory Core Principles are:
Rule 802 of Regulation SE defines a SBSEF as having the same meaning as in section 3(a)(77) of the Act, which states that a SBSEF is a trading system or platform in which multiple participants have the ability to execute or trade SBSs by accepting bids and offers made by multiple participants in the facility or system, through any means of interstate commerce, including any trading facility, that facilitates the execution of SBSs between persons; and is not a national securities exchange.
Specifically, Rule 803 of Regulation SE sets forth the requirements and procedures for registration as a SBSEF, including what must inform the Commission's determination whether to grant or deny registration. With respect to granting registration, Rule 803(b)(6)(i) states:
The Commission shall issue an order granting registration upon a Commission determination, in its own discretion, that the applicant has demonstrated compliance with the Act and the Commission's rules applicable to security-based swap execution
And with respect to denying registration, Rule 803(b)(6)(ii) states:
The Commission may issue an order denying registration upon a Commission determination, in its own discretion, that the applicant has not demonstrated compliance with the Act and the Commission's rules applicable to security-based swap execution facilities. If the Commission denies an application, it shall specify the grounds for the denial.
In 2011, the Commission published for comment proposed Regulation SBSEF relating to, among other things, the registration and regulation of SBSEFs.
In the Adopting Release, the Commission set forth the following compliance schedule: (1) the adopted rules became effective on February 13, 2024 (the “Effective Date”); (2) the Temporary SBSEF Exemptions expired on August 12, 2024, which was 180 days after the Effective Date, for any entity that had not filed an application to register with the Commission on Form SBSEF; (3) for any entity that filed a Form SBSEF registration application on or before August 12, 2024, and whose Form SBSEF registration application was complete (having responded to requests by the Commission's staff for revisions or amendments) on or before October 11, 2024, which was 240 days after the Effective Date, the Temporary SBSEF Exemptions expire 30 days after Commission action to approve or disapprove the Form SBSEF registration application.
The SBSEF Applicants each filed a Form SBSEF registration application on or before August 12, 2024. After initial review focused on the completeness of each application, the Commission determined that each application was complete prior to October 11, 2024. Having determined each application to be complete, the Commission must determine whether each application has met the requirements of Rule 803 for registration as a SBSEF.
As stated above, pursuant to Rule 803, the Commission must issue an order granting SBSEF registration upon a Commission determination, in its own discretion, that the applicant has demonstrated compliance with the Exchange Act and the Commission's rules applicable to SBSEFs. Additionally, Rule 818(b) provides that, “[u]nless otherwise determined by the Commission, by rule or regulation, a security-based swap execution facility . . . shall have reasonable discretion in establishing the manner in which it complies with the core principles described in section 3D of the Act.”
After review, the Commission has determined that each SBSEF Applicant has demonstrated compliance with the Exchange Act and the Commission rules applicable to SBSEFs. Each SBSEF Applicant's Form SBSEF application sets forth materials that demonstrate the SBSEF Applicant's compliance with the requirements of section 3D of the Exchange Act and Regulation SE that must be met upon a grant of registration.
(1) Bloomberg SEF LLC (File No. 039-100022).
(2) Tradition SEF, LLC (File No. 039-100035).
(3) GFI Swaps Exchange LLC (File No. 039-100079).
(4) ICE Swap Trade, LLC (File No. 039-100038).
(5) TW SEF LLC (File No. 039-100034).
(6) WEMATCH.LIVE LLC (File No. 039-100017).
(7) tpSEF Inc. (File No. 039-100023).
(8) GLMX Technologies, LLC (File No. 039-100030).
By the Commission.
Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission” or “SEC”).
Notice.
Notice of an application under section 6(c) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Act”) for an exemption from section 15(a) of the Act, as well as from certain disclosure requirements in rule 20a-1 under the Act, Item 19(a)(3) of Form N-1A, Items 22(c)(1)(ii), 22(c)(1)(iii), 22(c)(8) and 22(c)(9) of Schedule 14A under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and sections 6-07(2)(a), (b), and (c) of Regulation S-X (“Disclosure Requirements”).
The requested exemption would permit Applicants to enter into and materially amend subadvisory agreements with subadvisers without shareholder approval and would grant relief from the Disclosure Requirements as they relate to fees paid to the subadvisers.
The RBB Fund Trust and Tweedy, Browne Company LLC
The application was filed on December 16, 2024.
An order granting the requested relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing on any application by emailing the SEC's Secretary at
The Commission:
Trace W. Rakestraw, Senior Special Counsel, at (202) 551-6825 (Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).
For Applicants' representations, legal analysis, and conditions, please refer to Applicants' application, dated December 16, 2024, which may be obtained via the Commission's website by searching for the file number at the top of this document, or for an Applicant using the Company name search field on the SEC's EDGAR system. The SEC's EDGAR system may be searched at
For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management, under delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to list and trade shares of the Canary Litecoin ETF (the
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to list and trade the Shares under Nasdaq Rule 5711(d),
The Commission has historically approved or disapproved exchange filings to list and trade series of Trust Issued Receipts, including spot-based Commodity-Based Trust Shares, on the basis of whether the listing exchange has in place a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement with a regulated market of significant size related to the underlying commodity to be held.
The Commission recently issued orders granting approval for proposals to list bitcoin- and ether-based commodity trust shares and bitcoin- and ether-based trust issued receipts (these proposed funds are nearly identical to the Trust, but proposed to hold bitcoin and ether, respectively, instead of Litecoin) (“Spot Bitcoin ETPs” and “Spot ETH ETPs”). In both the Spot Bitcoin ETP Approval Order and Spot ETH ETP Approval Order, the Commission found that sufficient “other means” of preventing fraud and manipulation had been demonstrated that justified dispensing with a surveillance-sharing agreement with a market of significant size. Specifically, the Commission found that while the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (“CME”) futures market for both bitcoin and ether were not of “significant size” with respect to the spot market, the Exchange demonstrated that other means could be reasonably expected to assist in surveilling for fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices in the specific context of the proposals.
As further discussed below, both the Exchange and the Sponsor believe that this proposal and the analysis to be included are sufficient to establish that there are sufficient “other means” of preventing fraud and manipulation that warrant dispensing of the surveillance-sharing agreement with a regulated market of significant size, as was done with both Spot Bitcoin ETPs and Spot ETH ETPs, and that this proposal should be approved.
The Shares will be issued by the Trust, a Delaware statutory trust. The Trust will operate pursuant to a trust agreement (the “Trust Agreement”), as amended and/or restated from time to time. CSC Delaware Trust Company, a Delaware corporation, is the trustee of the Trust (the “Trustee”). The Trust is managed and controlled by the Sponsor. U.S. Bancorp Fund Services, LLC will be the administrator (the “Administrator”), U.S. Bancorp Fund Services, LLC will be the transfer agent (the “Transfer Agent”), and U.S. Bank, N.A. will be responsible for the custody of the Trust's cash (the “Cash Custodian”). BitGo Trust Company, Inc. and Coinbase Custody Trust Company, LLC, (the “Custodians”) will be responsible for custody of the Trust's Litecoin (“LTC”).
According to the Registration Statement, each Share will represent a fractional undivided beneficial interest in and ownership of the Trust. The Trust's assets will consist only of LTC and cash.
According to the Registration Statement, the Trust is not a fund registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended.
Neither the Trust, nor the Sponsor, nor the Custodian, nor any other person associated with the Trust will, directly or indirectly, engage in action where any portion of the Trust's LTC is used to earn additional LTC or generate rewards or other income. The Trust will not acquire and will disclaim any incidental right (“IR”) or IR asset received, for example as a result of forks or airdrops, and such assets will not be taken into account for purposes of determining the Trust's net asset value (“NAV”).
When the Trust sells or redeems its Shares, it will do so in blocks of 10,000 Shares (a “Basket”) based on the quantity of LTC attributable to each Share of the Trust (net of accrued but unpaid expenses and liabilities). For a creation of Shares, the creation shall be in the amount of cash needed to purchase the amount of LTC represented by the Basket being created, as calculated by the Administrator. For a redemption of Shares, the Sponsor shall arrange for the LTC represented by the Basket to be sold and the cash proceeds distributed. Authorized participants will deliver, or facilitate the delivery of, cash to the Trust's account with the Cash Custodian in exchange for Shares when they purchase Shares, and the Trust will deliver cash to such Authorized Participants when they redeem Shares with the Trust. Authorized Participants may then offer Shares to the public at prices that depend on various factors, including the supply and demand for Shares, the value of the Trust's assets, and market conditions at the time of a transaction. Owners of the beneficial interests of the Shares (the “Shareholders”) who buy or sell Shares during the day from their broker may do so at a premium or discount relative to the per Share NAV of the Trust.
According to the Registration Statement and as further described below, the Trust's investment objective is to seek to track the performance of LTC, as measured by the Index (as defined below), adjusted for the Trust's expenses and other liabilities. In seeking to achieve its investment objective, the Trust will hold LTC and will value its Shares daily as of 4:00 p.m. Eastern time (“ET”) using the same methodology used to calculate the Index. All of the Trust's LTC will be held by the Custodians.
LTC is a digital asset that is created and transmitted through the operations of the peer-to-peer, decentralized network of computers that operates on cryptographic protocols (the “Litecoin Network”). No single entity owns or operates the Litecoin Network, the infrastructure of which is collectively maintained by a decentralized user base. The Litecoin Network allows people to
Litecoin is an alternative software implementation of Bitcoin that was created in late 2011 by Charlie Lee, a former Google employee, who set out to create a proof-of-work currency that could be an alternative to Bitcoin. Ultimately, this resulted in a clone of Bitcoin. Although Litecoin is thus very similar to Bitcoin, there are several key differences between the Litecoin Network and the Bitcoin Network. These differences include a block generation time of approximately two and a half minutes for LTC as compared to ten minutes for Bitcoin, and a cap on the number of coins that will be created of 84 million LTC, as compared to 21 million for Bitcoin. As a result of these differences, transactions using LTC occur four times faster than transactions using Bitcoin and at a lower cost. Litecoin also implemented “crypt,” a distinct hashing algorithm different from Bitcoin's SHA-256 hashing algorithm, which does not require application-specific integrated circuits (“ASICs”) to mine LTC and therefore results in less centralized mining hash power.
The Litecoin Network is decentralized and does not require governmental authorities or financial institution intermediaries to create, transmit or determine the value of LTC. Rather, LTC is created and allocated by the Litecoin Network protocol through a “mining” process. The value of LTC is determined by the supply of and demand for LTC on the digital asset trading platforms or in private end-user-to-end-user transactions.
Similar to the Bitcoin Network, the Litecoin Network operates on a proof-of-work model. New LTC is created and rewarded to the miners of a block in the Litecoin Blockchain for verifying transactions. The Litecoin Blockchain is effectively a decentralized database that includes all blocks that have been mined by miners and it is updated to include new blocks as they are solved. Each LTC transaction is broadcast to the Litecoin Network and, when included in a block, recorded on the Litecoin Blockchain. As each new block records outstanding LTC transactions, and outstanding transactions are settled and validated through such recording, the Litecoin Blockchain represents a complete, transparent and unbroken history of all transactions of the Litecoin Network. The current miner reward of 6.25 LTC per block was reduced from 12.5 LTC per block by 50% in August 2023, and will be further reduced by another 50% every 840,000 blocks, or approximately four years, thereafter.
Similar to Bitcoin, LTC can be used to pay for goods and services or can be converted to fiat currencies, such as the U.S. dollar, at rates determined on digital asset exchanges or in individual end-user-to-end-user transactions under a barter system. Additionally, LTC is used to pay for transaction fees to miners for verifying transactions on the Litecoin Network.
The Trust will use the CoinDesk Litecoin Price Index (LTX) (the “Index”) to calculate the Trust's NAV. The Index is calculated by applying a weighting algorithm to the price and trading volume data for the immediately preceding 24-hour period as of 4:00 p.m., New York time, derived from the selected digital asset trading platforms. CoinDesk Indices, Inc. publishes the Index.
As set forth in the Registration Statement, NAV means the total assets of the Trust including, but not limited to, all LTC and cash less total liabilities of the Trust. The Administrator determines the NAV of the Trust on each day that the Exchange is open for regular trading, as promptly as practical after 4:00 p.m. ET. The NAV of the Trust is the aggregate value of the Trust's assets less its accrued but unpaid liabilities (which include accrued expenses). In determining the Trust's NAV, the Administrator values the LTC held by the Trust based on the price set by the Index as of 4:00 p.m. ET. The Administrator also determines the NAV per Share. The NAV for the Trust will be calculated by the Administrator once a day and will be disseminated daily to all market participants at the same time.
In addition to the price transparency of the Index, the Trust will provide information regarding the Trust's LTC holdings as well as additional data regarding the Trust. The website for the Trust, which will be publicly accessible at no charge, will contain the following information: (a) the prior business day's NAV per Share; (b) the prior business day's Nasdaq official closing price; (c) calculation of the premium or discount of such Exchange official closing price against such NAV per Share; (d) data in chart form displaying the frequency distribution of discounts and premiums of the Exchange's official closing price against the NAV, within appropriate ranges for each of the four previous calendar quarters (or for the life of the Trust, if shorter); (e) the prospectus; and (f) other applicable quantitative information. The Trust will also disseminate the Trust's holdings on a daily basis on the Trust's website. Quotation and last sale information regarding the Shares will be disseminated through the facilities of the relevant securities information processor.
The intraday indicative value (“IIV”) will be calculated by using the prior day's closing NAV per Share as a base and updating that value during the Exchange's regular market session of 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. ET (the “Regular Market Session”) to reflect changes in the value of the Trust's LTC holdings during the trading day. The IIV disseminated during the Regular Market Session should not be viewed as an actual real-time update of the NAV, because NAV per Share is calculated only once at the end of each trading day based upon the relevant end-of-day values of the Trust's investments. The IIV will be widely disseminated on a per-Share basis every 15 seconds during the Regular Market Session through the facilities of the relevant securities information processor by market data vendors. In addition, the IIV will be available through online information services, such as Bloomberg and Reuters.
Quotation and last sale information for LTC is disseminated through a variety of major market data vendors. Information related to trading, including price and volume information, in LTC is available from major market data vendors and from the trading platforms on which LTC are traded. Depth of book information is also available from LTC trading platforms. The normal trading hours for LTC trading platforms are 24 hours per day, 365 days per year.
Information regarding market price and trading volume of the Shares will be continually available on a real-time basis throughout the day on brokers' computer screens and other electronic services. Information regarding the previous day's Nasdaq official closing price and trading volume information for the Shares will be published daily in the financial section of newspapers.
The Custodians will be responsible for custody of the Trust's LTC. The Custodians are qualified custodians
The Custodians carefully consider the design of the physical, operational and cryptographic systems for secure storage of the Trust's private keys in an effort to lower the risk of loss or theft. The Custodians utilizes a variety of security measures to ensure that private keys necessary to transfer digital assets remain uncompromised and that the Trust maintains exclusive ownership of its assets. The operational procedures of the Custodians are reviewed by third-party advisors with specific expertise in physical security. The devices that store the keys will never be connected to the internet or any other public or private distributed network—this is colloquially known as “cold storage.” Only specific individuals are authorized to participate in the custody process, and no individual acting alone will be able to access or use any of the private keys. In addition, no combination of the executive officers of the Sponsor or the investment professionals managing the Trust, acting alone or together, will be able to access or use any of the private keys that hold the Trust's LTC.
The Trust will issue Shares on an ongoing basis, but only in one or more Baskets. The creation and redemption of a Basket requires the delivery to the Trust, or the distribution by the Trust, of the cash value of the amount of LTC represented by each Basket being created or redeemed, which is calculated pursuant to the same procedures used to calculate the Trust's NAV (the “Basket Amount”). The amount of bitcoin the Trust, by the number of Shares outstanding at such time (the quotient so obtained represented by each Basket is determined by dividing the number of LTC owned by the Trust at 4:00 p.m. ET, on the trade date of a creation or redemption order, as adjusted for the number of whole and fractional LTC constituting accrued but unpaid fees and expenses of the Trust, by the number of Shares outstanding at such time and multiplying such quotient by 10,000. The Basket Amount multiplied by the number of Baskets being created or redeemed is the “Total Basket Amount.” The only persons that may place orders to create or redeem Baskets are authorized participants (“Authorized Participants”). Each Authorized Participant must (i) be a registered broker-dealer or similar exempt financial institution and (ii) enter into a participant agreement with the Sponsor, the Administrator, and the Trust's marketing agent. Authorized Participants may act for their own accounts or as agents for broker-dealers, custodians and other securities market participants that wish to create or redeem Baskets. Shareholders who are not Authorized Participants will only be able to redeem their Shares through an Authorized Participant. The Authorized Participants will deliver only cash to create Shares and will receive only cash when redeeming Shares. Further, Authorized Participants will not directly or indirectly purchase, hold, deliver, or receive LTC as part of the creation or redemption process or otherwise direct the trust or a third party with respect to purchasing, holding, delivering, or receiving LTC as part of the creation or redemption process. The Sponsor will maintain ownership and control of the LTC in a manner consistent with good delivery requirements for spot commodity transactions.
The Commission has approved numerous series of Trust Issued Receipts,
As noted above, the Commission has recognized that the “regulated market of significant size” standard is not the only means for satisfying Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, specifically providing that a listing exchange could demonstrate that “other means to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices” are sufficient to justify dispensing with the requisite surveillance-sharing agreement.
[B]ased on the record before the Commission and the improved quality of the correlation analysis in the record, including the Commission's own analysis, the Commission is able to conclude that fraud or manipulation that impacts prices in spot bitcoin markets would likely similarly impact CME bitcoin futures prices. And because the CME's surveillance can assist in detecting those impacts on CME bitcoin futures prices, the Exchanges' comprehensive surveillance-sharing agreement with the CME—a U.S. regulated market whose bitcoin futures market is consistently highly correlated to spot bitcoin, albeit not of
Today, Coinbase Derivatives, LLC (“Coinbase Derivatives”) offers trading in LTC futures.
The Shares will be subject to Nasdaq Rule 5711(d)(vi), which sets forth the initial and continued listing criteria applicable to Commodity-Based Trust Shares. The Exchange will obtain a representation that the Trust's NAV per Share will be calculated daily and will be made available to all market participants at the same time. A minimum of 40,000 Shares will be required to be outstanding at the time of commencement of trading on the Exchange. Upon termination of the Trust, the Shares will be removed from listing. The Trustee will be a trust company having substantial capital and surplus and the experience and facilities for handling corporate trust business, as required under Nasdaq Rule 5711(d)(vi)(D) and no change will be made to the Trustee without prior notice to and approval of the Exchange.
As required in Nasdaq Rule 5711(d)(viii), the Exchange notes that any registered market maker (“Market Maker”) in the Shares must file with the Exchange, in a manner prescribed by the Exchange, and keep current a list identifying all accounts for trading the underlying commodity, related futures or options on futures, or any other related derivatives, which the registered Market Maker may have or over which it may exercise investment discretion. No registered Market Maker in the Shares shall trade in the underlying commodity, related futures or options on futures, or any other related derivatives, in an account in which a registered Market Maker, directly or indirectly, controls trading activities, or has a direct interest in the profits or losses thereof, which has not been reported to the Exchange as required by Nasdaq Rule 5711(d). In addition to the existing obligations under Exchange rules regarding the production of books and records, the registered Market Maker in the Shares shall make available to the Exchange such books, records or other information pertaining to transactions by such entity or any limited partner, officer or approved person thereof, registered or non-registered employee affiliated with such entity for its or their own accounts in the underlying commodity, related futures or options on futures, or any other related derivatives, as may be requested by the Exchange.
The Exchange is able to obtain information regarding trading in the Shares and the underlying LTC, LTC futures contracts, or any other LTC derivative through members acting as registered Market Makers, in connection with their proprietary or customer trades.
As a general matter, the Exchange has regulatory jurisdiction over its members, and their associated persons. The Exchange also has regulatory jurisdiction over any person or entity controlling a member, as well as a subsidiary or affiliate of a member that is in the securities business. A subsidiary or affiliate of a member organization that does business only in commodities would not be subject to Exchange jurisdiction, but the Exchange could obtain information regarding the activities of such subsidiary or affiliate through surveillance sharing agreements with regulatory organizations of which such subsidiary or affiliate is a member.
The Exchange deems the Shares to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in the Shares subject to the Exchange's existing rules governing the trading of equity securities. The Exchange will allow trading in the Shares from 4:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. ET. The Exchange has appropriate rules to facilitate transactions in the Shares during all trading sessions. The Shares of the Trust will conform to the initial and continued listing criteria set forth in Nasdaq Rule 5711(d) and will comply with the requirements of Rule 10A-3 of the Act.
