rowid,id,occurrence,disposition,tracking_number,posted_date,is_withdrawn,title,comment_text,reason_withdrawn,attachment_files,content_files,duplicate_comments,source_slice 1,AMS-NOP-21-0073-3517,1,keep_both_alias,l7t-gkez-8jp8,,,,,,,,,AMS-2022:2022-01-01:2022-12-31 2,AMS-NOP-21-0073-3517,2,keep_both_alias,l7t-irh9-wtbz,,,,,,,,,AMS-2022:2022-01-01:2022-12-31 3,DOT-OST-2005-23194-0467,1,union_alias,803842f9,2006-02-15T05:00:00Z,0,Margaret Cucuizza,,,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/DOT-OST-2005-23194-0467/attachment_1.tif,https://downloads.regulations.gov/DOT-OST-2005-23194-0467/attachment_1.pdf",,,DOT-2006:2006-01-01:2006-12-31 4,FAA-1999-6717-0154,1,union_alias,80382e2e,2007-09-25T04:00:00Z,0,Larry J. Ross ,"In the comments under Passenger Recovery Plans in the final rule for ETOPS the FAA states: ""A plan depending on long-term use of the airplane hull to protect passengers and crew from the elements is not considered acceptable"". In the proposed AC, under Passenger Recovery Plan it states: ""If the certificate holder proposes to use the airplane capabilities and services as a means to satisfy all or part of the requirements for such a plan...."" This appears to be a contradiction. ",,,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 5,FAA-2000-8425-0017,1,union_alias,80382776,2007-09-14T04:00:00Z,0,Michael P. Walker ,"It would be very nice to have an extended deadline for the ""N"" numbering registration process of PPC aircraft (powered parachutes, 2-place macines). I have just recently purchased a used PPC and the Jan 31st,2008 is going to be very hard to make. I feel that if you would allow an extended deadline until Jan 31st,2010 then it would give everyone needing to register ample time to do so without being worried about whether they will make the current deadline or not. Thank you for considering this extension request. Sincerely, Michael Paul Walker ",,,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 6,FAA-2000-8425-0018,1,union_alias,80382777,2007-09-20T04:00:00Z,0,Dennis J. Demeter,"In light of the fact that it has taken so long to establish any sort of workable infrastructure to help this transition, I fail to see what FAA has to lose by granting an extension. Flex-wing and para-wing operators are being forced in many, many cases across the country to travel many miles, or pay a DAR to travel many miles to conduct an ELSA inspection incurring excessive cost in the process. In addition, the lack of instructors and DPE's for these operators has caused undue economic hardship to those wishing to obtain sport pilot licenses in type. Many would be sport pilots have had to travel across multiple state borders and pay for extended lodging in order to take the instruction necessary to complete the program. Since FAA MIDO and FSDO offices seem to be unable or unwilling to help with providing inspectors for aircraft inspections, and pilot instructors and examiners are in short supply, it is evident that an extension is in order. An extension of two years would allow many more pilots and aircraft to be brought into the system as the infrastructure expands to meet demand. I don't understand FAA's resistance to this. The aircraft and pilots flying illegal ships are not going to just disappear on 1/31/08. You can chase them down starting 2/01/08 or give us more time to bring in as many as we can with a better infrastructure. ",,,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 7,FAA-2000-8425-0020,1,union_alias,80382779,2007-09-24T04:00:00Z,0,William E. Whitley,"Dear Sir - Regarding the Petition by ASC to extend the deadline for Sport Pilot / LSA transition, I support the petition and ask that you give serious consideration to it. I am now a certificate holding Sport Pilot. It took me 17 months to get the certificate. I am well educated (a lawyer) and have the financial resources to accomplish the transition. It was expensive, costing over $1,000. Many who fly ultralights, which are just technically over the 254 pound limit are not able to get the sport pilot certificate accomplished in the short time allowed for the transition. They have time and financial problems which hinder this. I am a weight shift pilot and BFI with USUA. The trikers have very few weight shift CFIs. There are very few examiners to inspect the trikes to get them an airworthness certificate. It took me over 17 months to register and certify my trike and over $1,500. We need more time and more instructors and more inspectors. I believe that ultralights / light sport aviation is an important part of our nation's building process for the future of flight. I applaud the FAA for developing the Sport Pilot / LSA rule. We need more time to get people into the system. Nothing would be hurt by granting more time. People would be helped by giving more time to transition. I am attempting to become a weight shift sport pilot CFI. This is not a full time job and never will be. I teach students to fly these simple aircraft for the love of flying. There are so few weight shift examiners who can give me the practical test that it is difficult to find one within a reasonable distance and time. I finally found one in Live Oak, Florida, who is not too far away and he seems reasonable in the fees charged. However, my career is not in teaching weight shift flying, it is the practice of law. Many of the part time weight shift instructors have difficulty and are placed in a financial burden to transition to CFI. We respectfully ask that you consider the extension of time as a reasonable step to helping to bring more qualified BFIs to CFI status. - Thank you for