With respect to trading halts, the Exchange may consider all relevant factors in exercising its discretion to halt or suspend trading in the Shares. The Exchange will halt trading in the Shares under the conditions specified in Nasdaq Rules 4120 and 4121, including without limitation the conditions specified in Nasdaq Rule 4120(a)(9) and (10) and the trading pauses under Nasdaq Rules 4120(a)(11) and (12).
Trading may be halted because of market conditions or for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in the Shares inadvisable. These may include: (1) the extent to which trading is not occurring in the LTC underlying the Shares; or (2) whether other unusual conditions or circumstances detrimental to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market are present.
If the IIV or the value of the Index is not being disseminated as required, the Exchange may halt trading during the day in which the interruption to the dissemination of the IIV or the value of the Index occurs. If the interruption to the dissemination of the IIV or the value of the Index persists past the trading day in which it occurred, the Exchange will halt trading no later than the beginning of the trading day following the interruption.
In addition, if the Exchange becomes aware that the NAV per Share with respect to the Shares is not disseminated to all market participants at the same time, it will halt trading in the Shares until such time as the NAV per Share is available to all market participants.
The Exchange believes that its surveillance procedures are adequate to properly monitor the trading of the Shares on the Exchange during all trading sessions and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and the applicable federal securities laws. The surveillance program includes real-time patterns for price and volume movements and post-trade surveillance patterns (
The Exchange will require the Trust to represent to the Exchange that it will advise the Exchange of any failure by the Trust to comply with the continued listing requirements, and, pursuant to its obligations under Section 19(g)(1) of the Exchange Act, the Exchange will surveil for compliance with the continued listing requirements. If the Trust is not in compliance with the applicable listing requirements, the Exchange will commence delisting procedures under the Nasdaq 5800 Series. In addition, the Exchange also has a general policy prohibiting the distribution of material, non-public information by its employees.
The Exchange or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, or both, will communicate as needed regarding trading in the Shares with other markets and other entities that are members of the ISG, and the Exchange or FINRA, on behalf of the Exchange, or both, may obtain trading information regarding trading in the Shares and listed LTC futures from such markets and other entities. The Exchange also may obtain information regarding trading in the Shares and listed LTC futures via the ISG, from other exchanges who are members or affiliates of the ISG, or with which the Exchange has entered into a comprehensive surveillance sharing agreement.
Prior to the commencement of trading, the Exchange will inform its members in an information circular (“Information Circular”) of the special characteristics and risks associated with trading the Shares. Specifically, the Information Circular will discuss the following: (1) the procedures for creations and redemptions of Shares in Baskets (and that Shares are not individually redeemable); (2) Section 10 of Nasdaq General Rule 9, which imposes suitability obligations on Nasdaq members with respect to recommending transactions in the Shares to customers; (3) how information regarding the IIV and NAV is disseminated; (4) the risks involved in trading the Shares during the pre-market and post-market sessions when an updated IIV will not be calculated or publicly disseminated; (5) the requirement that members deliver a prospectus to investors purchasing newly issued Shares prior to or concurrently with the confirmation of a transaction; and (6) trading information. The Information Circular will also discuss any exemptive, no action and interpretive relief granted by the Commission from any rules under the Act.
The Information Circular will also reference the fact that there is no regulated source of last sale information regarding LTC, that the Commission has no jurisdiction over the trading of LTC as a commodity.
Additionally, the Information Circular will reference that the Trust is subject to various fees and expenses described in the Registration Statement. The Information Circular will also disclose the trading hours of the Shares. The Information Circular will disclose that information about the Shares will be publicly available on the Trust's website.
The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act,
The Commission has approved numerous series of Trust Issued Receipts, including Commodity-Based Trust Shares, to be listed on U.S. national securities exchanges. In order for any proposed rule change from an exchange to be approved, the Commission must determine that, among other things, the proposal is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, specifically including: (i) the requirement that a national securities exchange's rules are designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices; and (ii) the requirement that an exchange proposal be designed, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange believes that this proposal is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.
As noted above, the Commission has recognized that the “regulated market of significant size” standard is not the only means for satisfying Section 6(b)(5) of the act, specifically providing that a listing exchange could demonstrate that “other means to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices” are sufficient to justify dispensing with the requisite surveillance-sharing agreement with the underlying spot market. The Exchange and Sponsor believe that such conditions are present. As discussed above, in approving the Spot Bitcoin ETPs, the Commission found that there were “sufficient `other means' of preventing fraud and manipulation,” including that:
[B]ased on the record before the Commission and the improved quality of the correlation analysis in the record, including the Commission's own analysis, the Commission is able to conclude that fraud or manipulation that impacts prices in spot bitcoin markets would likely similarly impact CME bitcoin futures prices. And because the CME's surveillance can assist in detecting those impacts on CME bitcoin futures prices, the Exchanges' comprehensive surveillance-sharing agreement with the CME—a U.S. regulated market whose bitcoin futures market is consistently highly correlated to spot bitcoin, albeit not of “significant size” related to spot bitcoin—can be reasonably expected to assist in surveilling for fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices in the specific context of the [Spot Bitcoin ETPs].
As discussed above, Coinbase Derivatives offers trading in LTC futures.
The Exchange further believes that the proposed rule change is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices and to protect investors and the public interest in that the Shares will be listed and traded on the Exchange pursuant to the initial and continued listing criteria set forth in Nasdaq Rule 5711(d). The Exchange has in place surveillance procedures that are adequate to properly monitor trading in the Shares in all trading sessions and to deter and detect violations of Exchange rules and applicable federal securities laws. As discussed above, the surveillance program includes real-time patterns for price and volume movements and post-trade surveillance patterns (
The Exchange will require the Trust to represent to the Exchange that it will advise the Exchange of any failure by the Trust to comply with the continued listing requirements, and, pursuant to its obligations under Section 19(g)(1) of the Exchange Act, the Exchange will surveil for compliance with the continued listing requirements. If the Trust is not in compliance with the applicable listing requirements, the Exchange will commence delisting procedures under the Nasdaq 5800 Series. In addition, the Exchange also has a general policy prohibiting the distribution of material, non-public information by its employees.
The Exchange will communicate as needed regarding trading in the Shares with other markets and other entities that are members of the ISG, and the Exchange may obtain trading information regarding trading in the Shares and listed LTC futures from such markets and other entities.
Trading in Shares of the Trust will be halted if the circuit breaker parameters have been reached or because of market conditions or for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in the Shares inadvisable. These may include unusual conditions or circumstances detrimental to the maintenance of a fair and orderly market.
The proposed rule change is designed to perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest in that it will facilitate the listing and trading of Shares that will enhance competition among market participants, to the benefit of investors and the marketplace.
For all the above reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purpose of the Act. The Exchange notes that the proposed rule change rather will facilitate the listing and trading of additional exchange-traded product that will enhance competition among both market participants and listing venues, to the benefit of investors and the marketplace.
No written comments were either solicited or received.
Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to file number SR-NASDAQ-2025-005 and should be submitted on or before February 25, 2025.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
On November 19, 2024, MIAX Emerald, LLC (“Emerald” or the “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) a proposed minor rule violation plan (“MRVP” or “Plan”) pursuant to Section 19(d)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”),
The Exchange's MRVP specifies the rule violations that will be included in the Plan and will have sanctions not exceeding $2,500. Any violations resolved under the MRVP would not be subject to the provisions of Rule 19d-1(c)(1) of the Act,
The Exchange proposed to include in its MRVP the procedures and violations currently included in Exchange Rule 1014 (“Imposition of Fines for Minor Rule Violations”).
According to the Exchange, upon the Commission's declaration of effectiveness of the MRVP, the Exchange will provide to the Commission a quarterly report for any actions taken on minor rule violations under the MRVP.
The Exchange requested that the Commission deem any changes to the rules applicable to the Exchange's MRVP to be deemed modifications to the Exchange's MRVP.
The Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with the public interest, the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as required by Rule 19d-1(c)(2) under the Act,
In declaring the Exchange's MRVP effective, the Commission does not minimize the importance of compliance with Exchange rules and all other rules subject to the imposition of sanctions under Exchange Rule 1014(d). Violation of an SRO's rules, as well as Commission rules, is a serious matter. However, Exchange Rule 1014(d) provides a reasonable means of addressing violations that do not rise to the level of requiring formal disciplinary proceedings, while providing greater flexibility in handling certain violations. The Commission expects the Exchange to continue to conduct surveillance and make determinations based on its findings, on a case-by-case basis, regarding whether a violation requires formal disciplinary action or whether a sanction under the MRVP is appropriate.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
On October 17, 2024, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”), pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”)
Nasdaq offers complimentary services under Listing Rule IM-5900-7 to Eligible New Listings
Currently, an Eligible Switch that has a market capitalization of $750 million or more but less than $5 billion receives certain complimentary services for four years, including the choice of one of the following Market Advisory Tools: Stock Surveillance, Global Targeting, or an Annual Perception Study.
Currently, an Eligible Switch that has a market capitalization of $5 billion or more receives as part of its Service Package the choice of two Market Advisory Tools for four years.
Finally, Nasdaq proposes to modify the definition of an “Eligible Switch” in Listing Rule IM-5900-7(a)(2) to include
After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of section 6 of the Act.
Nasdaq is responding to competitive pressures in the market for listings in making this proposal. Nasdaq states that it faces competition in the market for listing services, and competes, in part, by offering valuable services to companies, including complimentary services.
The Commission finds that it is consistent with the Act to modify the packages of complimentary services offered to Eligible Switches with a market capitalization of $750 million or more that list on or after the effective date of this proposed rule change as described herein. As Nasdaq states, the proposed modifications relate to how Market Advisory Tools are provided and would likely increase the value of complimentary services packages to the companies affected by this proposal.
As stated in the Commission's previous order approving Listing Rule IM-5900-7, section 6(b)(5) of the Act
The Commission also finds that it is consistent with the Act for Nasdaq to modify the definition of an Eligible Switch in Listing Rule IM-5900-7(a)(2) to include companies switching their listing not only from the NYSE, as currently provided, but also from any other national securities exchange. In Nasdaq's 2011 proposal to limit Eligible Switches only to companies switching their listing from the NYSE, Nasdaq stated that those listings would bring greater future value to Nasdaq.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
The Commission's Office of the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation (“Office” or “OASB”) seeks to collect feedback from small businesses and their investors to understand better the population that it is serving and their role in the small business ecosystem. The proposed collection of information will help ensure that the Office's outreach efforts and communication materials and other program initiatives are effective and responsive to customer needs. More specifically, the Office will seek the following four categories of information: (i) Demographic information about program participants, (ii) feedback on the Office's outreach and educational materials, (iii) capital formation-related questions, and (iv) issues and challenges faced by small businesses and their investors. This feedback will allow the Office to tailor its outreach efforts and communication materials to serve its customers more effectively. Collecting feedback will also allow the Office to understand better its target audience and improve outreach events and educational materials by optimizing their content and delivery, while strategizing how best to deploy the Office's resources to address issues and challenges faced by its customers.
Feedback collected under this generic clearance will provide useful information, but it will not yield data that can be generalized to the overall population. This type of generic clearance for information will not be used for quantitative information collections that are designed to yield reliably actionable results, such as monitoring trends over time or documenting program performance.
These are the estimates for the next three years for the expected annual number of (i) activities: 30; (ii) respondents: 10,000; (iii) responses: 10,000; (iv) frequency of response: once per request; (v) average minutes per response: 5; and (vi) burden hours: 833.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
Please direct your written comments to: Austin Gerig, Director/Chief Data Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Tanya Ruttenberg, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 or send an email to:
Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
Appendix F applies to certain members of a class of broker-dealers known as over-the-counter (“OTC”) derivatives dealers. Exchange Act Rule 15c3-1 is the Commission's net capital rule for broker-dealers.
At present, two OTC derivatives dealers have been approved to use Appendix F. No additional OTC derivatives dealers have applied to use Appendix F, and the staff does not expect that any additional OTC derivatives dealers will apply to use Appendix F during the next three years. The Commission estimates that the two approved OTC derivatives dealers will spend an average of approximately 1,000 hours each per year reporting information concerning their value-at-risk (“VAR”) models and internal risk management systems, for a total annual burden of approximately 2,000 hours.
Written comments are invited on: (a) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (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. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted April 7, 2025.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
Please direct your written comments to: Austin Gerig, Director/Chief Data Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Tanya Ruttenberg, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549, or send an email to:
Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission” or “SEC”).
Notice.
Notice of an application under section 6(c) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Act”) for an exemption from section 15(a) of the Act, as well as from certain disclosure requirements in rule 20a-1 under the Act, Item 19(a)(3) of Form N-1A, Items 22(c)(1)(ii), 22(c)(1)(iii), 22(c)(8) and 22(c)(9) of Schedule 14A under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and sections 6-07(2)(a), (b), and (c) of Regulation S-X (“Disclosure Requirements”).
The requested exemption would permit Applicants to enter into and materially amend subadvisory agreements with subadvisers without shareholder approval and would grant relief from the Disclosure Requirements as they relate to fees paid to the subadvisers.
The RBB Fund Trust and First Eagle Investment Management, LLC
The application was filed on December 19, 2024.
An order granting the requested relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing on any application by emailing the SEC's Secretary at
The Commission:
Trace W. Rakestraw, Senior Special Counsel, at (202) 551-6825 (Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).
For Applicants' representations, legal analysis, and conditions, please refer to Applicants' application, dated December 19, 2024, which may be obtained via the Commission's website by searching for the file number at the top of this document, or for an Applicant using the Company name search field on the SEC's EDGAR system. The SEC's EDGAR system may be searched at
For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management, under delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange proposes to update certain representations regarding service providers and basket size made in the proposed rule change previously filed with and approved by the Commission relating to the Hashdex Nasdaq Crypto Index US ETF (“Trust”) under Nasdaq Rule 5711(d).
The proposed rule change, including the Exchange's statement of the purpose of, and statutory basis for, the proposed rule change, is available on the Exchange's website at
The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act
A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission will institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (“PRA”) (44 U.S.C. 3501
In connection with offerings of municipal securities, paragraph (b) of Rule 15c2-12
Rule 15c2-12 is intended to enhance disclosure, and thereby reduce fraud, in the municipal securities market by establishing standards for obtaining, reviewing, and disseminating information about municipal securities by their underwriters.
Municipal offerings of less than $1 million are exempt from the rule,
The required
Nonetheless, as discussed more fully in the Supporting Statement,
With respect to hour burdens, the Commission estimates that approximately 28,000 issuers, 205 broker-dealers, and the MSRB will spend a total of 786,220 hours per year complying with Rule 15c2-12 over the next three years.
Rule 15c2-12 imposes ongoing third-party disclosure burdens on broker-dealers that act as Participating Underwriters in offerings of municipal securities. The Commission estimates that the total annual burden on broker-dealers to comply with Rule 15c2-12 is 101,454 hours.
Finally, Rule 15c2-12 imposes ongoing recordkeeping burdens on the MSRB. The Commission estimates that the total annual burden on the MSRB to comply with Rule 15c2-12 is 22,000 hours. Based on estimates provided by the MSRB, the Commission estimates that, over the last three years, the MSRB has incurred an annual burden of approximately 22,000 hours to collect, index, store, retrieve, and make available the pertinent continuing disclosure documents under Rule 15c2-12. Accordingly, the Commission estimates that the MSRB will incur an annual burden of 22,000 hours to collect, index, store, retrieve and make available the pertinent documents under Rule 15c2-12 each year over the next three years.
With respect to cost burdens, the Commission estimates that 18,200 issuers and the MSRB will spend a total of $20,492,000 complying with Rule 15c2-12 over the next three years.
Finally, based on recently obtained data provided by the MSRB, the Commission estimates that the MSRB will incur total annual costs of approximately $1,238,000 to operate the continuing disclosure service for the MSRB's Electronic Municipal Market Access (“EMMA”) system, including hardware, software, and external third-party costs such as cloud service provider costs.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
The public may view and comment on this information collection request at:
Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I hereby determine that certain objects being imported from abroad pursuant to an agreement with their foreign owner or custodian for temporary display in the exhibition “What drawing can be: four responses” at the Menil Drawing Institute, The Menil Collection, Houston, Texas, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, are of cultural significance, and, further, that their temporary exhibition or display within the United States as aforementioned is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these determinations be published in the
Reed Liriano, Program Coordinator, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6471; email:
The foregoing determinations were made pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,
Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I hereby determine that certain objects being imported from abroad pursuant to an agreement with their foreign owner or custodian for temporary display in the exhibition “Rosa Barba: The Ocean of One's Pause” at The Museum of Modern Art, New York, New York, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, are of cultural significance, and, further, that their temporary exhibition or display within the United States as aforementioned is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these determinations be published in the
Reed Liriano, Program Coordinator, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6471; email:
The foregoing determinations were made pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,
U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission.
Notice of open public hearing.
Notice is hereby given of the following hearing of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. The Commission is mandated by Congress to investigate, assess, and report to Congress annually on “the national security implications of the economic relationship between the United States and the People's Republic of China.” Pursuant to this mandate, the Commission will hold a public hearing in Washington, DC on February 20, 2025 on “An Axis of Autocracy? China's Relations with Russia, Iran, and North Korea.”
The hearing is scheduled for Thursday, February 20, 2025 at 9 a.m.
Members of the public will be able to attend in person at or near the U.S. Capitol and adjacent Congressional office buildings (specific building and room number to be announced) or view a live webcast via the Commission's website at
Any member of the public seeking further information concerning the hearing should contact Jameson Cunningham, 444 North Capitol Street NW, Suite 602, Washington, DC 20001; telephone: 202-624-1496, or via email at
The hearing will be co-chaired by Commissioner Aaron Friedberg and Commissioner Jonathan Stivers. Any interested party may file a written statement by February 20, 2025 by transmitting it to the contact above. A portion of the hearing will include a question and answer period between the Commissioners and the witnesses.
United States Sentencing Commission.
Notice and request for public comment and hearing.
The United States Sentencing Commission is considering promulgating amendments to the sentencing guidelines, policy statements, and commentary. This notice sets forth the proposed amendments and, for each proposed amendment, a synopsis of the issues addressed by that proposed amendment. This notice also sets forth several issues for comment, some of which are set forth together with the proposed amendments, and one of which (regarding retroactive application of proposed amendments) is set forth in the
There are two methods for submitting public comment.
Jennifer Dukes, Senior Public Affairs Specialist, (202) 502-4597.
The United States Sentencing Commission is an independent agency in the judicial branch of the United States Government. The Commission promulgates sentencing guidelines and policy statements for federal courts pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 994(a). The Commission also periodically reviews and revises previously promulgated guidelines pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 994(o) and submits guideline amendments to the Congress not later than the first day of May each year pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 994(p).
Publication of a proposed amendment requires the affirmative vote of at least three voting members of the Commission and is deemed to be a request for public comment on the proposed amendment.
The Commission published a notice of proposed amendments in the
The proposed amendments in this notice are presented in one of two formats. First, some of the amendments are proposed as specific revisions to a guideline, policy statement, or commentary. Bracketed text within a proposed amendment indicates a heightened interest on the Commission's part in comment and suggestions regarding alternative policy choices; for example, a proposed enhancement of [2][4][6] levels indicates that the Commission is considering, and invites comment on, alternative policy choices regarding the appropriate level of enhancement. Similarly, bracketed text within a specific offense characteristic or application note means that the Commission specifically invites comment on whether the proposed provision is appropriate. Second, the Commission has highlighted certain issues for comment and invites suggestions on how the Commission should respond to those issues.
In summary, the proposed amendments and issues for comment set forth in this notice are as follows:
(1) A two-part proposed amendment relating to supervised release, including (A) amendments to Chapter Five, Part D (Supervised Release) to provide courts greater discretion to impose a term of supervised release in the manner it determines is most appropriate based on an individualized assessment of the defendant and to ensure the provisions in this Chapter fulfill rehabilitative ends, distinct from those of incarceration, and related issues for comment; and (B) amendments to Chapter Seven (Violations of Probation and Supervised Release) to provide courts greater discretion to respond to a violation of a condition of supervised release and to ensure the provisions in this Chapter reflect the differences between probation and supervised release, and related issues for comment.