considering this. William E. Whitley ",,,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 8,FAA-2000-8425-0021,1,union_alias,8038277a,2007-09-25T04:00:00Z,0,Edward J. Remavege,"Please consider this extension! This has become a full time job getting this accomplished and quit costly. I will get this accomplished but I do have a life and a career and a family etc. An extension makes sense doesn't it? After all, only a schedual that was set arbitrarily will be changed but the spirit and end result will still be accomplished. Now, that's what's important isn't it? My best to all, Thank you for your consideration, Ned ",,,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 9,FAA-2000-8425-0022,1,union_alias,8038277b,2007-09-25T04:00:00Z,0,Daniel Antunes,"We need an extention for the powered parachutes. DAR's are limited, costs to complete the transition are not easily available and more time is needed, and fees that the DAR's and DPE's charge require for many to save up and Jan.31, 2008 does not give some of us enough time. I ask that the FAA at least require powered parachute owners to register a n-nummber and be assigned an n-number by 1/31/08 but give us more time to for inspections,and required paperwork that is needed for airworthiness. This is what we ask for and we hope you can give us this extention so that the current ppc's will not become worthless due to this 1/31/08 deadline. We are not asking for unreasonable extention but please give us more time. ",,,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 10,FAA-2000-8425-0023,1,union_alias,8038277c,2007-09-25T04:00:00Z,0,Anonymous,"In this latest request, ASC claims to have 3000 instructors (""Minimum"") registered with their organization, yet there are only 976 instructors listed on their website. Either the numbers cited in the request are grossly inaccurate, or they have been artificially inflated to enhance the petitioner's position. With inaccuracies of this magnitude, the other statistics cited in the petition are also suspect. I question the real need for this extension, as presented. ",,,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 11,FAA-2000-8425-0024,1,union_alias,8038277d,2007-09-25T04:00:00Z,0,Anonymous,"I am against the sport pilot rule pertaining to powered parachutes. There is not enough time to complete the process, I dont have the spare money, and I dont see where if I take my Wife or kids up in my plane, what business it is of yours. How dare you make a law abiding citizen into a criminal, at the whim of an unelected buracrats whim. The hell with you, keep yours hands off of my property and out of my life. Me taking off for a twenty minute flight out off of field is no threat to national security and don't tell is. How about this, profile the Muslims, the ones that cause the problems over and over again and leave me the hell alone. ",,,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 12,FAA-2001-11133-2743,1,union_alias,80383e5b,2007-09-24T04:00:00Z,0,Experimental Aircraft Association ,"EAA understands the issues presented by the petition for exemption submitted by Future Flight LLC., DOT Docket No. FAA-2001-11133-2742. EAA supports this petition request as a prudent means to eliminate the unintended consequences the combination of the stated regulations are causing the light sport aircraft industry. This action is required to ensure the continued flight safety of the LSA gyroplane industry. EAA also supports the request from Future Flight LLC to expedite the processing (and approval) of this petition in order not to harm the light-sport industry. January 31, 2008 is a fixed regulatory deadline. EAA recommends the FAA start a rulemaking process to correct the noted regulatory issues. Randy Hansen EAA Government Relations Director ",,,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 13,FAA-2001-9410-0008,1,union_alias,803828c5,2007-09-25T04:00:00Z,0,U.S. DOT/FAA - Grant of Petition,"Grant of Petition to the Department of the Air Force to extend Exemption No. 134, as amended. The FAA decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 134, as amended, to September 30, 2010, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. ",,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2001-9410-0008/attachment_1.doc,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2001-9410-0008/attachment_1.pdf",,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 14,FAA-2002-12501-4307,1,union_alias,80382e78,2002-09-30T04:00:00Z,0,Anonymous,"As an airline pilot I am very much in favor of increasing the retirement age beyond age 60. I think that judging whether a person is competent to fly should be based on individual evaluations, not a blanket one size fits all system. It is age discrimination to do otherwise. Additonally, in the aftermath of Sept. 11th, my future earnings are sure to be drastically reduced. I need the opportunity to work for longer time since I won't be making as much money as I need to retire. Of course, I also won't receive social security until I am 67. Please make the retirement age one based on an individuals' ability to perform the job. Anyone can be taught to manipulate the controls of an aircraft. The crucial difference in any unusual flying situation is the judgement that is brought to bear at the time. There are answers to variables that cannot be taught in a simulator. Those answers come from EXPERIENCE AND EXPERIENCE ONLY, expertise that comes with longevity on the job. Safety and experience are one and the same. Please extend the retirement age beyond age 60. It makes good sense. ",,,,,FAA-2002:2002-01-01:2002-12-31 15,FAA-2006-25156-0008,1,union_alias,8038496b,2007-09-24T04:00:00Z,0,Cessna Aircraft,,,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2006-25156-0008/attachment_1.doc,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2006-25156-0008/attachment_1.pdf",,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 16,FAA-2006-26110-0017,1,union_alias,80384698,2007-09-17T04:00:00Z,0,Association of Asia Pacific Airlines ,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2006-26110-0017/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 17,FAA-2006-26110-0018,1,union_alias,80384699,2007-09-19T04:00:00Z,0,National Transportation Safety Board,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2006-26110-0018/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 18,FAA-2006-26139-6106,1,union_alias,803849a0,2007-09-26T04:00:00Z,0,G. Schwend ,"Clearly increasing the retirement age from 60 to 65 will unfairly impact the majority of the commercial pilot force. The only fair way to implement this change is to make the change for those persons obtaining an ATP at the minimum age, effective on the date of the new rule. In effect the first person to continue flying past age 60 would occur 37 years after the rule change. Implementing the rule in this manner will create a clear delineation between those persons subject to the age 60 rule and those subject to the age 65 rule. The current pilot force has relied on the age 60 rule for progression. In fact the current group of pilots approaching age 60 has strongly supported retirement at age 60 until recently. Increasing the retirement age midstream will place an undue cost on those pilots who are not yet approaching age 60. This is the majority of the pilot force. Allowing those pilots who are the most senior to continue working for five more years will delay advancement for everyone else. Again, increasing the retirement age will benefit those same persons who benefited by having their senior peers step aside at age 60. These persons will get a double benefit while those who are not yet approaching age 60 will have to wait 5 more years to advance. The FAA should not facilitate this unfair benefit. ",,,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 19,FAA-2007-27310-0016,1,union_alias,803849ea,2007-09-20T04:00:00Z,0,Preferred Processing Solutions LLC,,,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-27310-0016/attachment_1.tif,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-27310-0016/attachment_1.pdf",,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 20,FAA-2007-27390-0036,1,union_alias,803849f2,2007-09-17T04:00:00Z,0,Michael Aherne,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-27390-0036/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 21,FAA-2007-27390-0037,1,union_alias,803849f3,2007-09-24T04:00:00Z,0,Jerry Irvine,,,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-27390-0037/attachment_1.tif,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-27390-0037/attachment_1.pdf",,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 22,FAA-2007-27390-0038,1,union_alias,803849f4,2007-09-21T04:00:00Z,0,National Association of Rocketry - Comments,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-27390-0038/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 23,FAA-2007-27390-0039,1,union_alias,803849f5,2007-09-27T04:00:00Z,0,Tripoli Rocketry Association,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-27390-0039/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 24,FAA-2007-27811-0024,1,union_alias,80384a01,2007-09-24T04:00:00Z,0,Gulfstream Aerospace,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-27811-0024/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 25,FAA-2007-27983-0011,1,union_alias,80384a0c,2007-09-18T04:00:00Z,0,Clyde Hart - Comments,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-27983-0011/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 26,FAA-2007-28413-0004,1,union_alias,803847f1,2007-09-26T04:00:00Z,0,Vincent Wen ,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28413-0004/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 27,FAA-2007-28413-0005,1,union_alias,803847f5,2007-09-26T04:00:00Z,0,Air New Zealand Ltd.,"•Bulletin SB 73-0326 is incorrectly identified. •When Air NZ found that SB 73-0326 Rev 00 was not successful in preventing leaks we issued our own inspection document that required replacement of all clamps with new parts at each inspection. This document is approved by the local regulator. All engines in the fleet had the clamps replaced with new items in a three month program. The NPRM Table 1 currently gives credit for this program, however the “differences between the proposed AD and the Manufacturer’s Service Information” section of the NPRM states that credit is given for “new loop clamps installed at last shop visit”. Air NZ requests that it is made clear that credit is given for all new clamps installed whether at shop visit or on-wing. •In discussions the OEM has indicated that Teflon tape under clamps has not yet been proven to extend the durability of the clamps. Air NZ has been applying Permacel P421 Teflon tape (in lieu of the abrasive fibreglass tape per SB 73-0326) under all new clamps under our own authority. We request that the AD recognises that new clamps may have been installed with Teflon tape and allows those engines to continue to the next inspection without any limit or penalty. •Air NZ has also seen clamp wear on P/N 1303M31G10 and 1303M32G10 fuel manifolds and believes that the wear issues are common to both styles of manifolds. Air NZ will apply the AD requirements to both styles