(2) A multi-part proposed amendment relating to drug offenses, including (A) (i) three options for amending § 2D1.1 (Unlawful Manufacturing, Importing, Exporting, or Trafficking (Including Possession with Intent to Commit These Offenses); Attempt or Conspiracy) to set the highest base offense level in the Drug Quantity Table at subsection (c) at a lower base offense level, and related issues for comment; and (ii) two options for amending § 2D1.1 to add a new specific offense characteristic providing for a reduction relating to low-level trafficking functions, and related issues for comment; (B) (i) amendments to § 2D1.1 to address offenses involving “Ice,” and related issues for comment; and (ii) two options for amending § 2D1.1 to address the purity distinction between methamphetamine in “actual” form and methamphetamine as part of a mixture, and related issues for comment; (C) amendments to § 2D1.1 to revise the enhancement for misrepresentation of fentanyl and fentanyl analogue at subsection (b)(13), and related issues for comment; (D) amendments to § 2D1.1 to address the application of subsection (b)(1) to machineguns, and a related issue for comment; and (E) amendments to the Commentary to § 5C1.2 (Limitation on Applicability of Statutory Minimum Sentences in Certain Cases) to address the manner by which a defendant may satisfy § 5C1.2(a)(5)'s requirement of providing truthful information and
In addition, the Commission requests public comment regarding whether, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2) and 28 U.S.C. 994(u), any proposed amendment published in this notice should be included in subsection (d) of § 1B1.10 (Reduction in Term of Imprisonment as a Result of Amended Guideline Range (Policy Statement)) as an amendment that may be applied retroactively to previously sentenced defendants. The Commission lists in § 1B1.10(d) the specific guideline amendments that the court may apply retroactively under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2). The Background Commentary to § 1B1.10 lists the purpose of the amendment, the magnitude of the change in the guideline range made by the amendment, and the difficulty of applying the amendment retroactively to determine an amended guideline range under § 1B1.10(b) as among the factors the Commission considers in selecting the amendments included in § 1B1.10(d). To the extent practicable, public comment should address each of these factors.
The text of the proposed amendments and related issues for comment are set forth below. Additional information pertaining to the proposed amendments and issues for comment described in this notice may be accessed through the Commission's website at
The length of the term of supervised release that a court may select depends on the class of the offense of conviction. The term may be not more than five years for a Class A or Class B felony, not more than three years for a Class C or Class D felony, and not more than one year for a Class E felony or a misdemeanor (other than a petty offense).
If a court imposes a term of supervised release, the court must order certain conditions of supervised release, such as that the defendant not commit another crime or unlawfully possess a controlled substance during the term, and that the defendant make restitution.
Courts are authorized, under certain conditions, to extend or terminate a term of supervised release, or modify, enlarge, or reduce the conditions thereof.
The Sentencing Commission's policies regarding supervised release are included in Part D (Supervised Release) of Chapter Five (Determining the Sentence) and Part B (Probation and Supervised Release Violations) of Chapter Seven (Probation and Supervised Release Violations) of the
The Commission is considering whether to implement one or both parts, as they are not mutually exclusive.
Section 5D1.1 (Imposition of a Term of Supervised Release) governs the imposition of a term of supervised release. Under § 5D1.1(a), a court shall order a term of supervised release (1) when it is required by statute or (2) when a sentence of more than one year is imposed. In any other case, § 5D1.1(b) treats the decision to impose a term of supervised release as discretionary. The commentary to § 5D1.1 describes the factors to consider in determining whether to impose a term of supervised release: (1) certain 18 U.S.C. 3553 factors, which the court is statutorily required to consider (
Section 5D1.1(c) provides an exception to the rule in § 5D1.1(a), directing that “[t]he court ordinarily should not impose a term of supervised release in a case in which supervised release is not required by statute and the defendant is a deportable alien who likely will be deported after imprisonment.” However, Application Note 5 directs that a court should consider imposing a term of supervised release if “it would provide an added measure of deterrence and protection based on the facts and circumstances of a particular case.”
Section 5D1.2 (Term of Supervised Release) governs the length of a term of supervised release. First, § 5D1.2(a) sets forth the recommended terms of supervised release for each classification of offense: (1) two to five years for an individual convicted of a Class A or B felony; (2) one to three years for an individual convicted of a Class C or D felony; and (3) one year for an individual convicted of a Class E felony or a Class A misdemeanor. Second, for offenses involving terrorism or a sex offense, § 5D1.2(b) provides for a term of supervised release up to life, and a policy statement further directs that for a sex offense, as defined in Application Note 1, the statutory maximum term of supervised release is
The Commentary to § 5D1.2 provides further guidance for setting a term of supervised release. Application Note 4 directs that the factors to be considered in selecting the length of a term of supervised release are the same as those for determining whether to impose such a term. Application Note 5 states that courts have “authority to terminate or extend a term of supervised release” and encourages courts to “exercise this authority in appropriate cases.”
Section 5D1.3 (Conditions of Supervised Release) sets forth the mandatory, “standard,” “special,” and additional conditions of supervised release. It provides a framework for courts to use when imposing the standard, special, and additional conditions—those considered “discretionary.”
The Commission has received feedback from commenters that the guidelines should provide courts with greater discretion to make determinations regarding the imposition of supervised release that are based on an individualized assessment of the defendant. Additionally, a bipartisan coalition in Congress has sought to address similar concerns.
Part A of the proposed amendment seeks to revise Chapter Five, Part D to accomplish two goals. The first is to provide courts greater discretion to impose a term of supervised release in the manner it determines is most appropriate based on an individualized assessment of the defendant. The second is to ensure the provisions in Chapter Five “fulfill[] rehabilitative ends, distinct from those of incarceration.”
Part A of the proposed amendment would make a number of changes to the supervised release provisions in Chapters Five to serve these goals.
First, Part A of the proposed amendment would add introductory commentary to Part D of Chapter Five expressing the Commission's view that, when making determinations regarding supervised release, courts should assess a wide range of factors to ensure its decisions fulfill the rehabilitative needs of the defendant and protect the public from further crimes of the defendant.
Second, Part A of the proposed amendment would amend the provisions of § 5D1.1 addressing the imposition of a term of supervised release. It would remove the requirement that a court impose a term of supervised release when a sentence of imprisonment of more than one year is imposed, so a court would be required to impose supervised release only when required by statute. For cases in which the decision whether to impose supervised release is discretionary, the court may order a term of supervised release when warranted by an individualized assessment of the need for supervision. Additionally, the court should state the reason for its decision on the record.
Third, Part A of the proposed amendment would amend § 5D1.2, which addresses the length of the term of supervised release. The proposed amendment would remove the provisions requiring a minimum term of supervised release of two years for a Class A or B felony and one year for a Class C, D, or E felony or Class A misdemeanor. Instead, Part A of the proposed amendment would require the court to conduct an individualized assessment to determine the length of the term of supervised release, which must not exceed the maximum term allowed by statute. It would remove the policy statement recommending a supervised release term of life for sex offense cases and add a policy statement that the court should state on the record its reasons for selecting the length of the term of supervised release.
Fourth, Part A of the proposed amendment would amend § 5D1.3, which addresses the conditions of supervised release. It would add a provision stating that courts should conduct an individualized assessment to determine what discretionary conditions are warranted. It brackets the possibility of redesignating “standard” conditions as “examples of common conditions” and brackets either that such conditions may be warranted in some appropriate cases or may be modified, omitted, or expanded in appropriate cases. It would also add an example of a “special” condition that would require a defendant who has not obtained a high school or equivalent diploma to participate in a program to obtain such a diploma.
Finally, Part A of the proposed amendment would add a new policy statement at § 5D1.4 (Modification, Early Termination, and Extension of Supervised Release (Policy Statement)) addressing a court's authority to extend or terminate a term of supervised release or modify the conditions thereof. It would encourage a court, as soon as practicable after a defendant's release from imprisonment, to conduct an individualized assessment to determine whether it is warranted to modify, reduce, or enlarge the conditions of supervised release. Additionally, any time after the expiration of one year of supervised release, it would encourage a court to terminate the remaining term of supervision and discharge the defendant if the court determines, following consultation with the government and the probation officer, that the termination is warranted by the conduct of the defendant and the interest of justice. Part A of the proposed amendment provides an option to list factors for a court to consider when determining whether to terminate supervised release. It would also provide that a court, any time before the expiration of a term of supervised release, may extend the term in a case in which the maximum term was not imposed.
Conforming changes are also made to § 1B1.10 (Reduction in Term of Imprisonment as a Result of Amended Guideline Range (Policy Statement)), the Commentary to § 4B1.5 (Repeat and Dangerous Sex Offenders Against Minors), § 5B1.3 (Conditions of Probation), § 5H1.3 (Mental and Emotional Conditions (Policy Statement)), and § 5H1.4 (Physical Condition, Including Drug or Alcohol Dependence or Abuse; Gambling Addiction (Policy Statement)).
Issues for comment are also provided.
Chapter Five, Part D is amended by inserting at the beginning the following new Introductory Commentary:
The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 requires the court to assess a wide range of factors `in determining whether to include a term of supervised release, and, if a term of supervised release is to be included, in determining the length of the term and the conditions of supervised release.' 18 U.S.C. 3583(c). These determinations aim to make the imposition and scope of supervised release `dependent on the needs of the defendant for supervision.'
Section 5D1.1 is amended—
by striking subsections (a) and (b) as follows:
“(a) The court shall order a term of supervised release to follow imprisonment—
(1) when required by statute (
(2) except as provided in subsection (c), when a sentence of imprisonment of more than one year is imposed.
(b) The court may order a term of supervised release to follow imprisonment in any other case.
and inserting the following new subsections (a) and (b):
“(a) The court shall order a term of supervised release to follow imprisonment when required by statute (
(b) When a term of supervised release is not required by statute, the court should order a term of supervised release to follow imprisonment when, and only when, warranted by an individualized assessment of the need for supervision.”;
and by inserting at the end the following new subsection (d):
“(d) The court should state on the record the reasons for imposing [or not imposing] a term of supervised release.”.
The Commentary to § 5D1.1 captioned “Application Notes” is amended—
by striking Notes 1, 2, and 3 as follows:
“1.
2.
3.
(A)
(i) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant;
(ii) the need to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct, to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant, and to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner;
(iii) the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of similar conduct; and
(iv) the need to provide restitution to any victims of the offense.
(B)
(C)
(D)
by redesignating Notes 4 and 5 as Notes 5 and 6, respectively;
and by inserting at the beginning the following new Notes 1, 2, 3, and 4:
“1.
(A) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant (18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(1));
(B) the need to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct, to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant, and to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner (18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(2)(B)-(D));
(C) the kinds of sentence and the sentencing range established for the applicable category of offense committed by the applicable category of defendant as set forth in the guidelines (18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(4));
(D) any pertinent policy statement issued by the Sentencing Commission (18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(5));
(E) the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of similar conduct (18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(6)); and
(F) the need to provide restitution to any victims of the offense (18 U.S.C. 3553(a)(7)).
2.
3.
4.
Section 5D1.2 is amended—
by striking subsections (a) and (b) as follows:
“(a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c), if a term of supervised release is ordered, the length of the term shall be:
(1) At least two years but not more than five years for a defendant convicted of a Class A or B felony.
(2) At least one year but not more than three years for a defendant convicted of a Class C or D felony.
(3) One year for a defendant convicted of a Class E felony or a Class A misdemeanor.
(b) Notwithstanding subdivisions (a)(1) through (3), the length of the term of supervised release shall be not less than the minimum term of years specified for the offense under subdivisions (a)(1) through (3) and may be up to life, if the offense is—
(1) any offense listed in 18 U.S.C. 2332b(g)(5)(B), the commission of which resulted in, or created a foreseeable risk of, death or serious bodily injury to another person; or
(2) a sex offense.
(Policy Statement) If the instant offense of conviction is a sex offense, however, the statutory maximum term of supervised release is recommended.”;
by inserting at the beginning the following new subsection (a):
“(a) If a term of supervised release is ordered, the court shall conduct an individualized assessment to determine the length of the term, not to exceed the relevant statutory maximum term.”;
by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (b);
and by inserting at the end the following new subsection (c):
“(c) The court should state on the record the reasons for the length of the term imposed.”.
The Commentary to § 5D1.2 captioned “Application Notes” is amended—
by striking Note 1 as follows:
“1.
`Sex offense' means (A) an offense, perpetrated against a minor, under (i) chapter 109A of title 18, United States Code; (ii) chapter 110 of such title, not including a recordkeeping offense; (iii) chapter 117 of such title, not including transmitting information about a minor or filing a factual statement about an alien individual; (iv) an offense under 18 U.S.C. 1201; or (v) an offense under 18 U.S.C. 1591; or (B) an attempt or a conspiracy to commit any offense described in subdivisions (A)(i) through (v) of this note. Such term does not include an offense under 18 U.S.C. 2250 (Failure to register).
`Minor' means (A) an individual who had not attained the age of 18 years; (B) an individual, whether fictitious or not, who a law enforcement officer represented to a participant (i) had not attained the age of 18 years; and (ii) could be provided for the purposes of engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or (C) an undercover law enforcement officer who represented to a participant that the officer had not attained the age of 18 years.”;
by redesignating Notes 2, 3, and 4 as Notes 1, 2, and 3, respectively;
in Note 1 (as so redesignated) by striking “shall be” and inserting “is”;
in Note 2 (as so redesignated) by striking “or the guidelines”;
in Note 3 (as so redesignated) by striking “
by striking Notes 5 and 6 as follows:
“5.
6.
For example, if subsection (a) provides a range of two years to five years, but the relevant statute requires a minimum term of supervised release of three years and a maximum term of life, the term of supervised release provided by the guidelines is restricted by subsection (c) to three years to five years. Similarly, if subsection (a) provides a range of two years to five years, but the relevant statute requires a minimum term of supervised release of five years and a maximum term of life, the term of supervised release provided by the guidelines is five years.
The following example illustrates the interaction of subsections (a) and (c) when subsection (b) is also involved. In this example, subsection (a) provides a range of two years to five years; the relevant statute requires a minimum term of supervised release of five years and a maximum term of life; and the offense is a sex offense under subsection (b). The effect of subsection (b) is to raise the maximum term of supervised release from five years (as provided by subsection (a)) to life, yielding a range of two years to life. The term of supervised release provided by the guidelines is then restricted by subsection (c) to five years to life. In this example, a term of supervised release of more than five years would be a guideline sentence. In addition, subsection (b) contains a policy statement recommending that the maximum—a life term of supervised release—be imposed.”;
and by inserting at the end the following new Note 4:
“4.
The Commentary to § 5D1.2 is amended by striking the Commentary captioned “Background” in its entirety as follows:
“
Section 5D1.3 is amended—
by striking subsections (b), (c), and (d) as follows:
“(b)
The court may impose other conditions of supervised release to the extent that such conditions (1) are reasonably related to (A) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant; (B) the need for the sentence imposed to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct; (C) the need to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; and (D) the need to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner; and (2) involve no greater deprivation of liberty than is reasonably necessary for the purposes set forth above and are consistent with any pertinent policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission.
(c)
The following `standard' conditions are recommended for supervised release. Several of the conditions are expansions of the conditions required by statute:
(1) The defendant shall report to the probation office in the federal judicial district where he or she is authorized to reside within 72 hours of release from imprisonment, unless the probation officer instructs the defendant to report to a different probation office or within a different time frame.
(2) After initially reporting to the probation office, the defendant will receive instructions from the court or the probation officer about how and when to report to the probation officer, and the defendant shall report to the probation officer as instructed.
(3) The defendant shall not knowingly leave the federal judicial district where he or she is authorized to reside without first getting permission from the court or the probation officer.
(4) The defendant shall answer truthfully the questions asked by the probation officer.
(5) The defendant shall live at a place approved by the probation officer. If the defendant plans to change where he or she lives or anything about his or her living arrangements (such as the people the defendant lives with), the defendant shall notify the probation officer at least 10 days before the change. If notifying the probation officer at least 10 days in advance is not possible due to unanticipated circumstances, the defendant shall notify the probation officer within 72 hours of becoming aware of a change or expected change.
(6) The defendant shall allow the probation officer to visit the defendant at any time at his or her home or elsewhere, and the defendant shall permit the probation officer to take any items prohibited by the conditions of the defendant's supervision that he or she observes in plain view.
(7) The defendant shall work full time (at least 30 hours per week) at a lawful type of employment, unless the probation officer excuses the defendant from doing so. If the defendant does not have full-time employment he or she shall try to find full-time employment, unless the probation officer excuses the defendant from doing so. If the defendant plans to change where the defendant works or anything about his or her work (such as the position or the job responsibilities), the defendant shall notify the probation officer at least 10 days before the change. If notifying the probation officer in advance is not possible due to unanticipated circumstances, the defendant shall notify the probation officer within 72 hours of becoming aware of a change or expected change.
(8) The defendant shall not communicate or interact with someone the defendant knows is engaged in criminal activity. If the defendant knows someone has been convicted of a felony, the defendant shall not knowingly communicate or interact with that person without first getting the permission of the probation officer.
(9) If the defendant is arrested or questioned by a law enforcement officer, the defendant shall notify the probation officer within 72 hours.
(10) The defendant shall not own, possess, or have access to a firearm, ammunition, destructive device, or dangerous weapon (
(11) The defendant shall not act or make any agreement with a law enforcement agency to act as a confidential human source or informant without first getting the permission of the court.
(12) If the probation officer determines that the defendant poses a risk to another person (including an organization), the probation officer may require the defendant to notify the person about the risk and the defendant shall comply with that instruction. The probation officer may contact the person and confirm that the defendant has notified the person about the risk.
(13) The defendant shall follow the instructions of the probation officer related to the conditions of supervision.
(d)
The following `special' conditions of supervised release are recommended in the circumstances described and, in addition, may otherwise be appropriate in particular cases:
(1)
(A) If the defendant has one or more dependents—a condition specifying that the defendant shall support his or her dependents.
(B) If the defendant is ordered by the government to make child support payments or to make payments to support a person caring for a child—a condition specifying that the defendant shall make the payments and comply with the other terms of the order.
(2)
If an installment schedule of payment of restitution or a fine is imposed—a condition prohibiting the defendant from incurring new credit charges or opening additional lines of credit without approval of the probation officer unless the defendant is in compliance with the payment schedule.
(3)
If the court imposes an order of restitution, forfeiture, or notice to victims, or orders the defendant to pay a fine—a condition requiring the defendant to provide the probation officer access to any requested financial information.
(4)
If the court has reason to believe that the defendant is an abuser of narcotics, other controlled substances or alcohol—(A) a condition requiring the defendant to participate in a program approved by the United States Probation Office for substance abuse, which program may include testing to determine whether the defendant has reverted to the use of drugs or alcohol; and (B) a condition specifying that the defendant shall not use or possess alcohol.
(5)
If the court has reason to believe that the defendant is in need of psychological or psychiatric treatment—a condition requiring that the defendant participate in a mental health program approved by the United States Probation Office.
(6)
If (A) the defendant and the United States entered into a stipulation of deportation pursuant to section 238(c)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1228(c)(5)*); or
* So in original. Probably should be 8 U.S.C. 1228(d)(5).
(7)
If the instant offense of conviction is a sex offense, as defined in Application Note 1 of the Commentary to § 5D1.2 (Term of Supervised Release)—
(A) A condition requiring the defendant to participate in a program approved by the United States Probation Office for the treatment and monitoring of sex offenders.
(B) A condition limiting the use of a computer or an interactive computer service in cases in which the defendant used such items.
(C) A condition requiring the defendant to submit to a search, at any time, with or without a warrant, and by any law enforcement or probation officer, of the defendant's person and any property, house, residence, vehicle, papers, computer, other electronic communication or data storage devices or media, and effects upon reasonable suspicion concerning a violation of a condition of supervised release or unlawful conduct by the defendant, or by any probation officer in the lawful discharge of the officer's supervision functions.
(8)
If the defendant has any unpaid amount of restitution, fines, or special assessments, the defendant shall notify the probation officer of any material change in the defendant's economic circumstances that might affect the defendant's ability to pay.
(e)
The following `special conditions' may be appropriate on a case-by-case basis:
(1)
Residence in a community treatment center, halfway house or similar facility may be imposed as a condition of supervised release.
(2)
Home detention may be imposed as a condition of supervised release, but only as a substitute for imprisonment.
(3)
Community service may be imposed as a condition of supervised release.
(4)
Occupational restrictions may be imposed as a condition of supervised release.
(5)
A condition imposing a curfew may be imposed if the court concludes that restricting the defendant to his place of residence during evening and nighttime hours is necessary to protect the public from crimes that the defendant might commit during those hours, or to assist in the rehabilitation of the defendant. Electronic monitoring may be used as a means of surveillance to ensure compliance with a curfew order.
(6)
Intermittent confinement (custody for intervals of time) may be ordered as a condition of supervised release during the first year of supervised release, but only for a violation of a condition of supervised release in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 3583(e)(2) and only when facilities are available.
and inserting the following new subsection (b):
“(b)
(1)
Such conditions are warranted to the extent that they (A) are reasonably related to (i) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant; (ii) the need for the sentence imposed to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct; (iii) the need to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; and (iv) the need to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner; and (B) involve no greater deprivation of liberty than is reasonably necessary for the purposes set forth above and are consistent with any pertinent policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission.
(2) [
The following are [`standard' conditions of supervised release, which the court may modify, expand, or omit in appropriate cases] [examples of common conditions of supervised release that may be warranted in appropriate cases][. Several of the conditions are expansions of the conditions required by statute]:
(A) The defendant shall report to the probation office in the federal judicial district where he or she is authorized to reside within 72 hours of release from imprisonment, unless the probation officer instructs the defendant to report to a different probation office or within a different time frame.
(B) After initially reporting to the probation office, the defendant will receive instructions from the court or the probation officer about how and when to report to the probation officer, and the defendant shall report to the probation officer as instructed.
(C) The defendant shall not knowingly leave the federal judicial district where he or she is authorized to reside without first getting permission from the court or the probation officer.
(D) The defendant shall answer truthfully the questions asked by the probation officer.
(E) The defendant shall live at a place approved by the probation officer. If the defendant plans to change where he or she lives or anything about his or her living arrangements (such as the people the defendant lives with), the defendant shall notify the probation officer at least 10 days before the change. If notifying the probation officer at least 10 days in advance is not possible due to unanticipated circumstances, the defendant shall notify the probation officer within 72 hours of becoming aware of a change or expected change.
(F) The defendant shall allow the probation officer to visit the defendant at any time at his or her home or elsewhere, and the defendant shall permit the probation officer to take any items prohibited by the conditions of the defendant's supervision that he or she observes in plain view.
(G) The defendant shall work full time (at least 30 hours per week) at a lawful type of employment, unless the probation officer excuses the defendant from doing so. If the defendant does not have full-time employment he or she shall try to find full-time employment, unless the probation officer excuses the defendant from doing so. If the defendant plans to change where the defendant works or anything about his or her work (such as the position or the job responsibilities), the defendant shall notify the probation officer at least 10 days before the change. If notifying the probation officer in advance is not possible due to unanticipated circumstances, the defendant shall notify the probation officer within 72 hours of becoming aware of a change or expected change.
(H) The defendant shall not communicate or interact with someone the defendant knows is engaged in criminal activity. If the defendant knows someone has been convicted of a felony, the defendant shall not
(I) If the defendant is arrested or questioned by a law enforcement officer, the defendant shall notify the probation officer within 72 hours.
(J) The defendant shall not own, possess, or have access to a firearm, ammunition, destructive device, or dangerous weapon (
(K) The defendant shall not act or make any agreement with a law enforcement agency to act as a confidential human source or informant without first getting the permission of the court.
(L) If the probation officer determines that the defendant poses a risk to another person (including an organization), the probation officer may require the defendant to notify the person about the risk and the defendant shall comply with that instruction. The probation officer may contact the person and confirm that the defendant has notified the person about the risk.
(M) The defendant shall follow the instructions of the probation officer related to the conditions of supervision.
(3)
One or more conditions from the following non-exhaustive list of `special' conditions of supervised release may be appropriate in a particular case, including in the circumstances described:
(A)
(i) If the defendant has one or more dependents—a condition specifying that the defendant shall support his or her dependents.
(ii) If the defendant is ordered by the government to make child support payments or to make payments to support a person caring for a child—a condition specifying that the defendant shall make the payments and comply with the other terms of the order.
(B)
If an installment schedule of payment of restitution or a fine is imposed—a condition prohibiting the defendant from incurring new credit charges or opening additional lines of credit without approval of the probation officer unless the defendant is in compliance with the payment schedule.
(C)
If the court imposes an order of restitution, forfeiture, or notice to victims, or orders the defendant to pay a fine—a condition requiring the defendant to provide the probation officer access to any requested financial information.
(D)
If the court has reason to believe that the defendant is an abuser of narcotics, other controlled substances or alcohol—(i) a condition requiring the defendant to participate in a program approved by the United States Probation Office for substance abuse, which program may include testing to determine whether the defendant has reverted to the use of drugs or alcohol; and (ii) a condition specifying that the defendant shall not use or possess alcohol.
(E)
If the court has reason to believe that the defendant is in need of psychological or psychiatric treatment—a condition requiring that the defendant participate in a mental health program approved by the United States Probation Office.
(F)
If (i) the defendant and the United States entered into a stipulation of deportation pursuant to section 238(c)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1228(c)(5)*); or (ii) in the absence of a stipulation of deportation, if, after notice and hearing pursuant to such section, the Attorney General demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that the alien is deportable—a condition ordering deportation by a United States district court or a United States magistrate judge.
* So in original. Probably should be 8 U.S.C. 1228(d)(5).
(G)
If the instant offense of conviction is a sex offense—
(i) A condition requiring the defendant to participate in a program approved by the United States Probation Office for the treatment and monitoring of sex offenders.
(ii) A condition limiting the use of a computer or an interactive computer service in cases in which the defendant used such items.
(iii) A condition requiring the defendant to submit to a search, at any time, with or without a warrant, and by any law enforcement or probation officer, of the defendant's person and any property, house, residence, vehicle, papers, computer, other electronic communication or data storage devices or media, and effects upon reasonable suspicion concerning a violation of a condition of supervised release or unlawful conduct by the defendant, or by any probation officer in the lawful discharge of the officer's supervision functions.
(H)
If the defendant has any unpaid amount of restitution, fines, or special assessments, the defendant shall notify the probation officer of any material change in the defendant's economic circumstances that might affect the defendant's ability to pay.
(I)
If the defendant has not obtained a high school or equivalent diploma, a condition requiring the defendant to participate in a program to obtain such a diploma.
(J)
Residence in a community treatment center, halfway house or similar facility may be imposed as a condition of supervised release.
(K)
Home detention may be imposed as a condition of supervised release, but only as a substitute for imprisonment.
(L)
Community service may be imposed as a condition of supervised release.
(M)
Occupational restrictions may be imposed as a condition of supervised release.
(N)
A condition imposing a curfew may be imposed if the court concludes that restricting the defendant to his place of residence during evening and nighttime hours is necessary to protect the public from crimes that the defendant might commit during those hours, or to assist in the rehabilitation of the defendant. Electronic monitoring may be used as a means of surveillance to ensure compliance with a curfew order.
(O)
Intermittent confinement (custody for intervals of time) may be ordered as a condition of supervised release during the first year of supervised release, but only for a violation of a condition of supervised release in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 3583(e)(2) and only when facilities are available.
The Commentary to § 5D1.3 captioned “Applications Notes” is amended—
in the caption by striking “Note” and inserting “Notes”;
by redesignating Note 1 as Note 2;
by inserting at the beginning the following new Note 1:
“1.
in Note 2 (as so redesignated) by striking “(c)(4)” both places it appears and inserting “(b)(2)(D)”;
and by inserting at the end the following new Note 3:
“3.
`Sex offense' means (A) an offense, perpetrated against a minor, under (i) chapter 109A of title 18, United States Code; (ii) chapter 110 of such title, not including a recordkeeping offense; (iii) chapter 117 of such title, not including transmitting information about a minor or filing a factual statement about an alien individual; (iv) an offense under 18 U.S.C. 1201; or (v) an offense under 18 U.S.C. 1591; or (B) an attempt or a conspiracy to commit any offense described in subdivisions (A)(i) through (v) of this note. Such term does not include an offense under 18 U.S.C. 2250 (Failure to register).
`Minor' means (A) an individual who had not attained the age of 18 years; (B) an individual, whether fictitious or not, who a law enforcement officer represented to a participant (i) had not attained the age of 18 years; and (ii) could be provided for the purposes of engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or (C) an undercover law enforcement officer who represented to a participant that the officer had not attained the age of 18 years.”.
Chapter Five, Part D is amended by inserting at the end the following new § 5D1.4:
Ҥ 5D1.4.
(a)
(b)
[In determining whether termination is warranted, the court should consider the following non-exhaustive list of factors:
(1) any history of court-reported violations over the term of supervision;
(2) the ability of the defendant to lawfully self-manage beyond the period of supervision;
(3) the defendant's substantial compliance with all conditions of supervision;
(4) the defendant's engagement in appropriate prosocial activities and the existence or lack of prosocial support to remain lawful beyond the period of supervision;
(5) a demonstrated reduction in risk level over the period of supervision; and
(6) whether termination will jeopardize public safety, as evidenced by the nature of the defendant's offense, the defendant's criminal history, the defendant's record while incarcerated, the defendant's efforts to reintegrate into the community and avoid recidivism, any statements or information provided by the victims of the offense, and other factors the court finds relevant.]
The court is encouraged to conduct such assessments upon the expiration of one year of supervision and periodically throughout the term of supervision thereafter.
(c)
1.
2.
3.
The Commentary to § 1B1.10 captioned “Application Notes” is amended in Note 8(B) by inserting after “18 U.S.C. 3583(e)(1).” the following: “
[The Commentary to § 4B1.5 captioned “Application Notes” is amended by striking Note 5 as follows:
“5.
(A)
(B)
[The Commentary to § 4B1.5 captioned “Application Notes” is amended in Note 5—
by striking the following:
“
(A)
(B)
and by inserting the following:
“
Section 5B1.3(d)(7) is amended by striking “, as defined in Application Note 1 of the Commentary to § 5D1.2 (Term of Supervised Release)”.
The Commentary to § 5B1.3 captioned “Application Note” is amended—
in the caption by striking “Note” and inserting “Notes”;
and by inserting at the end the following new Note 2:
“2.
`Sex offense' means (A) an offense, perpetrated against a minor, under (i) chapter 109A of title 18, United States Code; (ii) chapter 110 of such title, not including a recordkeeping offense; (iii) chapter 117 of such title, not including transmitting information about a minor or filing a factual statement about an alien individual; (iv) an offense under 18 U.S.C. 1201; or (v) an offense under 18 U.S.C. 1591; or (B) an attempt or a conspiracy to commit any offense described in subdivisions (A)(i) through (v) of this note. Such term does not include an offense under 18 U.S.C. 2250 (Failure to register).
`Minor' means (A) an individual who had not attained the age of 18 years; (B) an individual, whether fictitious or not, who a law enforcement officer represented to a participant (i) had not attained the age of 18 years; and (ii) could be provided for the purposes of engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or (C) an undercover law enforcement officer who represented to a participant that the officer had not attained the age of 18 years.”.
Section 5H1.3 is amended in the paragraph that begins “Mental and emotional conditions may be relevant in determining the conditions” by striking “5D1.3(d)(5)” and inserting “5D1.3(b)(3)(E)”.
Section 5H1.4 is amended in the paragraph that begins “Drug or alcohol dependence” by striking “§ 5D1.3(d)(4)” and inserting “§ 5D1.3(b)(3)(D)”.
1. The Commission has received feedback that courts should be afforded more discretion to tailor their supervised release decisions based on an individualized assessment of the defendant. At the same time, the Commission has received feedback that courts and probation officers would benefit from more guidance concerning the imposition, length, and conditions of supervised release.
(A) Part A of the proposed amendment would add language throughout Chapter Five, Part D (Supervised Release) directing courts that supervised release decisions should be based on an “individualized assessment” of the statutory factors listed in 18 U.S.C. 3583(c)-(e) and remove recommended minimum terms of supervised release. The Commission seeks comment on whether the inclusion of an individualized assessment based on statutory factors is sufficient to provide both discretion and useful guidance.
(B) Part A of the proposed amendment would maintain the Commentary to § 5D1.1 (Imposition of a Term of Supervised Release) that directs courts to pay particular attention to a defendant's criminal or substance abuse history. In addition, new proposed policy statement at § 5D1.4 (Modification, Early Termination, and Extension of Supervised Release (Policy Statement)) includes as a bracketed option a non-exhaustive list of factors that a court should consider in determining whether early termination of supervised release is warranted. The Commission seeks comment on whether such guidance should be retained or deleted and whether similar guidance should be included elsewhere. If the Commission provides further guidance, what should that guidance be?
(C) Is there any other approach the Commission should consider to provide courts with appropriate discretion while also including useful guidance, either throughout Chapter Five, Part D, or for certain guideline provisions?
2. Section 5D1.1(c) instructs that “[t]he court ordinarily should not impose a term of supervised release in a case in which supervised release is not required by statute and the defendant is a deportable alien who likely will be deported after imprisonment.” The Commission has received feedback that imposition of a term of supervised release in such cases varies substantially by jurisdiction, may be excessive, and may divert resources. Should the Commission amend § 5D1.1(c) to further discourage the imposition of supervised release for individuals who are likely to be deported?
3. In § 5D1.4, Part A of the proposed amendment provides an option to include a non-exhaustive list of factors for courts to consider when determining whether early termination is warranted. These factors are drawn from the Post-Conviction Supervision Policies in the
4. The First Step Act of 2018 (FSA), Public Law 115—391, allows individuals in custody who successfully complete evidence-based recidivism reduction programming or productive activities to earn time credits.
The Commission seeks comment on whether and how the changes to supervised release set forth in Part A of the proposed amendment may impact defendants' eligibility to benefit from the FSA earned time credits. Should the Commission make any additional or different changes to Chapter Five to avoid any unintended consequences that would impact a defendant's eligibility? If so, what changes should be made?
5. At § 5D1.3 (Conditions of Supervised Release), Part A of the proposed amendment retains two general categories of discretionary conditions of supervised release without amending their substance—“standard” and “special” conditions. In doing so, the Commission brackets language that would alternatively refer to “standard” conditions as “examples of common conditions that may be warranted in appropriate cases.” Part A of the proposed amendment also includes in
6. Part A of the proposed amendment would establish a new policy statement at § 5D1.4 (Modification, Early Termination, and Extension of Supervised Release (Policy Statement)), which, among other things, addresses a court's determination whether to terminate a term of supervised release. The Commission seeks comment on whether it should provide that the completion of reentry programs (more information available at
7. Furthermore, the Commission seeks comment on whether the new policy statement at § 5D1.4 should provide guidance to courts on the appropriate procedures to employ when determining whether to terminate a term of supervised release. For example, should the Commission recommend that courts make the determination pursuant to a full public proceeding, or is a more informal proceeding sufficient? In either case, should the Commission encourage courts to appoint counsel to represent the defendant? How might the Commission encourage courts to ensure that any victim of the offense (or of any violation of a condition of supervised release) is notified of the early termination consideration and afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard? Are there other appropriate approaches the Commission should recommend?
Section 7B1.1 (Classification of Violations (Policy Statement)) governs the classification of violations of supervised release. Grade A Violations consist of conduct constituting (A) a federal, state, or local offense punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding one year that (i) is a crime of violence, (ii) is a controlled substance offense, or (iii) involves possession of a firearm or destructive device of a type described in 26 U.S.C. 5845(a); or (B) any other federal, state, or local offense punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding twenty years. USSG § 7B1.1(a)(1). Grade B Violations involve conduct constituting any other federal, state, or local offense punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding on year. USSG § 7B1.1(a)(2). Grade C Violations involve conduct constituting (A) a federal, state, or local offense punishable by a term of imprisonment of one year or less; or (B) a violation of any other condition of supervision. USSG § 7B1.1(a)(3). In cases with more than one violation of the conditions of supervision, or a single violation with conduct constituting more than one offense, the grade of the violation is determined by the violation having the most serious grade. USSG § 7B1.1(b).
Section 7B1.2 (Reporting of Violations of Probation and Supervised Release (Policy Statement)) concerns the reporting of violations of supervised release to the court. In cases of Grade A or B violations, § 7B1.2(a) directs that the probation officer “shall” promptly report them to the court. For Grade C violations, the probation officer also “shall” promptly report them to the court unless the officer determines that (1) the violation is minor and not part of a continuing pattern, and (2) non-reporting will not present an undue risk to the individual or the public or be inconsistent with any directive of the court. USSG § 7B1.2(b).
Section 7B1.3 (Revocation of Probation or Supervised Release (Policy Statement)) governs a court's options when it finds that a violation of the terms of supervised release have occurred. Upon the finding of a Grade A or B violation, the court shall revoke an individual's supervised release; upon the finding of a Grade C violation, the court may either revoke supervised release, or it may extend the term of supervision and/or modify the conditions of supervision. USSG § 7B1.3(a). When a court does revoke supervised release, § 7B1.3(b) directs that the applicable range of imprisonment is the one set forth in § 7B1.4. Section 7B1.3(c) provides that in the case of a Grade B or C violation, certain community confinement or home detention sentences are available to satisfy at least a portion of the sentence. Section 7B1.3(f) directs that any term of imprisonment imposed upon revocation shall be ordered to be served consecutively to any sentence of imprisonment the individual is serving, regardless of whether that other sentence resulted from the conduct that is the basis for the revocation. If supervised release is revoked, the court may also include an additional term of supervised release to be imposed upon release from imprisonment, but that term may not exceed statutory limits. USSG § 7B1.3(g).
Section 7B1.4 (Term of Imprisonment (Policy Statement)) contains the revocation table, which sets forth recommended ranges of imprisonment based on the grade of violation and an individual's criminal history category. Increased sentencing ranges apply where the individual has committed a Grade A violation while also on supervised release following imprisonment for a Class A felony. USSG § 7B1.4(a)(2). An asterisked note to the revocation table notes that the criminal history category to be applied is the one “applicable at the time the defendant originally was sentenced to a term of supervision.” USSG § 7B1.4(a)(2). Trumping mechanisms apply if the terms of imprisonment required by statute exceed or fall below the suggested range. USSG § 7B1.4(b).
Subsection (b) of 7B1.5 (No Credit for Time Under Supervision (Policy Statement)) directs that upon revocation of supervised release, “no credit shall be given (toward any term of imprisonment ordered) for time previously served on post-release supervision.” An exception applies for individuals serving a period
Part B of the proposed amendment seeks to revise Chapter Seven to accomplish two goals. The first is to provide courts greater discretion to respond to a violation of a condition of supervised release. The second is to ensure the provisions in Chapter Seven reflect the differences between probation and supervised release.
Part B of the proposed amendment revises the introductory commentary in Part A of Chapter Seven. It would add commentary explaining that the Commission has updated the policy statements addressing violations of supervised release in response to feedback from stakeholders identifying the need for more flexible, individualized responses to such violations. It would also add commentary highlighting the differences between probation and supervised release and how those differences have led the Commission to recommend different approaches to handling violations of probation, which serves a punitive function, and supervised release, a primary function of which is to “fulfill[] rehabilitative ends, distinct from those served by incarceration.”
Part B of the proposed amendment separates the provisions addressing violations of probation from those addressing violations of supervised release by removing all references to supervised release from Part B of Chapter Seven. It then duplicates the provisions of Part B as they pertain to supervised release in a new Part C.
Part B of the proposed amendment would create a new Part C in Chapter Seven to address supervised release violations. Part C would begin with introductory commentary explaining that—in responding to an allegation that a supervisee has violated the terms of supervision, addressing a violation found during revocation proceedings, or imposing a sentence upon revocation—the court should conduct the same kind of individualized assessment used throughout the process of imposing a term of supervised release. It would also express the Commission's view that courts should consider a wide array of options to address violations of supervised release.
The specific policy statements of Part C would duplicate the provisions of Part B as they pertain to supervised release, with a number of changes. Under the new § 7C1.1 (Classification of Violations (Policy Statement)), which duplicates § 7B1.1, there would be a fourth classification of violation: Grade D, which would include “a violation of any other condition of supervised release,” which is currently classified as a Grade C violation.
Part B of the proposed amendment would duplicate § 7B1.2, which addresses a probation officer's duty to report violations, in the new § 7C1.2.
Part B of the proposed amendment would create a new § 7C1.3 (Responses to Violations of Supervised Release (Policy Statement)), establishing the actions a court may take in response to an allegation of non-compliance with supervised release. Under the policy statement, upon an allegation of non-compliance, the court would be instructed to conduct an individualized assessment to determine the appropriate response. Part B of the proposed amendment brackets the possibility of creating in the guideline a non-exhaustive list of possible responses and brackets the possibility of including a list of other possible responses in an Application Note. It provides two options for addressing a court's response to a finding of a violation. Under Option 1, upon a finding of a violation for which revocation is not required, the court would be authorized, subject to an individualized assessment, to continue the term of supervised release without modification, extend the term of supervised release or modify the conditions, terminate the term, or revoke supervised release. Upon a finding of a violation for which revocation is required by statute, the court would be required to revoke supervised release. Under Option 2, the court would be required to revoke supervised release upon a finding of a violation for which revocation is required by statute or for a Grade A or B violation. Upon a finding of any other violation, the court would be authorized, subject to an individualized assessment, to continue the term of supervised release without modification, extend the term of supervised release or modify the conditions, terminate the term, or revoke supervised release.
Section 7C1.4 (Revocation of Supervised Release (Policy Statement)) would address instances of revocation. In such a case, the court would be required to conduct an individualized assessment to determine the appropriate length of the term of imprisonment. Part B of the proposed amendment provides two options, Option 1 and Option 2, for addressing whether such a term should be served concurrently or consecutively to any sentence of imprisonment the defendant is serving. Under Option 1, the court would be instructed to conduct an individualized assessment to determine whether that term should be served concurrently, partially concurrently, or consecutively to any sentence of imprisonment the defendant is serving. Option 2 would maintain the current provision requiring the term to be served consecutively. Part B of the proposed amendment would also continue to recognize the court's authority to include a requirement that the defendant be placed on a term of supervised release upon release from imprisonment.
Section 7C1.5 (Term of Imprisonment—Supervised Release (Policy Statement)), which duplicates § 7B1.4, would set forth the Supervised Release Revocation Table. The Supervised Release Revocation Table would include recommended ranges of imprisonment, which would be subject to an individualized assessment conducted by the court. The Table would also include recommended ranges for Grade D violations. It would also remove the guidance addressing statutory maximum and minimum terms of imprisonment.
Finally, § 7C1.6 (No Credit for Time Under Supervision (Policy Statement)) would duplicate § 7B1.5, which provides that, upon revocation of supervised release, no credit shall be given for time previously served on post-release supervision.
Issues for comment are also provided.
Chapter Seven, Part A is amended—
in Subpart 1 by striking “Under 28 U.S.C. 994(a)(3), the Sentencing Commission is required to issue guidelines or policy statements applicable to the revocation of probation and supervised release. At this time, the Commission has chosen to promulgate policy statements only. These policy statements will provide guidance while allowing for the identification of any substantive or procedural issues that require further review. The Commission views these policy statements as evolutionary and will review relevant data and materials concerning revocation determinations under these policy statements. Revocation guidelines will be issued after federal judges, probation officers, practitioners, and others have the opportunity to evaluate and comment on these policy statements.” and inserting “Under 28 U.S.C. 994(a)(3), the Sentencing Commission is required to issue guidelines or policy statements applicable to the revocation of probation and supervised release. Initially, the Commission chose to promulgate policy statements only. These policy
in Subpart 3(a), in the paragraph that begins “Moreover, the Commission” by striking “anticipates” and inserting “anticipated”; by striking “will provide” and inserting “would provide”; by striking “represent” and inserting “represented”; and by striking “intends to promulgate revocation guidelines” and inserting “intended to promulgate updated revocation policies”;
in Subpart 3(b)—
in the paragraph that begins “The Commission debated” by inserting after “the Commission” the following: “initially”;
in the paragraph that begins “After lengthy consideration” by inserting after “the Commission” the following: “initially”;
in the paragraph that begins “Given the relatively narrow” by inserting after “the Commission” the following: “initially”;
and in the paragraph that begins “Accordingly, the Commission” by inserting after “the Commission” the following: “initially”;
in Subpart 4—
in the paragraph that begins “The revocation policy” by striking “categorize” and inserting “initially categorized”; and by striking “fix” and inserting “fixed”;
and in the paragraph that begins “The Commission” by striking “has elected” and inserting “initially elected”; by striking “the Commission determined” and inserting “the Commission had determined”; and by striking “the Commission has initially concluded” and inserting “the Commission initially concluded”;
by striking Subpart 5 as follows:
“
The Commission views these policy statements for revocation of probation and supervised release as the first step in an evolutionary process. The Commission expects to issue revocation guidelines after judges, probation officers, and practitioners have had an opportunity to apply and comment on the policy statements.
In developing these policy statements, the Commission assembled two outside working groups of experienced probation officers representing every circuit in the nation, officials from the Probation Division of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, the General Counsel's office at the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, and the U.S. Parole Commission. In addition, a number of federal judges, members of the Criminal Law and Probation Administration Committee of the Judicial Conference, and representatives from the Department of Justice and federal and community defenders provided considerable input into this effort.”;
and by inserting at the end the following new Subpart 5:
“
The Commission viewed the original policy statements for revocation of probation and supervised release as the first step in an evolutionary process. The Commission intended to revise its approach after judges, probation officers, and practitioners have had an opportunity to apply and comment on the policy statements. In the three decades since the promulgation of those policy statements, a broad array of stakeholders has identified the need for more flexible, individualized responses to violations of supervised release.
In response, the Commission updated the policy statements in this Chapter to ensure judges have the discretion necessary to properly manage supervised release. The revised policy statements encourage judges to take an individualized approach in: (1) responding to allegations of non-compliance before initiating revocation proceedings; (2) addressing violations found during revocation proceedings; and (3) imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon revocation. These changes are intended to better allocate taxpayer dollars and probation resources, encourage compliance and improve public safety, and facilitate the reentry and rehabilitation of defendants.
This Chapter proceeds in two parts: Part B addresses violations of probation, and Part C addresses violations of supervised release. Both parts maintain an approach in which the court addresses primarily the defendant's failure to comply with court-ordered conditions, while reflecting, to a limited degree, the seriousness of the underlying violation and the criminal history of the individual. The Commission determined that violations of probation and supervised release should be addressed separately to reflect their different purposes. While probation serves a punitive function, supervised release `fulfills rehabilitative ends, distinct from those served by incarceration,'
Chapter Seven, Part B is amended in the Introductory Commentary—
in the paragraph that begins “The policy statements” by striking “chapter” and inserting “part”; and by striking “supervision” and inserting “probation”;
by striking the following paragraph:
“Because these policy statements focus on the violation of the court-ordered supervision, this chapter, to the extent permitted by law, treats violations of the conditions of probation and supervised release as functionally equivalent.”;
by striking the last paragraph as follows:
“This chapter is applicable in the case of a defendant under supervision for a felony or Class A misdemeanor. Consistent with § 1B1.9 (Class B or C Misdemeanors and Infractions), this chapter does not apply in the case of a defendant under supervision for a Class B or C misdemeanor or an infraction.”
and by inserting at the end the following new paragraph:
“This part is applicable in the case of a defendant on probation for a felony or Class A misdemeanor. Consistent with § 1B1.9 (Class B or C Misdemeanors and Infractions), this part does not apply in the case of a defendant on probation for a Class B or C misdemeanor or an infraction.”.
Section 7B1.1 is amended—
in subsection (a) by striking “and supervised release”;
in subsection (a)(3) by striking “supervision” and inserting “probation”;
and in subsection (b) by striking “supervision” and inserting “probation”.
The Commentary to § 7B1.1 captioned “Application Notes” is amended—
in Note 1 by striking “18 U.S.C. 3563(a)(1) and 3583(d), a mandatory condition of probation and supervised release” and inserting “18 U.S.C.
and in Note 5 by striking “under supervision” and inserting “on probation”.
Section 7B1.2 is amended in the heading by striking “and Supervised Release”.
Section 7B1.3 is amended—
in the heading by striking “or Supervised Release”;
in subsection (a)(1) by striking “or supervised release”;
in subsection (a)(2) by striking “revoke probation or supervised release; or (B) extend the term of probation or supervised release and/or modify the conditions of supervision” and inserting “revoke probation; or (B) extend the term of probation and/or modify the conditions thereof”;
in subsection (b) by striking “or supervised release”;
in subsection (e) by striking “or supervised release” both places such phrase appears;
in subsection (f) by striking “or supervised release” both places such phrase appears;
in subsection (g) by striking the following:
“(1) If probation is revoked and a term of imprisonment is imposed, the provisions of §§ 5D1.1-1.3 shall apply to the imposition of a term of supervised release.
(2) If supervised release is revoked, the court may include a requirement that the defendant be placed on a term of supervised release upon release from imprisonment. The length of such a term of supervised release shall not exceed the term of supervised release authorized by statute for the offense that resulted in the original term of supervised release, less any term of imprisonment that was imposed upon revocation of supervised release. 18 U.S.C. 3583(h).”;
and inserting the following:
“If probation is revoked and a term of imprisonment is imposed, the provisions of §§ 5D1.1-1.3 shall apply to the imposition of a term of supervised release.”.
The Commentary to § 7B1.3 captioned “Application Notes” is amended—
in Note 1 by striking “or supervised release”; and by striking “supervision” both places such term appears and inserting “probation”;
by striking Note 2 as follows:
“2. The provisions for the revocation, as well as early termination and extension, of a term of supervised release are found in 18 U.S.C. 3583(e), (g)-(i). Under 18 U.S.C. 3583(h) (effective September 13, 1994), the court, in the case of revocation of supervised release, may order an additional period of supervised release to follow imprisonment.”;
by redesignating Notes 3, 4, and 5 as Notes 2, 3, and 4, respectively;
in Note 2 (as so redesignated) by striking “or supervised release”; and by striking “Bureau of Prisons” and inserting “Federal Bureau of Prisons”;
in Note 3 (as so redesignated) by striking “or supervised release” both places such phrase appears;
and in Note 4 (as so redesignated) by striking “. Intermittent confinement is authorized as a condition of supervised release during the first year of supervised release, but only for a violation of a condition of supervised release in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 3583(e)(2) and only when facilities are available.
Section 7B1.4 is amended in the heading by striking “
Section 7B1.4(a) is amended in the Table—
in the heading by striking “
by striking the following:
“
12-18 15-21 18-24 24-30 30-37 33-41
24-30 27-33 30-37 37-46 46-57 51-63.
* The criminal history category is the category applicable at the time the defendant originally was sentenced to a term of supervision.”;
and by inserting at the end the following:
“
* The criminal history category is the category applicable at the time the defendant originally was sentenced to a term of probation.”.
The Commentary to § 7B1.4 captioned “Application Notes” is amended—
in Note 1 by striking “supervision” each place such term appears and inserting “probation”;
in Note 2 by striking “Revocation Table” and inserting “Probation Revocation Table”; and by striking “supervision” both places such term appears and inserting “probation”;
in Note 3 by striking “under supervision” and inserting “on probation”;
in Note 5 by striking “or supervised release” both places such phrase appears; and by striking “18 U.S.C. 3565(b), 3583(g)” and inserting “18 U.S.C. 3565(b)”;
and in Note 6 by striking “18 U.S.C. 3565(b) and 3583(g). 18 U.S.C. 3563(a), 3583(d)” and inserting “18 U.S.C. 3565(b). 18 U.S.C. 3563(a)”.
Section 7B1.5 is amended—
in the heading by striking “
by striking subsections (a), (b), and (c) as follows:
“(a) Upon revocation of probation, no credit shall be given (toward any sentence of imprisonment imposed) for any portion of the term of probation served prior to revocation.
(b) Upon revocation of supervised release, no credit shall be given (toward any term of imprisonment ordered) for time previously served on post-release supervision.
(c)
and inserting the following:
“Upon revocation of probation, no credit shall be given (toward any sentence of imprisonment imposed) for any portion of the term of probation served prior to revocation.”.
The Commentary to § 7B1.5 is amended by striking the Commentary captioned “Application Note” in its entirety as follows:
“
1. Subsection (c) implements 18 U.S.C. 4106A(b)(1)(C), which provides that the combined periods of imprisonment and supervised release in transfer treaty cases shall not exceed the term of imprisonment imposed by the foreign court.”.
The Commentary to § 7B1.5 captioned “Background” is amended by striking “or supervised release”; by striking “with supervision” and inserting “with probation”; and by striking “under supervision” and inserting “on probation”.
Chapter Seven is amended by inserting at the end the following new Part C:
At the time of original sentencing, the court may impose a term of supervised release to follow the sentence of imprisonment.
If the court finds that the defendant violated a condition of supervised release, it may continue the defendant on supervised release under existing conditions, modify the conditions, extend the term, or revoke supervised release and impose a term of imprisonment.
Because supervised release is intended to promote rehabilitation and ease the defendant's transition back into the community, the Commission encourages courts—where possible—to consider a wide array of options to respond to non-compliant behavior and violations of the conditions of supervised release. These interim steps before revocation are intended to allow courts to address the defendant's failure to comply with court-imposed conditions and to better address the needs of the defendant while also maintaining public safety. If revocation is mandated by statute or the court otherwise determines revocation to be necessary, the sentence imposed upon revocation should be tailored to address the failure to abide by the conditions of the court-ordered supervision; imposition of an appropriate punishment for new criminal conduct is not the primary goal of a revocation sentence. The determination of the appropriate sentence on any new criminal conviction that is also a basis of the violation should be a separate determination for the court having jurisdiction over such conviction.
(a) There are four grades of supervised release violations:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(b) Where there is more than one violation of the conditions of supervised release, or the violation includes conduct that constitutes more than one offense, the grade of the violation is determined by the violation having the most serious grade.
1. Under 18 U.S.C. 3583(d), a mandatory condition of supervised release is that the defendant not commit another federal, state, or local crime. A violation of this condition may be charged whether or not the defendant has been the subject of a separate federal, state, or local prosecution for such conduct. The grade of violation does not depend upon the conduct that is the subject of criminal charges or of which the defendant is convicted in a criminal proceeding. Rather, the grade of the violation is to be based on the defendant's actual conduct.
2. `Crime of violence' is defined in § 4B1.2 (Definitions of Terms Used in Section 4B1.1).
3. `Controlled substance offense' is defined in § 4B1.2 (Definitions of Terms Used in Section 4B1.1).
4. A `firearm or destructive device of a type described in 26 U.S.C. 5845(a)' includes a shotgun, or a weapon made from a shotgun, with a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length; a weapon made from a shotgun or rifle with an overall length of less than 26 inches; a rifle, or a weapon made from a rifle, with a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length; a machine gun; a muffler or silencer for a firearm; a destructive device; and certain large bore weapons.
5. Where the defendant is on supervised release in connection with a felony conviction, or has a prior felony conviction, possession of a firearm (other than a firearm of a type described in 26 U.S.C. 5845(a)) will generally constitute a Grade B violation, because 18 U.S.C. 922(g) prohibits a convicted felon from possessing a firearm. The term `generally' is used in the preceding sentence, however, because there are certain limited exceptions to the applicability of 18 U.S.C. 922(g).
(a) The probation officer shall promptly report to the court any alleged Grade A or B violation.
(b) The probation officer shall promptly report to the court any alleged Grade C or D violation unless the officer determines: (1) that such violation is minor, and not part of a continuing pattern of violations; and (2) that non-reporting will not present an undue risk to an individual or the public or be inconsistent with any directive of the court relative to the reporting of violations.
1. Under subsection (b), a Grade C or D violation must be promptly reported to the court unless the probation officer makes an affirmative determination that the alleged violation meets the criteria for non-reporting. For example, an isolated failure to file a monthly report or a minor traffic infraction generally would not require reporting.
(a)
(1) Continue the term of supervised release without modification;
(2) Extend the term of supervised release and/or modify the conditions thereof;
(3) Terminate the term of supervised release, if more than one year of the term of supervised release has expired; or
(4) Initiate revocation proceedings.]
(b)
(1) Continue the term of supervised release without modification;
(2) Extend the term of supervised release and/or modify the conditions thereof;
(3) Terminate the term of supervised release, if more than one year of the term of supervised release has expired; or
(4) Revoke supervised release.
(c) Upon a finding of a violation for which revocation is required by statute, the court shall revoke supervised release.
(b)
(c) Upon a finding of any other violation, the court should conduct an individualized assessment to determine what response, if any, is appropriate. When warranted by an individualized assessment, the court may:
(1) Continue the term of supervised release without modification;
(2) Extend the term of supervised release and/or modify the conditions thereof;
(3) Terminate the term of supervised release, if more than one year of the term of supervised release has expired; or
(4) Revoke supervised release.]
1.
[2.
(a) In the case of a revocation of supervised release, the court shall conduct an individualized assessment to determine:
(1) the appropriate length of the term of imprisonment, given the recommended range of imprisonment set forth in § 7C1.5 (Term of Imprisonment—Supervised Release (Policy Statement)); and
(2) whether that term should be served concurrently, partially concurrently, or consecutively to any sentence of imprisonment that the defendant is serving, whether or not the sentence of imprisonment being served resulted from the conduct that is the basis of the revocation of supervised release.]
(a) In the case of a revocation of supervised release, the court shall conduct an individualized assessment to determine the appropriate length of the term of imprisonment, given the recommended range of imprisonment set forth in § 7C1.5 (Term of Imprisonment—Supervised Release (Policy Statement)).
(b) Any term of imprisonment imposed upon the revocation of supervised release should be ordered to be served consecutively to any sentence of imprisonment that the defendant is serving, whether or not the sentence of imprisonment being served resulted from the conduct that is the basis of the revocation of supervised release.]
([b][c]) If supervised release is revoked, the court may include a requirement that the defendant be placed on a term of supervised release upon release from imprisonment. The length of such a term of supervised release shall not exceed the term of supervised release authorized by statute for the offense that resulted in the original term of supervised release, less any term of imprisonment that was imposed upon revocation of supervised release. 18 U.S.C. 3583(h).
1.
2. The provisions for the revocation, as well as early termination and extension, of a term of supervised release are found in 18 U.S.C. 3583(e), (g)-(i). Under 18 U.S.C. 3583(h) (effective September 13, 1994), the court, in the case of revocation of supervised release, may order an additional period of supervised release to follow imprisonment.
3. In the case of a revocation based, at least in part, on a violation of a condition specifically pertaining to community confinement, intermittent confinement, or home detention, use of the same or a less restrictive sanction is not recommended.
4. Any restitution, fine, community confinement, home detention, or intermittent confinement previously imposed in connection with the sentence for which revocation is ordered that remains unpaid or unserved at the time of revocation shall be ordered to be paid or served in addition to the sanction determined under § 7C1.5 (Term of Imprisonment—Supervised Release), and any such unserved period of community confinement, home detention, or intermittent confinement may be converted to an equivalent period of imprisonment.
Unless otherwise required by statute, and subject to an individualized assessment, the recommended range of imprisonment applicable upon revocation is set forth in the following table:
1. The criminal history category to be used in determining the applicable range of imprisonment in the Supervised Release Revocation Table is the category determined at the time the defendant originally was sentenced to the term of supervision. The criminal history category is not to be recalculated because the ranges set forth in the Supervised Release Revocation Table have been designed to take into account that the defendant violated supervision. In the rare case in which no criminal history category was determined when the defendant originally was sentenced to the term of supervision being revoked, the court shall determine the criminal history category that would have been applicable at the time the defendant originally was sentenced to the term of supervision. (
2. In the case of a Grade D violation and a criminal history category of I, the recommended range of imprisonment in the Supervised Release Revocation Table is up to 7 months. This range allows for a sentence of less than 1 month.
3. Departure from the applicable range of imprisonment in the Supervised Release Revocation Table may be warranted when the court departed from the applicable range for reasons set forth in § 4A1.3 (Departures Based on Inadequacy of Criminal History Category) in originally imposing the sentence that resulted in supervised release. Additionally, an upward departure may be warranted when a defendant, subsequent to the federal sentence resulting in supervised release, has been sentenced for an offense that is not the basis of the violation proceeding.
4. In the case of a Grade C or D violation that is associated with a high risk of new felonious conduct (
5. Where the original sentence was the result of a downward departure (
6. Upon a finding that a defendant violated a condition of supervised release by being in possession of a controlled substance or firearm or by refusing to comply with a condition requiring drug testing, the court is required to revoke supervised release and impose a sentence that includes a term of imprisonment. 18 U.S.C. 3583(g).
7. The availability of appropriate substance abuse programs, or a defendant's current or past participation in such programs, may warrant an exception from the requirement of mandatory revocation and imprisonment under 18 U.S.C. 3583(g). 18 U.S.C. 3583(d).
(a) Upon revocation of supervised release, no credit shall be given (toward any term of imprisonment ordered) for time previously served on post-release supervision.
(b)
1. Subsection (b) implements 18 U.S.C. 4106A(b)(1)(C), which provides that the combined periods of imprisonment and supervised release in transfer treaty cases shall not exceed the term of imprisonment imposed by the foreign court.
1. Part B of the proposed amendment adds language to address feedback indicating both that courts and probation officers should be afforded more discretion in their ability to address a defendant's non-compliant behavior while on supervised release and that they would benefit from more guidance concerning revocations of supervised release.
(A) Part B would include throughout Chapter Seven, Part C (Supervised Release Violations) a recommendation that courts use an “individualized assessment” based on the statutory factors listed in 18 U.S.C. 3583(e) when addressing non-compliant behavior. The Commission seeks comment on whether the recommendation of an individualized assessment based on statutory factors is sufficient to provide both discretion and useful guidance.
(B) New policy statement § 7C1.3 (Responses to Violations of Supervised Release (Policy Statement)) includes in the Commentary examples of how a court might address allegations of non-
(C) Is there any other approach the Commission should consider to provide courts with appropriate discretion while also providing useful guidance, either throughout Chapter Seven, Part C, or for certain guideline provisions?
2. Part B of the proposed amendment includes two options to address when revocation is required or appropriate under new § 7C1.3 (Responses to Violations of Supervised Release (Policy Statement)). Option 1 would remove the language indicating that revocation is mandatory in all cases of Grade A or B violations and provide that the court should conduct an individualized assessment to determine whether to revoke in any cases that revocation is not required by statute. Option 2 would duplicate the language in § 7B1.3(a) that provides that “the court shall revoke” supervised release upon a finding of a Grade A or B violation and may revoke in other cases. Should the Commission continue to provide guidance tying whether revocation is required to the grade of the violation, or should the Commission remove this instruction and permit courts to make revocation determinations based on an individualized assessment in all cases? If the latter, should the Commission provide further guidance about when revocation is appropriate?
3. Given the proposed amendment's goal of promoting judicial discretion at revocation, the Commission seeks comment on whether it should replace the Supervised Release Revocation Table set forth in proposed § 7C1.4 (Term of Imprisonment—Supervised Release) with guidance indicating that courts abide by the statutory limits regarding maximum and minimum terms. If the Commission decides to retain the Revocation Table, would any further changes beyond those set forth in Part B of the proposed amendment be appropriate? For example, should the Commission recommend a sentence range that begins at less than one month in all cases, not just those involving Grade D violations for individuals in Criminal History Category I? Should it eliminate the higher set of ranges for cases in which the defendant is on supervised release as a result of a sentence for a Class A felony?
4. The Commission further seeks comment on whether and how a retained Supervised Release Revocation Table should make recommendations to courts regarding their consideration of criminal history. Should the defendant's criminal history category be recalculated at the time of revocation for a violation of supervised release? For example, should a court recalculate a defendant's criminal history score to exclude prior sentences that are no longer countable under the rules in § 4A1.2 (Definitions and Instructions for Computing Criminal History) or to account for new offenses a defendant may have been sentenced for after commission of the offense for which probation or supervised release is being revoked?
5. The Commission seeks comment on whether it should issue more specific guidance on the appropriate response to Grade D violations. Should the Commission state that revocation is not ordinarily appropriate for such violations, unless revocation is required under 18 U.S.C. 3583(g)? Should the Commission further state that revocation may be appropriate for Grade D violations if there have been multiple violations or if the court determines that revocation is necessary for protection of the public? Would such statements imply that revocation is ordinarily appropriate for Grade A, B, and C violations?
6. The recommended ranges of imprisonment set forth in the Revocation Tables at § 7B1.4 (Term of Imprisonment—Probation) and § 7C1.4 (Term of Imprisonment—Supervised Release) are determined, in part, by the defendant's criminal history category. For both tables, the criminal history category “is the category applicable at the time the defendant originally was sentenced” to a term of probation or supervised release. The Commission seeks comment on whether a defendant's criminal history score should be recalculated at the time of revocation to reflect changes made by amendments listed in subsection (d) of § 1B1.10 (Reduction in Term of Imprisonment as a Result of Amended Guideline Range (Policy Statement)) if one or more of those amendments have the effect of lowering the defendant's criminal history category. For example, Part A of Amendment 821, which is applied retroactively, limits the overall criminal history impact of “status points,” potentially resulting in a defendant's criminal history being lowered (
The most commonly prosecuted federal drug statutes prohibit the manufacture, distribution, importation, and exportation of controlled substances. The statutory penalties for these offenses vary based on (1) the quantity of the drug, (2) the defendant's prior commission of certain felony offenses, and (3) any serious bodily injury or death that resulted from using the drug. Section 2D1.1 applies to violations of 21 U.S.C. 841 and 960, among other drug statutes. This guideline provides five alternative base offense levels, 18 specific offense characteristics, and two cross references.
The first four base offense levels, set out in § 2D1.1(a)(1)-(a)(4), apply when the defendant was convicted of an offense under 21 U.S.C. 841(b) or § 960(b) to which the applicable enhanced statutory minimum or maximum term of imprisonment applies or when the parties have stipulated to such an offense or such base offense level. The fifth base offense level, at § 2D1.1(a)(5), applies in any other case and sets forth as the base offense level “the offense level specified in the Drug Quantity Table,” subject to special provisions that apply when a defendant receives a mitigating role adjustment under § 3B1.2 (Mitigating Role).
The Drug Quantity Table at § 2D1.1(c) applies in the overwhelming majority of drug cases. The penalty structure of the Drug Quantity Table is based on the penalty structure of federal drug laws for most major drug types. That penalty structure generally establishes several tiers of penalties for manufacturing and trafficking in controlled substances, each based on the type and quantity of controlled substances involved.
Section 2D1.1 generally incorporates the statutory mandatory minimum sentences into the guidelines and extrapolates upward and downward to set offense levels for all drug quantities. Under the original guidelines, the quantity thresholds in the Drug Quantity Table were set to provide base offense levels corresponding to guideline ranges that were slightly above the statutory mandatory minimum penalties. Accordingly, offenses involving drug quantities that triggered a five-year statutory minimum were assigned a base offense level of 26, corresponding to a sentencing guideline range of 63 to 78 months for a defendant in Criminal History Category I (a guideline range that exceeds the five-year statutory minimum for such offenses by at least three months). Similarly, offenses that triggered a ten-year statutory minimum were assigned a base offense level of 32, corresponding to a sentencing guideline range of 121 to 151 months for a defendant in Criminal History Category I (a guideline range that exceeds the ten-year statutory minimum for such offenses by at least one month).
In 2014, the Commission determined that setting the base offense levels slightly above the mandatory minimum penalties was no longer necessary and instead set the base offense levels to straddle the mandatory minimum penalties.
The Commission has received comment over the years indicating that § 2D1.1 overly relies on drug type and quantity as a measure of offense culpability and results in sentences greater than necessary to accomplish the purposes of sentencing. Some commenters have suggested that the Commission should again lower penalties in § 2D1.1, citing Commission data indicating that judges impose sentences below the guideline range in most drug trafficking cases. Commission data reflects that the difference between the average guideline minimum and average sentence imposed varies depending on the base offense level, with the greatest difference occurring at the highest offense levels on the Drug Quantity Table. In addition, commenters have raised concerns that the mitigating role adjustment from Chapter Three, Part B (Role in the Offense) is applied inconsistently in drug trafficking cases and does not adequately reflect individuals' roles in drug trafficking offenses.
Subpart 1 of Part A of the proposed amendment sets forth three options for amending § 2D1.1 to set the highest base offense level in the Drug Quantity Table at subsection (c) at a lower base offense level.
Subpart 1 brackets § 2D1.1(a)(5) to indicate that all three options would require changes to the special provisions that apply when a defendant receives a mitigating role adjustment under § 3B1.2. The third issue for comment below provides some background information on § 2D1.1(a)(5) and sets forth a request for comment on the changes that should be made to this provision in light of the revisions proposed by the three options described above.
Additional issues for comment are also provided.
Subpart 2 of Part A of the proposed amendment would add a new specific offense characteristic providing for a [2][4][6]-level reduction relating to low-level trafficking functions. It provides two options for this new reduction.
Both options would include a provision indicating that the reduction at proposed § 2D1.1(b)(17) shall apply regardless of whether the defendant acted alone or in concert with others. In addition, Options 1 and 2 would add a special instruction to § 2D1.1 providing that § 3B1.2 does not apply to cases where the defendant's offense level is determined under § 2D1.1. It would also include a new application note in the Commentary to § 2D1.1 relating to the new low-level trafficking functions adjustment. The new application note would provide guidance taken from the Commentary to § 3B1.2. Options 1 and 2 would also make conforming changes in § 2D1.1 to replace all references to § 3B1.2 with references to the new low-level trafficking functions reduction. These conforming changes include tying the additional decreases and mitigating role cap at § 2D1.1(a)(5) to the application of the proposed reduction at new § 2D1.1(b)(17) for low-level trafficking functions.
Issues for comment are also provided.
[Options 1, 2, and 3 set forth in this subpart would require changes to § 2D1.1(a)(5). See the third issue for comment below on possible changes that should be made to § 2D1.1(a)(5) in light of the revisions proposed by these three options.]
Section 2D1.1(c) is amended—
by striking paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) as follows:
“(1) • 90 KG or more of Heroin; Level 38
• 450 KG or more of Cocaine;
• 25.2 KG or more of Cocaine Base;
• 90 KG or more of PCP, or 9 KG or more of PCP (actual);
• 45 KG or more of Methamphetamine, or
4.5 KG or more of Methamphetamine (actual), or
4.5 KG or more of `Ice';
• 45 KG or more of Amphetamine, or
4.5 KG or more of Amphetamine (actual);
• 900 G or more of LSD;
• 36 KG or more of Fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] Propanamide);
• 9 KG or more of a Fentanyl Analogue;
• 90,000 KG or more of Marihuana;
• 18,000 KG or more of Hashish;
• 1,800 KG or more of Hashish Oil;
• 90,000,000 units or more of Ketamine;
• 90,000,000 units or more of Schedule I or II Depressants;
• 5,625,000 units or more of Flunitrazepam;
• 90,000 KG or more of Converted Drug Weight.
(2) • At least 30 KG but less than 90 KG of Heroin; Level 36
• At least 150 KG but less than 450 KG of Cocaine;
• At least 8.4 KG but less than 25.2 KG of Cocaine Base;
• At least 30 KG but less than 90 KG of PCP, or
at least 3 KG but less than 9 KG of PCP (actual);
• At least 15 KG but less than 45 KG of Methamphetamine, or
at least 1.5 KG but less than 4.5 KG of Methamphetamine (actual), or
at least 1.5 KG but less than 4.5 KG of `Ice';
• At least 15 KG but less than 45 KG of Amphetamine, or
at least 1.5 KG but less than 4.5 KG of Amphetamine (actual);
• At least 300 G but less than 900 G of LSD;
• At least 12 KG but less than 36 KG of Fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] Propanamide);
• At least 3 KG but less than 9 KG of a Fentanyl Analogue;
• At least 30,000 KG but less than 90,000 KG of Marihuana;
• At least 6,000 KG but less than 18,000 KG of Hashish;
• At least 600 KG but less than 1,800 KG of Hashish Oil;
• At least 30,000,000 units but less than 90,000,000 units of Ketamine;
• At least 30,000,000 units but less than 90,000,000 units of Schedule I or II Depressants;
• At least 1,875,000 units but less than 5,625,000 units of Flunitrazepam;
• At least 30,000 KG but less than 90,000 KG of
(3) • At least 10 KG but less than 30 KG of Heroin; Level 34
• At least 50 KG but less than 150 KG of Cocaine;
• At least 2.8 KG but less than 8.4 KG of Cocaine Base;
• At least 10 KG but less than 30 KG of PCP, or
at least 1 KG but less than 3 KG of PCP (actual);
• At least 5 KG but less than 15 KG of Methamphetamine, or
at least 500 G but less than 1.5 KG of Methamphetamine (actual), or
at least 500 G but less than 1.5 KG of `Ice';
• At least 5 KG but less than 15 KG of Amphetamine, or
at least 500 G but less than 1.5 KG of Amphetamine (actual);
• At least 100 G but less than 300 G of LSD;
• At least 4 KG but less than 12 KG of Fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] Propanamide);
• At least 1 KG but less than 3 KG of a Fentanyl Analogue;
• At least 10,000 KG but less than 30,000 KG of Marihuana;
• At least 2,000 KG but less than 6,000 KG of Hashish;
• At least 200 KG but less than 600 KG of Hashish Oil;
• At least 10,000,000 but less than 30,000,000 units of Ketamine;
• At least 10,000,000 but less than 30,000,000 units of Schedule I or II Depressants;
• At least 625,000 but less than 1,875,000 units of Flunitrazepam;
• At least 10,000 KG but less than 30,000 KG of Converted Drug Weight.”;
by inserting the following new paragraph (1):
“(1) • 10 KG or more of Heroin; Level 34
• 50 KG or more of Cocaine;
• 2.8 KG or more of Cocaine Base;
• 10 KG or more of PCP, or
1 KG or more of PCP (actual);
• 5 KG or more of Methamphetamine, or
500 G or more of Methamphetamine (actual), or
500 G or more of `Ice';
• 5 KG or more of Amphetamine, or
500 G or more of Amphetamine (actual);
• 100 G or more of LSD;
• 4 KG or more of Fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] Propanamide);
• 1 KG or more of a Fentanyl Analogue;
• 10,000 KG or more of Marihuana;
• 2,000 KG or more of Hashish;
• 200 KG or more of Hashish Oil;
• 10,000,000 units or more of Ketamine;
• 10,000,000 units or more of Schedule I or II Depressants;
• 625,000 units or more of Flunitrazepam;
• 10,000 KG or more of Converted Drug Weight.”;
and by redesignating paragraphs (4) through (17) as paragraphs (2) through (15), respectively.
The Commentary to § 2D1.1 captioned “Application Notes” is amended in Note 27(B) by striking “level 38” each place such term appears and inserting “level 34”.]
Section 2D1.1(c) is amended—
by striking paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (4) as follows:
“(1) • 90 KG or more of Heroin; Level 38
• 450 KG or more of Cocaine;
• 25.2 KG or more of Cocaine Base;
• 90 KG or more of PCP, or 9 KG or more of PCP (actual);
• 45 KG or more of Methamphetamine, or
4.5 KG or more of Methamphetamine (actual), or
4.5 KG or more of `Ice';
• 45 KG or more of Amphetamine, or
4.5 KG or more of Amphetamine (actual);
• 900 G or more of LSD;
• 36 KG or more of Fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] Propanamide);
• 9 KG or more of a Fentanyl Analogue;
• 90,000 KG or more of Marihuana;
• 18,000 KG or more of Hashish;
• 1,800 KG or more of Hashish Oil;
• 90,000,000 units or more of Ketamine;
• 90,000,000 units or more of Schedule I or II Depressants;
• 5,625,000 units or more of Flunitrazepam;
• 90,000 KG or more of Converted Drug Weight.
(2) • At least 30 KG but less than 90 KG of Heroin; Level 36
• At least 150 KG but less than 450 KG of Cocaine;
• At least 8.4 KG but less than 25.2 KG of Cocaine Base;
• At least 30 KG but less than 90 KG of PCP, or
at least 3 KG but less than 9 KG of PCP (actual);
• At least 15 KG but less than 45 KG of Methamphetamine, or
at least 1.5 KG but less than 4.5 KG of Methamphetamine (actual), or
at least 1.5 KG but less than 4.5 KG of `Ice';
• At least 15 KG but less than 45 KG of Amphetamine, or
at least 1.5 KG but less than 4.5 KG of Amphetamine (actual);
• At least 300 G but less than 900 G of LSD;
• At least 12 KG but less than 36 KG of Fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] Propanamide);
• At least 3 KG but less than 9 KG of a Fentanyl Analogue;
• At least 30,000 KG but less than 90,000 KG of Marihuana;
• At least 6,000 KG but less than 18,000 KG of Hashish;
• At least 600 KG but less than 1,800 KG of Hashish Oil;
• At least 30,000,000 units but less than 90,000,000 units of Ketamine;
• At least 30,000,000 units but less than 90,000,000 units of Schedule I or II Depressants;
• At least 1,875,000 units but less than 5,625,000 units of Flunitrazepam;
• At least 30,000 KG but less than 90,000 KG of
(3) • At least 10 KG but less than 30 KG of Heroin; Level 34
• At least 50 KG but less than 150 KG of Cocaine;
• At least 2.8 KG but less than 8.4 KG of Cocaine Base;
• At least 10 KG but less than 30 KG of PCP, or
at least 1 KG but less than 3 KG of PCP (actual);
• At least 5 KG but less than 15 KG of Methamphetamine, or
at least 500 G but less than 1.5 KG of Methamphetamine (actual), or
at least 500 G but less than 1.5 KG of `Ice';
• At least 5 KG but less than 15 KG of Amphetamine, or
at least 500 G but less than 1.5 KG of Amphetamine (actual);
• At least 100 G but less than 300 G of LSD;
• At least 4 KG but less than 12 KG of Fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] Propanamide);
• At least 1 KG but less than 3 KG of a Fentanyl Analogue;
• At least 10,000 KG but less than 30,000 KG of Marihuana;
• At least 2,000 KG but less than 6,000 KG of Hashish;
• At least 200 KG but less than 600 KG of Hashish Oil;
• At least 10,000,000 but less than 30,000,000 units of Ketamine;
• At least 10,000,000 but less than 30,000,000 units of Schedule I or II Depressants;
• At least 625,000 but less than 1,875,000 units of Flunitrazepam;
• At least 10,000 KG but less than 30,000 KG of Converted Drug Weight.
(4) • At least 3 KG but less than 10 KG of Heroin; Level 32
• At least 15 KG but less than 50 KG of Cocaine;
• At least 840 G but less than 2.8 KG of Cocaine Base;
• At least 3 KG but less than 10 KG of PCP, or
at least 300 G but less than 1 KG of PCP (actual);
• At least 1.5 KG but less than 5 KG of Methamphetamine, or
at least 150 G but less than 500 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or
at least 150 G but less than 500 G of `Ice';
• At least 1.5 KG but less than 5 KG of Amphetamine, or
at least 150 G but less than 500 G of Amphetamine (actual);
• At least 30 G but less than 100 G of LSD;
• At least 1.2 KG but less than 4 KG of Fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] Propanamide);
• At least 300 G but less than 1 KG of a Fentanyl Analogue;
• At least 3,000 KG but less than 10,000 KG of Marihuana;
• At least 600 KG but less than 2,000 KG of Hashish;
• At least 60 KG but less than 200 KG of Hashish Oil;
• At least 3,000,000 but less than 10,000,000 units of Ketamine;
• At least 3,000,000 but less than 10,000,000 units of Schedule I or II Depressants;
• At least 187,500 but less than 625,000 units of Flunitrazepam;
• At least 3,000 KG but less than 10,000 KG of Converted Drug Weight.”;
by inserting the following new paragraph (1):
“(1) • 3 KG or more of Heroin; Level 32
• 15 KG or more of Cocaine;
• 840 G or more of Cocaine Base;
• 3 KG or more of PCP, or
300 G or more of PCP (actual);
• 1.5 KG or more of Methamphetamine, or
150 G or more of Methamphetamine (actual), or
150 G or more of `Ice';
• 1.5 KG or more of Amphetamine, or
150 G or more of Amphetamine (actual);
• 30 G or more of LSD;
• 1.2 KG or more of Fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] Propanamide);
• 300 G or more of a Fentanyl Analogue;
• 3,000 KG or more of Marihuana;
• 600 KG or more of Hashish;
• 60 KG or more of Hashish Oil;
• 3,000,000 units or more of Ketamine;
• 3,000,000 units or more of Schedule I or II Depressants;
• 187,500 units or more of Flunitrazepam;
• 3,000 KG or more of Converted Drug Weight.”;
and by redesignating paragraphs (5) through (17) as paragraphs (2) through (14), respectively.
The Commentary to § 2D1.1 captioned “Application Notes” is amended in Note 27(B) by striking “level 38” each place such term appears and inserting “level 32”.]
Section 2D1.1(c) is amended—
by striking paragraphs (1), (2), (3), (4), and (5) as follows:
“(1) • 90 KG or more of Heroin; Level 38
• 450 KG or more of Cocaine;
• 25.2 KG or more of Cocaine Base;
• 90 KG or more of PCP, or 9 KG or more of PCP (actual);
• 45 KG or more of Methamphetamine, or
4.5 KG or more of Methamphetamine (actual), or
4.5 KG or more of `Ice';
• 45 KG or more of Amphetamine, or
4.5 KG or more of Amphetamine (actual);
• 900 G or more of LSD;
• 36 KG or more of Fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] Propanamide);
• 9 KG or more of a Fentanyl Analogue;
• 90,000 KG or more of Marihuana;
• 18,000 KG or more of Hashish;
• 1,800 KG or more of Hashish Oil;
• 90,000,000 units or more of Ketamine;
• 90,000,000 units or more of Schedule I or II Depressants;
• 5,625,000 units or more of Flunitrazepam;
• 90,000 KG or more of Converted Drug Weight.
(2) • At least 30 KG but less than 90 KG of Heroin; Level 36
• At least 150 KG but less than 450 KG of Cocaine;
• At least 8.4 KG but less than 25.2 KG of Cocaine Base;
• At least 30 KG but less than 90 KG of PCP, or
at least 3 KG but less than 9 KG of PCP (actual);
• At least 15 KG but less than 45 KG of Methamphetamine, or
at least 1.5 KG but less than 4.5 KG of Methamphetamine (actual), or
at least 1.5 KG but less than 4.5 KG of `Ice';
• At least 15 KG but less than 45 KG of Amphetamine, or
at least 1.5 KG but less than 4.5 KG of Amphetamine (actual);
• At least 300 G but less than 900 G of LSD;
• At least 12 KG but less than 36 KG of Fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] Propanamide);
• At least 3 KG but less than 9 KG of a Fentanyl Analogue;
• At least 30,000 KG but less than 90,000 KG of Marihuana;
• At least 6,000 KG but less than 18,000 KG of Hashish;
• At least 600 KG but less than 1,800 KG of Hashish Oil;
• At least 30,000,000 units but less than 90,000,000 units of Ketamine;
• At least 30,000,000 units but less than 90,000,000 units of Schedule I or II Depressants;
• At least 1,875,000 units but less than 5,625,000 units of Flunitrazepam;
• At least 30,000 KG but less than 90,000 KG of
(3) • At least 10 KG but less than 30 KG of Heroin; Level 34
• At least 50 KG but less than 150 KG of Cocaine;
• At least 2.8 KG but less than 8.4 KG of Cocaine Base;
• At least 10 KG but less than 30 KG of PCP, or
at least 1 KG but less than 3 KG of PCP (actual);
• At least 5 KG but less than 15 KG of Methamphetamine, or
at least 500 G but less than 1.5 KG of Methamphetamine (actual), or
at least 500 G but less than 1.5 KG of `Ice';
• At least 5 KG but less than 15 KG of Amphetamine, or
at least 500 G but less than 1.5 KG of Amphetamine (actual);
• At least 100 G but less than 300 G of LSD;
• At least 4 KG but less than 12 KG of Fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] Propanamide);
• At least 1 KG but less than 3 KG of a Fentanyl Analogue;
• At least 10,000 KG but less than 30,000 KG of Marihuana;
• At least 2,000 KG but less than 6,000 KG of Hashish;
• At least 200 KG but less than 600 KG of Hashish Oil;
• At least 10,000,000 but less than 30,000,000 units of Ketamine;
• At least 10,000,000 but less than 30,000,000 units of Schedule I or II Depressants;
• At least 625,000 but less than 1,875,000 units of Flunitrazepam;
• At least 10,000 KG but less than 30,000 KG of Converted Drug Weight.
(4) • At least 3 KG but less than 10 KG of Heroin; Level 32
• At least 15 KG but less than 50 KG of Cocaine;
• At least 840 G but less than 2.8 KG of Cocaine Base;
• At least 3 KG but less than 10 KG of PCP, or
at least 300 G but less than 1 KG of PCP (actual);
• At least 1.5 KG but less than 5 KG of Methamphetamine, or
at least 150 G but less than 500 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or
at least 150 G but less than 500 G of `Ice';
• At least 1.5 KG but less than 5 KG of Amphetamine, or
at least 150 G but less than 500 G of Amphetamine (actual);
• At least 30 G but less than 100 G of LSD;
• At least 1.2 KG but less than 4 KG of Fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] Propanamide);
• At least 300 G but less than 1 KG of a Fentanyl Analogue;
• At least 3,000 KG but less than 10,000 KG of Marihuana;
• At least 600 KG but less than 2,000 KG of Hashish;
• At least 60 KG but less than 200 KG of Hashish Oil;
• At least 3,000,000 but less than 10,000,000 units of Ketamine;
• At least 3,000,000 but less than 10,000,000 units of Schedule I or II Depressants;
• At least 187,500 but less than 625,000 units of Flunitrazepam;
• At least 3,000 KG but less than 10,000 KG of Converted Drug Weight.
(5) • At least 1 KG but less than 3 KG of Heroin; Level 30
• At least 5 KG but less than 15 KG of Cocaine;
• At least 280 G but less than 840 G of Cocaine Base;
• At least 1 KG but less than 3 KG of PCP, or
at least 100 G but less than 300 G of PCP (actual);
• At least 500 G but less than 1.5 KG of Methamphetamine, or
at least 50 G but less than 150 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or
at least 50 G but less than 150 G of `Ice';
• At least 500 G but less than 1.5 KG of Amphetamine, or
at least 50 G but less than 150 G of Amphetamine (actual);
• At least 10 G but less than 30 G of LSD;
• At least 400 G but less than 1.2 KG of Fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] Propanamide);
• At least 100 G but less than 300 G of a Fentanyl Analogue;
• At least 1,000 KG but less than 3,000 KG of Marihuana;
• At least 200 KG but less than 600 KG of Hashish;
• At least 20 KG but less than 60 KG of Hashish Oil;
• At least 1,000,000 but less than 3,000,000 units of Ketamine;
• At least 1,000,000 but less than 3,000,000 units of Schedule I or II Depressants;
• At least 62,500 but less than 187,500 units of Flunitrazepam;
• At least 1,000 KG but less than 3,000 KG of Converted Drug Weight.”;
by inserting the following new paragraph (1):
“(1) • 1 KG or more of Heroin; Level 30
• 5 KG or more of Cocaine;
• 280 G or more of Cocaine Base;
• 1 KG or more of PCP, or
100 G or more of PCP (actual);
• 500 G or more of Methamphetamine, or
50 G or more of Methamphetamine (actual), or
50 G or more of `Ice';
• 500 G or more of Amphetamine, or
50 G or more of Amphetamine (actual);
• 10 G or more of LSD;
• 400 G or more of Fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] Propanamide);
• 100 G or more of a Fentanyl Analogue;
• 1,000 KG or more of Marihuana;
• 200 KG or more of Hashish;
• 20 KG or more of Hashish Oil;
• 1,000,000 units or more of Ketamine;
• 1,000,000 units or more of Schedule I or II Depressants;
• 62,500 units or more of Flunitrazepam;
• 1,000 KG or more of Converted Drug Weight.”;
and by redesignating paragraphs (6) through (17) as paragraphs (2) through (13), respectively.
The Commentary to § 2D1.1 captioned “Application Notes” is amended in Note 27(B) by striking “level 38” each place such term appears and inserting “level 30”.]
1. Commission data reflects that the difference between the average guideline minimum and average sentence imposed varies depending on the base offense level, with the greatest difference occurring at the highest base offense levels. Subpart 1 sets forth three options for amending the Drug Quantity Table at subsection (c) of § 2D1.1 (Unlawful Manufacturing, Importing, Exporting, or Trafficking (Including Possession with Intent to Commit These Offenses); Attempt or Conspiracy) to set the highest base offense level at [34][32][30]. Should the Commission consider setting the highest base offense level at another level? If so, what is the appropriate highest base offense level for the Drug Quantity Table?
2. Subpart 1 of Part A of the proposed amendment would amend § 2D1.1 to reduce the highest base offense level in the Drug Quantity Table. The Commission seeks comment on whether it should instead consider reducing all base offense levels in the Drug Quantity Table. If so, to what extent? Should this reduction apply to all drug types and at all offense levels? Are there drug types for which the base offense levels should not be reduced or for which there should be a different base offense level reduction?
3. The mitigating role cap at § 2D1.1(a)(5) provides a decrease for base offense levels of 32 or greater when the mitigating role adjustment at § 3B1.2 applies. The mitigating role cap also sets forth a maximum base offense level of 32 based on the application of the 4-level reduction (“minimal participant”) at § 3B1.2(a). Subpart 1 sets forth three options to decrease the highest base offense level of the Drug Quantity Table to level [34][32][30]. If the Commission adopts any of these options, it will require changes to the mitigating role cap at § 2D1.1(a)(5). The Commission seeks comment on how it should address the interaction between the options set forth in Subpart 1 and the mitigating role cap. Specifically, should the Commission retain some or all clauses in the mitigating role cap if it sets a highest base offense level at or below the current mitigating role cap? If so, what base offense levels should trigger the mitigating role cap? What is the appropriate decrease from those base offense levels?
4. Section 2D1.11 (Unlawfully Distributing, Importing, Exporting or Possessing a Listed Chemical; Attempt or Conspiracy) includes two chemical quantity tables at subsections (d) and (e). Section 2D1.11 is generally structured to provide base offense levels that are tied to, but less severe than, the base offense levels in § 2D1.1 for offenses involving the same substance. If the Commission were to promulgate Option 1, 2, or 3 from Subpart 1, should the Commission amend the chemical quantity tables at § 2D1.11?
5. Subpart 1 of Part A of the Proposed Amendment sets forth three options to decrease the highest base offense level of the Drug Quantity Table from level 38 to level [34][32][30]. Part B of the proposed amendment would revise the Drug Quantity Table with respect to methamphetamine, which is the most common drug type in federal drug trafficking offenses. The Commission seeks comment on the interaction between these parts of the proposed amendment. If the Commission were to amend the Drug Quantity Table relating to methamphetamine, should that affect the Commission's consideration of a reduction of the highest base offense level in the Drug Quantity Table? If so, how?
Section 2D1.1(a)(5) is amended by striking “an adjustment under § 3B1.2 (Mitigating Role)” and inserting “a reduction under subsection (b)(17)”, and by striking “the 4-level (`minimal participant') reduction in § 3B1.2(a)” and inserting “a reduction under subsection (b)(17)”.
Section 2D1.1(b) is amended—
in paragraph (5) by striking “an adjustment under § 3B1.2 (Mitigating Role)” and inserting “a reduction under subsection (b)(17)”;
by redesignating paragraphs (17) and (18) as paragraphs (18) and (19), respectively;
by inserting the following new paragraph (17):
“(17) If—
(A) subsection (b)(2) does not apply;
[(B) the defendant did not possess a firearm or other dangerous weapon (or induce another participant to do so) in connection with the offense;] and
(C) [the defendant's most serious conduct in the offense was limited to performing any of the following low-level trafficking functions][the defendant's primary function in the offense was performing any of the following low-level trafficking functions]—
(i) carried one or more controlled substances (regardless of the quantity of the controlled substance involved) on their person, vehicle, vessel, or aircraft for purposes of transporting the controlled substance, without holding an ownership interest in the controlled substance or claiming a significant share of profits from the offense;
(ii) performed any low-level function in the offense other than the selling of controlled substances (such as running errands, sending or receiving phone calls or messages, scouting, receiving packages, packaging controlled substances, acting as a lookout, storing controlled substances, or acting as a deckhand or crew member on a vessel or aircraft used to transport controlled substances), without holding an ownership interest in the controlled substance or claiming a significant share of profits from the offense; or
(iii) distributed retail or user-level quantities of controlled substances to end users [or similarly situated distributors] and [one or more of the following factors is][two or more of the following factors are] present: (I) the defendant was motivated by an intimate or familial relationship or by threats or fear to commit the offense and was otherwise unlikely to commit such an offense; (II) the defendant was motivated primarily by a substance abuse disorder; (III) the defendant was engaged in the distribution of controlled substances infrequently or for brief duration; (IV) the defendant received little or no compensation from the distribution of the controlled substance involved in the offense; [or (V) the defendant had limited knowledge of the distribution network and an additional factor similar to any of the factors described in subclauses (I) through (IV) is present];
decrease by [2][4][6] levels. This reduction shall apply regardless of whether the defendant acted alone or in concert with others.”;]
“(17) If—
(A) subsection (b)(2) does not apply;
[(B) the defendant did not possess a firearm or other dangerous weapon (or induce another participant to do so) in connection with the offense;] and
(C) [the defendant's most serious conduct in the offense was limited to performing a low-level trafficking function][the defendant's primary function in the offense was performing a low-level trafficking function]; decrease by [2][4][6] levels. This reduction shall apply regardless of whether the defendant acted alone or in concert with others.
Functions that may qualify as low-level trafficking functions, depending on the scope and structure of the criminal activity, include where the defendant:
(A) carried one or more controlled substances (regardless of the quantity of the controlled substance involved) on their person, vehicle, vessel, or aircraft for purposes of transporting the controlled substance, without holding an ownership interest in the controlled substance or claiming a significant share of profits from the offense;
(B) performed any low-level function in the offense other than the selling of controlled substances (such as running errands, sending or receiving phone calls or messages, scouting, receiving packages, packaging controlled substances, acting as a lookout, storing controlled substances, or acting as a deckhand or crew member on a vessel or aircraft used to transport controlled substances), without holding an ownership interest in the controlled substance or claiming a significant share of profits from the offense; or
(C) distributed retail or user-level quantities of controlled substances to end users [or similarly situated distributors] and [one or more of the following factors is][two or more of the following factors are] present: (i) the defendant was motivated by an intimate or familial relationship or by threats or fear to commit the offense and was otherwise unlikely to commit such an offense; (ii) the defendant was motivated primarily by a substance abuse disorder; (iii) the defendant was engaged in the distribution of controlled substances infrequently or for brief duration; (iv) the defendant received little or no compensation from the distribution of the controlled substance involved in the offense; [or (v) the defendant had limited knowledge of the distribution network and an additional factor similar to any of the factors described in clauses (i) through (iv) is present].”;]
and in paragraph (18) (as so redesignated) by striking “the 4-level (`minimal participant') reduction in § 3B1.2(a)” and inserting “a reduction under subsection (b)(17)”.
Section 2D1.1(e) is amended—
in the heading by striking “Instruction” and inserting “Instructions”;
and by inserting at the end the following new paragraph (2):
“(2) If the defendant's offense level is determined under this guideline, do not apply § 3B1.2 (Mitigating Role).”.
The Commentary to § 2D1.1 captioned “Application Notes” is amended—
by redesignating Notes 21 through 27 as Notes 22 through 28, respectively;
by inserting the following new Note 21:
“21.
(A) A defendant who is accountable under § 1B1.3 (Relevant Conduct) only for the conduct in which the defendant personally was involved and who performs a low-level trafficking function may receive an adjustment under subsection (b)(17). For example, a defendant who is convicted of a drug trafficking offense, whose participation in that offense was limited to transporting or storing drugs, and who is accountable under § 1B1.3 only for the quantity of drugs the defendant personally transported or stored may receive an adjustment under subsection (b)(17).
(B) If a defendant has received a lower offense level by virtue of being convicted of an offense significantly less serious than warranted by the defendant's actual criminal conduct, a reduction under subsection (b)(17) ordinarily is not warranted because such defendant is not substantially less culpable than a defendant whose only conduct involved the less serious offense.”;
and in Note 22 (as so redesignated) by striking “(b)(18)” both places it appears and inserting “(b)(19)”.
The Commentary to § 2D1.1 captioned “Background” is amended by striking “(b)(17)” and inserting “(b)(18)”.
Section 2D1.14(a)(1) is amended by striking “(b)(18)” and inserting “(b)(19)”.
The Commentary to § 3B1.2 captioned “Application Notes” is amended—
in Note 3(A) by striking the following:
“A defendant who is accountable under § 1B1.3 (Relevant Conduct) only for the conduct in which the defendant personally was involved and who performs a limited function in the criminal activity may receive an adjustment under this guideline. For example, a defendant who is convicted of a drug trafficking offense, whose participation in that offense was limited to transporting or storing drugs and who is accountable under § 1B1.3 only for the quantity of drugs the defendant personally transported or stored may receive an adjustment under this guideline.
Likewise, a defendant who is accountable under § 1B1.3 for a loss amount under § 2B1.1 (Theft, Property Destruction, and Fraud) that greatly exceeds the defendant's personal gain from a fraud offense or who had limited knowledge of the scope of the scheme may receive an adjustment under this guideline. For example, a defendant in a health care fraud scheme, whose participation in the scheme was limited to serving as a nominee owner and who received little personal gain relative to the loss amount, may receive an adjustment under this guideline.”,
and inserting the following:
“A defendant who is accountable under § 1B1.3 (Relevant Conduct) only for the conduct in which the defendant personally was involved and who performs a limited function in the criminal activity may receive an adjustment under this guideline. For example, a defendant who is accountable under § 1B1.3 for a loss amount under § 2B1.1 (Theft, Property Destruction, and Fraud) that greatly exceeds the defendant's personal gain from a fraud offense or who had limited knowledge of the scope of the scheme may receive an adjustment under this guideline. For example, a defendant in a health care fraud scheme, whose participation in the scheme was limited to serving as a nominee owner and who received little personal gain relative to the loss amount, may receive an adjustment under this guideline.”;
and in Note 6 by striking the following:
“
and inserting the following:
“
1. Subpart 2 of Part A of the proposed amendment would add a new specific offense characteristic at subsection (b) of § 2D1.1 (Unlawful Manufacturing, Importing, Exporting, or Trafficking (Including Possession with Intent to Commit These Offenses); Attempt or Conspiracy) relating to low-level trafficking functions in drug offenses. The Commission has proposed that this specific offense characteristic decrease the offense levels by [2][4][6] levels. Should the adjustment be greater or lesser? Should the reduction be the same for all low-level trafficking functions?
2. The Commission seeks comment on whether the new specific offense characteristic at § 2D1.1(b)(17) properly captures low-level trafficking functions. Are there other factors that this provision should capture? Are there factors included in the proposed amendment that should not be included?
3. One of the low-level trafficking functions listed in proposed § 2D1.1(b)(17) is the distribution of retail or user-level quantities of controlled substances when certain mitigating circumstances are present. The Commission seeks comment on whether the distribution of retail or user-level quantities of controlled substances, when certain mitigating circumstances are present, merits a reduction. If so, what mitigating circumstances should the Commission provide?
4. Section 2D1.1(a)(5) provides an additional decrease to the base offense level based on the application of the mitigating role adjustment at § 3B1.2 (Mitigating Role). How should the Commission amend § 2D1.1(a)(5) to account for the new low-level trafficking functions adjustment?
5. Section 2D1.1(a)(5) also sets forth a maximum base offense level of 32 based on the application of the 4-level reduction (“minimal participant”) at § 3B1.2(a). How should the Commission amend § 2D1.1(a)(5) to account for the new low-level trafficking functions adjustment?
6. Subpart 2 of Part A of the proposed amendment includes a special instruction providing that § 3B1.2 (Mitigating Role) does not apply to cases where the defendant's offense level is determined under § 2D1.1. The Commission seeks comment on whether this special instruction is appropriate.
7. Some guidelines provide an instruction to use the offense level from another Chapter Two offense guideline, which generally refers to the entire offense guideline (
8. Subpart 2 of Part A of the proposed amendment would add Commentary to § 2D1.1 that closely tracks certain provisions currently contained in Application Note 3 of the Commentary to § 3B1.2. The proposed Commentary would provide that a low-level trafficking functions reduction applies even when the defendant's relevant conduct is limited to conduct in which the defendant was personally involved. Additionally, the proposed Commentary would state that a reduction ordinarily is not warranted when the defendant received a lower offense level by virtue of being convicted of a significantly less serious offense than warranted by the defendant's actual criminal conduct. The Commission seeks comment on whether including this guidance in the Commentary to § 2D1.1 is appropriate. Is the guidance provided in these provisions applicable in the context of the new low-level trafficking functions adjustment at § 2D1.1? If appropriate, should the Commission alternatively consider incorporating the prohibition and guidance by reference to the Commentary to § 3B1.2?
The statutory provisions and penalties associated with the trafficking of methamphetamine are found at 21 U.S.C. 841 and 960. While the statutory penalties for most drug types are based solely on drug quantity, the statutory penalties for methamphetamine are also based on the purity of the substance involved in the offense. Sections 841 and 960 contain quantity threshold triggers for five- and ten-year mandatory minimums for methamphetamine (actual) (
Under § 2D1.1, the base offense level for offenses involving methamphetamine varies based on the purity of the substance. Specifically, the Drug Quantity Table at § 2D1.1(c) contains three different entries relating to methamphetamine: (1) “Methamphetamine,” which refers to the entire weight of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine; (2) “Methamphetamine (actual),” which refers to the weight of methamphetamine itself contained in a mixture or substance; and (3) “Ice,” which is defined as “a mixture or substance containing d-methamphetamine hydrochloride of at least 80% purity” (
Although “Ice” is included in the guidelines, the term “Ice” does not appear in the statutory provisions setting penalties for methamphetamine offenses. “Ice” was added to the guidelines in response to the 1990 Crime Control Act, which directed the Commission to amend the guidelines “for offenses involving smokable crystal methamphetamine . . . so that convictions for [such offenses] will be assigned an offense level . . . two levels above that which would have been assigned to the same offense involving other forms of methamphetamine.”
Commission data shows that, since fiscal year 2002, the number of offenses involving methamphetamine mixture has remained relatively steady, but the number of offenses involving methamphetamine (actual) and “Ice” has risen substantially. Offenses involving methamphetamine (actual) increased 299 percent from 910 offenses in fiscal year 2002 to 3,634 offenses in fiscal year 2022. As a result, in fiscal year 2022, methamphetamine (actual) accounted for more than half (52.2%) of all methamphetamine cases. Offenses involving “Ice” also have risen during the past 20 years. In fiscal year 2002, there were 88 offenses involving “Ice” in the federal case load; that number rose by 881 percent to 863 offenses in fiscal year 2022. Offenses involving “Ice” now make up more than ten percent (12.4%) of all methamphetamine cases. Offenses involving methamphetamine mixture comprise roughly a third (35.4%) of all methamphetamine cases.
In addition, data published by the Commission in a recent report shows that methamphetamine today is highly and uniformly pure, with an average purity of 93.2 percent and a median purity of 98.0 percent. The methamphetamine tested in fiscal year 2022 was uniformly highly pure regardless of whether it was sentenced as methamphetamine mixture (91.0% pure on average), methamphetamine actual (92.6%), or “Ice” (97.6%).
The Commission has received significant comment regarding § 2D1.1's methamphetamine purity distinction. Some commenters suggest that the Commission should revisit or eliminate the disparity in § 2D1.1's treatment of methamphetamine mixture, on the one hand, and methamphetamine (actual) and “Ice,” on the other. Most of these commenters state that purity is no longer an accurate measure of offense culpability because methamphetamine today is highly and uniformly pure and that “Ice” cases do not involve a higher level of purity than other forms of methamphetamine. Some of these commenters also point to disparities in testing practices across judicial districts, which, in turn, have yielded disparate sentences.
Subpart 1 of Part B of the proposed amendment would amend the Drug Quantity Table at § 2D1.1(c) and the Drug Equivalency Tables at Application Note 8(D) of the Commentary to § 2D1.1 to delete all references to “Ice.” In addition, it brackets the possibility of adding a new specific offense characteristic at subsection (b)(19) that would provide a 2-level reduction if the offense involved methamphetamine in a non-smokable, non-crystalline form, which would continue to ensure that “convictions for offenses involving smokable crystal methamphetamine will be assigned an offense level under the guidelines which is two levels above” other forms of methamphetamine.
Issues for comment are also provided.
Subpart 2 of Part B of the proposed amendment would address the 10:1 quantity ratio for methamphetamine mixture and methamphetamine (actual) by deleting all references to “methamphetamine (actual)” from the Drug Quantity Table at § 2D1.1(c) and the Drug Conversion Tables at Application Note 8(D). The weight of methamphetamine in the tables would then be the entire weight of any mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine. Subpart 2 of Part B of the proposed amendment provides two options for setting the quantity thresholds applicable to methamphetamine.
Issues for comment are also provided.
[Section 2D1.1(b) is amended by inserting at the end the following new paragraph (19):
“(19) If the offense involved methamphetamine in a non-smokable, non-crystalline form, decrease by [2] levels.”.]
Section 2D1.1(c)(1) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) by striking “, or” and inserting a semicolon; and by striking the line referenced to “Ice” as follows: “4.5 KG or more of `Ice';”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(2) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) by striking “, or” and inserting a semicolon; and by striking the line referenced to “Ice” as follows: “at least 1.5 KG but less than 4.5 KG of `Ice';”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(3) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) by striking “, or” and inserting a semicolon; and by striking the line referenced to “Ice” as follows: “at least 500 G but less than 1.5 KG of `Ice';”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(4) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) by striking “, or” and inserting a semicolon; and by striking the line referenced to “Ice” as follows: “at least 150 G but less than 500 G of `Ice';”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(5) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) by striking “, or” and inserting a semicolon; and by striking the line referenced to “Ice” as follows: “at least 50 G but less than 150 G of `Ice';”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(6) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) by striking “, or” and inserting a semicolon; and by striking the line referenced to “Ice” as follows: “at least 35 G but less than 50 G of `Ice';”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(7) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) by striking “, or” and inserting a semicolon; and by striking the line referenced to “Ice” as follows: “at least 20 G but less than 35 G of `Ice';”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(8) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) by striking “, or” and inserting a semicolon; and by striking the line referenced to “Ice” as follows: “at least 5 G but less than 20 G of `Ice';”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(9) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) by striking “, or” and inserting a semicolon; and by striking the line referenced to “Ice” as follows: “at least 4 G but less than 5 G of `Ice';”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(10) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) by striking “, or” and inserting a semicolon; and by striking the line referenced to “Ice” as follows: “at least 3 G but less than 4 G of `Ice';”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(11) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) by striking “, or” and inserting a semicolon; and by striking the line referenced to “Ice” as follows: “at least 2 G but less than 3 G of `Ice';”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(12) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) by striking “, or” and inserting a semicolon; and by striking the line referenced to “Ice” as follows: “at least 1 G but less than 2 G of `Ice';”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(13) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) by striking “, or” and inserting a semicolon; and by striking the line referenced to “Ice” as follows: “at least 500 MG but less than 1 G of `Ice';”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(14) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) by striking “, or” and inserting a semicolon; and by striking the line referenced to “Ice” as follows: “less than 500 MG of `Ice';”.
The annotation to § 2D1.1(c) captioned “Notes to Drug Quantity Table” is amended—
in Note (B) by striking the following:
“The terms `Hydrocodone (actual)' and `Oxycodone (actual)' refer to the weight of the controlled substance, itself, contained in the pill, capsule, or mixture.”;
by striking Note (C) as follows:
“(C) `Ice,' for the purposes of this guideline, means a mixture or substance containing d-methamphetamine hydrochloride of at least 80% purity.”;
and by inserting the following new Note (C):
“(C) The terms `Hydrocodone (actual)' and `Oxycodone (actual)' refer to the weight of the controlled substance, itself, contained in the pill, capsule, or mixture.”.
The Commentary to § 2D1.1 captioned “Application Notes” is amended in Note 8(D), under the heading relating to Cocaine and Other Scheduled I and II Stimulants (and their immediate precursors), by striking the line referenced to “Ice” as follows:
“1 gm of `Ice' = 20 kg”.
1. Subpart 1 of Part B of the proposed amendment would amend the Drug Quantity Table at subsection (c) of § 2D1.1 (Unlawful Manufacturing, Importing, Exporting, or Trafficking (Including Possession with Intent to Commit These Offenses); Attempt or Conspiracy) and the Drug Conversion Tables at Application Note 8(D) of the Commentary to § 2D1.1 to delete all references to “Ice.” The Commission invites comment on whether deleting all references to “Ice” in § 2D1.1 is consistent with the 1990 congressional directive (Pub. L. 101-67, 2701 (1990)) and other provisions of federal law.
2. Subpart 1 of Part B of the proposed amendment brackets the possibility of adding a new specific offense characteristic at § 2D1.1(b)(19) that provides a 2-level reduction if the offense involved methamphetamine in a non-smokable, non-crystalline form. The Commission invites comment on whether deleting all references to “Ice,” while adding a new specific offense characteristic addressing methamphetamine in a non-smokable, non-crystalline form, is consistent with the 1990 congressional directive (Pub. L. 101-67, 2701 (1990)) and other provisions of federal law.
In addition, the Commission invites general comment on methamphetamine in a non-smokable, non-crystalline form, particularly on its pharmacological effects, potential for addiction and abuse, the patterns of abuse and harms associated with their abuse, and the patterns of trafficking and harms associated with its trafficking. How is non-smokable, non-crystalline methamphetamine manufactured, distributed, possessed, and used? What are the characteristics of the individuals involved in these various criminal activities? What harms are posed by these activities? How do these harms differ from those associated with other forms of methamphetamine?
Section 2D1.1(c)(1) is amended by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “4.5 KG or more of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(2) is amended by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 1.5 KG but less than 4.5 KG of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(3) is amended by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 500 G but less than 1.5 KG of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(4) is amended by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 150 G but less than 500 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(5) is amended by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 50 G but less than 150 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(6) is amended by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 35 G but less than 50 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(7) is amended by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 20 G but less than 35 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(8) is amended by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 5 G but less than 20 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(9) is amended by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 4 G but less than 5 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(10) is amended by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 3 G but less than 4 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(11) is amended by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 2 G but less than 3 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(12) is amended by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 1 G but less than 2 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(13) is amended by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 500 MG but less than 1 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(14) is amended by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “less than 500 MG of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
The annotation to § 2D1.1(c) captioned “Notes to Drug Quantity Table” is amended in Note (B) by striking the following:
“The terms `PCP (actual)', `Amphetamine (actual)', and `Methamphetamine (actual)' refer to the weight of the controlled substance, itself, contained in the mixture or substance. For example, a mixture weighing 10 grams containing PCP at 50% purity contains 5 grams of PCP (actual). In the case of a mixture or substance containing PCP, amphetamine, or methamphetamine, use the offense level determined by the entire weight of the mixture or substance, or the offense level determined by the weight of the PCP (actual), amphetamine (actual), or methamphetamine (actual), whichever is greater.”,
and inserting the following:
“The terms `PCP (actual)' and `Amphetamine (actual)' refer to the weight of the controlled substance, itself, contained in the mixture or substance. For example, a mixture weighing 10 grams containing PCP at 50% purity contains 5 grams of PCP (actual). In the case of a mixture or substance containing PCP or amphetamine, use the offense level determined by the entire weight of the mixture or substance, or the offense level determined by the weight of the PCP (actual) or amphetamine (actual), whichever is greater.”.
The Commentary to § 2D1.1 captioned “Application Notes” is amended—
in Note 8(D), under the heading relating to Cocaine and Other Scheduled I and II Stimulants (and their immediate precursors), by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows:
“1 gm of Methamphetamine (actual) = 20 kg”;
and in Note 27(C) by striking “methamphetamine,”.]
Section 2D1.1(c)(1) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine by striking “45 KG” and inserting “4.5 KG”; and by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “4.5 KG or more of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(2) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine by striking “15 KG but less than 45 KG” and inserting “1.5 KG but less than 4.5 KG”; and by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 1.5 KG but less than 4.5 KG of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(3) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine by striking “5 KG but less than 15 KG” and inserting “500 G but less than 1.5 KG”; and by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 500 G but less than 1.5 KG of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(4) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine by striking “1.5 KG but less than 5 KG” and inserting “150 G but less than 500 G”; and by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 150 G but less than 500 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(5) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine by striking “500 G but less than 1.5 KG” and inserting “50 G but less than 150 G”; and by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 50 G but less than 150 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(6) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine by striking “350 G but less than 500 G” and inserting “35 G but less than 50 G”; and by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 35 G but less than 50 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(7) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine by striking “200 G but less than 350 G” and inserting “20 G but less than 35 G”; and by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 20 G but less than 35 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(8) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine by striking “50 G but less than 200 G” and inserting “5 G but less than 20 G”; and by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 5 G but less than 20 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(9) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine by striking “40 G but less than 50 G” and inserting “4 G but less than 5 G”; and by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 4 G but less than 5 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(10) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine by striking “30 G but less than 40 G” and inserting “3 G but less than 4 G”; and by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 3 G but less than 4 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(11) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine by striking “20 G but less than 30 G” and inserting “2 G but less than 3 G”; and by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 2 G but less than 3 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(12) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine by striking “10 G but less than 20 G” and inserting “1 G but less than 2 G”; and by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “at least 1 G but less than 2 G of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
Section 2D1.1(c)(13) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine by striking “5 G but
Section 2D1.1(c)(14) is amended in the line referenced to Methamphetamine by striking “5 G” and inserting “500 MG”; and by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows: “less than 500 MG of Methamphetamine (actual), or”.
The annotation to § 2D1.1(c) captioned “Notes to Drug Quantity Table” is amended in Note (B) by striking the following:
“The terms `PCP (actual)', `Amphetamine (actual)', and `Methamphetamine (actual)' refer to the weight of the controlled substance, itself, contained in the mixture or substance. For example, a mixture weighing 10 grams containing PCP at 50% purity contains 5 grams of PCP (actual). In the case of a mixture or substance containing PCP, amphetamine, or methamphetamine, use the offense level determined by the entire weight of the mixture or substance, or the offense level determined by the weight of the PCP (actual), amphetamine (actual), or methamphetamine (actual), whichever is greater.”,
and inserting the following:
“The terms `PCP (actual)' and `Amphetamine (actual)' refer to the weight of the controlled substance, itself, contained in the mixture or substance. For example, a mixture weighing 10 grams containing PCP at 50% purity contains 5 grams of PCP (actual). In the case of a mixture or substance containing PCP or amphetamine, use the offense level determined by the entire weight of the mixture or substance, or the offense level determined by the weight of the PCP (actual) or amphetamine (actual), whichever is greater.”.
The Commentary to § 2D1.1 captioned “Application Notes” is amended—
in Note 8(D), under the heading relating to Cocaine and Other Scheduled I and II Stimulants (and their immediate precursors)—
in the line referenced to Methamphetamine by striking “2 kg” and inserting “20 kg”;
and by striking the line referenced to Methamphetamine (actual) as follows:
“1 gm of Methamphetamine (actual) = 20 kg”;
and in Note 27(C) by striking “methamphetamine,”.]
1. The Commission seeks comment on how, if at all, the guidelines should be amended to address the 10:1 quantity ratio between methamphetamine mixture and methamphetamine (actual). Should the Commission adopt either of the above options or neither? Should the Commission equalize the treatment of methamphetamine mixture and methamphetamine (actual) but at some level other than the current quantity thresholds for methamphetamine mixture or methamphetamine (actual)? Should the Commission retain references to both methamphetamine mixture and methamphetamine (actual) and set a quantity ratio between these substances but at some level other than the current 10:1 ratio? If so, what ratio should the Commission establish, and what is the basis for such ratio?
2. Option 2 in Subpart 2 of Part B of the proposed amendment would amend § 2D1.1 (Unlawful Manufacturing, Importing, Exporting, or Trafficking (Including Possession with Intent to Commit These Offenses); Attempt or Conspiracy) to establish a 1:1 quantity ratio for methamphetamine (actual) and methamphetamine mixture by setting the quantity thresholds for all methamphetamine at the level of methamphetamine (actual). However, this change may result in an increased offense level for some cases involving methamphetamine (actual). For example, under the current § 2D1.1, 5 grams of a mixture or substance containing 80 percent methamphetamine is treated as 4 grams of methamphetamine (actual), which triggers a base offense level of 22. By contrast, under Option 2, 5 grams of a mixture or substance containing 80 percent methamphetamine would be treated as 5 grams of methamphetamine, which would trigger a base offense level of 24. Is this an appropriate outcome? Why or why not? If not, how should the Commission revise § 2D1.1 to avoid this outcome?
3. Section 2D1.11 (Unlawfully Distributing, Importing, Exporting or Possessing a Listed Chemical; Attempt or Conspiracy) includes a chemical quantity table specifically for ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and phenylpropanolamine at subsection (d). The table ties the base offense levels for these chemicals to the base offense levels for methamphetamine (actual) set forth in § 2D1.1, assuming a 50 percent actual yield of the controlled substance from the chemicals.
As provided above, Option 1 in Subpart 2 of Part B of the proposed amendment would amend the Drug Quantity Table at § 2D1.1(c) and the Drug Equivalency Tables at Application Note 8(D) of the Commentary to § 2D1.1 to set the quantity thresholds for methamphetamine (actual) at the same level as methamphetamine mixture. If the Commission were to promulgate Option 1, should the Commission amend the table at § 2D1.11(d) and make conforming changes to the quantity thresholds? Should the Commission revise the quantity thresholds in § 2D1.11(d) in a different way? If so, what quantity thresholds should the Commission set and on what basis?
4. Subpart 2 of Part B of the proposed amendment addresses the quantity ratio between methamphetamine mixture and methamphetamine (actual) in § 2D1.1. In addition to comment on the methamphetamine purity distinction, the Commission has received comment suggesting that the Commission should reconsider the different treatment between cocaine (
The Commission has received some comment urging the Commission to revise § 2D1.1(b)(13) because courts rarely apply this enhancement. According to those commenters, the enhancement is vague and has led to disagreement on when it should be applied. Some commenters suggested that the Commission lower the
Part C of the proposed amendment would revise the enhancement at § 2D1.1(b)(13) to address these concerns. Three options are provided.
Issues for comment are also provided.
Section 2D1.1(b)(13) is amended by striking the following:
“If the defendant (A) knowingly misrepresented or knowingly marketed as another substance a mixture or substance containing fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] propanamide) or a fentanyl analogue, increase by 4 levels; or (B) represented or marketed as a legitimately manufactured drug another mixture or substance containing fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] propanamide) or a fentanyl analogue, and acted with willful blindness or conscious avoidance of knowledge that such mixture or substance was not the legitimately manufactured drug, increase by 2 levels. The term `drug,' as used in subsection (b)(13)(B), has the meaning given that term in 21 U.S.C. 321(g)(1).”;
and inserting the following:
“If the offense involved representing or marketing a mixture or substance containing fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] propanamide) or a fentanyl analogue as any other substance, increase by [2][4] levels.”.]
“If the defendant represented or marketed a mixture or substance containing fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] propanamide) or a fentanyl analogue as any other substance, [with knowledge or reason to believe that it contained fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] propanamide) or a fentanyl analogue][with knowledge of or reckless disregard as to the actual content of the mixture or substance], increase by [2][4] levels.”.]
“If (A) the defendant represented or marketed a mixture or substance containing fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] propanamide) or a fentanyl analogue as any other substance, [with knowledge or reason to believe that it contained fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] propanamide) or a fentanyl analogue][with knowledge of or reckless disregard as to the actual content of the mixture or substance], increase by [4] levels; or (B) the offense otherwise involved representing or marketing a mixture or substance containing fentanyl (N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] propanamide) or a fentanyl analogue as any other substance, increase by [2] levels.”.]
1. Part C of the proposed amendment would amend subsection (b)(13) of § 2D1.1 (Unlawful Manufacturing, Importing, Exporting, or Trafficking (Including Possession with Intent to Commit These Offenses); Attempt or Conspiracy) to address some concerns relating to application issues with the enhancement. The Commission seeks comment on whether any of the three options set forth above is appropriate to address the concerns raised by commenters. If not, is there an alternative approach that the Commission should consider? Should the Commission provide a different
2. The Commission enacted § 2D1.1(b)(13) to address cases where individuals purchasing a mixture or substance containing fentanyl or a fentanyl analogue may believe they are purchasing a different substance. The Commission invites general comment on whether the proposed revisions to § 2D1.1(b)(13) are appropriate to address this harm and the culpability of the defendants in these cases. Is the use of terms such as “representing” and
The Department of Justice has expressed concern that § 2D1.1(b)(1) fails to differentiate between machineguns and other weapons. The Department of Justice and other commenters have also noted the increased prevalence of machinegun conversion devices (“MCDs”) (
Part D of the proposed amendment would amend the enhancement at § 2D1.1(b)(1) for cases involving the possession of a weapon. It would create a tiered enhancement based on whether the weapon possessed was a machinegun (as defined in 26 U.S.C. 5845(b)) or some other dangerous weapon. Courts would be instructed to apply the greater of either a 4-level enhancement if a machinegun was possessed or a 2-level enhancement if a dangerous weapon was possessed.
An issue for comment is also provided.
Section 2D1.1(b)(1) is amended by striking the following:
“If a dangerous weapon (including a firearm) was possessed, increase by 2 levels.”;
and inserting the following:
“(Apply the greater):
(A) If a machinegun (as defined in 26 U.S.C. 5845(b)) was possessed, increase by [4] levels;
(B) If a dangerous weapon (including a firearm) was possessed, increase by 2 levels.”.
The Commentary to § 2D1.1 captioned “Application Notes” is amended in Note 11(B) by striking “dangerous weapon” and inserting “weapon”.
1. Subsection (b)(1) of § 2D1.1 (Unlawful Manufacturing, Importing, Exporting, or Trafficking (Including Possession with Intent to Commit These Offenses); Attempt or Conspiracy) applies if “a dangerous weapon . . . was possessed” as part of the offense and does not require that the defendant possessed the weapon. In addition, the Commentary to § 2D1.1 provides that the enhancement “should be applied if the weapon was present, unless it is clearly improbable that the weapon was connected with the offense.”
Section 5C1.2(a)(5) does not prescribe any particular manner by which a defendant must satisfy the requirement of providing truthful information and evidence to the Government. The Commission has heard concerns, however, that this requirement has been understood to require that the defendant meet directly with the Government. Due to safety concerns, defendants otherwise eligible for the safety valve may forego that benefit due to the requirement of an in-person meeting.
Part E of the proposed amendment would address these concerns by amending the Commentary to § 5C1.2 to add a provision stating that subsection (a)(5) does not specify how the defendant should provide such information and evidence to the Government. It would also provide that the specific manner by which the defendant has disclosed the information—whether by written disclosure or in-person meeting—should not preclude a determination by the court that the defendant has complied with the requirement of disclosing information about the offense, provided that the disclosure satisfies the requirements of completeness and truthfulness. It would state that the fact that the defendant provided the information as a written disclosure shall not by itself render the disclosure—if otherwise found complete and truthful—insufficient.
An issue for comment is also provided.
The Commentary to § 5C1.2 captioned “Application Notes” is amended in Note 4 by striking the following:
“
and inserting the following:
“
(A)
(B)
1. The Commission seeks comment on whether the changes set forth in Part E of the proposed amendment are appropriate to address the concerns raised by commenters. If not, is there an alternative approach that the Commission should consider?