of manifold. ",,,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 28,FAA-2007-28433-0007,1,union_alias,80384a2c,2007-09-17T04:00:00Z,0,Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28433-0007/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 29,FAA-2007-28478-0052,1,union_alias,80384a2d,2007-09-24T04:00:00Z,0,James Zangger ,"Background: Service letter issued April of 2007 to address corrosion issues identified in struts. Origin and history of suspect struts is undocumented. Maintenance practices associated with suspect aircraft are also undocumented. Intent was to prevent in flight failures of struts. AD Issuance: Timing of AD appears to have been prompted by an unrelated failure of a separate structure. History: Taylorcraft has no documented record of in flight structural failures until the recent Washington state fatality. (The accident aircraft was licensed in the experimental category, annual inspections had been performed and signed off by the owner IA, aircraft was stored outdoors on a lake in a salt air environment while on floats. Condensation would develop in locations in a float equipped airplane that may not apply to a land based aircraft.) Safety: Service letter was sufficient to inform owners of problem areas. (Distribution of the service letter was not consistent and did not reach all owners.) Maintenance: Annual inspections using normal maintenance practices have, over the years, found suspect areas. Appropriate repairs have been made to allow the continued safe flight of the aircraft. Inspection: Per the AD, the authorized inspections and frequency of such to determine the presence of corrosion are prohibitively expensive and unnecessarily repetitive. Recommendations: Allow Alternate Means of Compliance that have been approved on previous AD's of other aircraft - specifically, the Maule test allowed on Piper struts. This test would indicate whether the need for more extensive testing is required. A visual boroscope inspection would also identify any corrosion on the interior of the struts dictating the need for more extensive testing. While ultrasound inspections are able to accurately determine wall thickness, the eddy current inspection appears to be more appropriate on aluminum. An x-ray inspection would possibly be more revealing than either of these other methods and be the correct test for any future corrosion concerns in other areas. This would prevent the need for fabric removal in those areas. If a structure is determined to have no corrosion through the use of these test methods, the frequency of re-inspection bi-annually seems unnecessary. Logic would dictate that if no corrosion had occured in 60 years or more that little new corrosion would form in the next two years, certainly not enough to raise concern over the integrity of the material. Wouldn't it be reasonable to test a suspect strut to destruction as a means to determine if the strut meets the original design load criteria? This would allow a determination as to what would be acceptable levels of corrosion in a particular structure. ",,,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 30,FAA-2007-28478-0053,1,union_alias,80384a2e,2007-09-25T04:00:00Z,0,William E. Russell,"The fact that there was no comment period prior to the FAA issuing the AD on the lift strut inspections seems without merit. Most owners/operators maintain their aricraft in accordance with sound maintenance procedures. It seems that all of the owner/operators are being unfairly punished for a few that failed to maintain their aircraft. The cost and inconvience of repeated inspections and removal of the lift struts is too much for most individuals to contend with. This AD needs to be revised so that owners have a longer interval between the required Eddy current flow tests if their lift struts passed inital visual and Eddy tests rather than the 24 month period now specified. ",,,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 31,FAA-2007-28498-0002,1,union_alias,80384800,2007-09-26T04:00:00Z,0,"McDonald Ops Evaluations, LLC - Comments",,,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28498-0002/attachment_1.tif,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28498-0002/attachment_1.pdf",,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 32,FAA-2007-28498-0003,1,union_alias,80384801,2007-09-26T04:00:00Z,0,McDonald Ops Evaluations,,,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28498-0003/attachment_1.rtf,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28498-0003/attachment_1.pdf",,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 33,FAA-2007-28689-0003,1,union_alias,8038488c,2007-09-20T04:00:00Z,0,Freeflight Systems,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28689-0003/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 34,FAA-2007-28750-0008-0001,1,union_alias,803848a2,2007-09-20T04:00:00Z,0,The Boeing Company,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28750-0008-0001/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 35,FAA-2007-28750-0008-0002,1,union_alias,803848a3,2007-09-20T04:00:00Z,0,The Boeing Company,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28750-0008-0002/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 36,FAA-2007-28750-0009,1,union_alias,803848a4,2007-09-27T04:00:00Z,0,U.S. DOT/FAA - Comment - EASA,,,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28750-0009/attachment_1.doc,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28750-0009/attachment_1.pdf",,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 37,FAA-2007-28881-0004,1,union_alias,803848c9,2007-09-19T04:00:00Z,0,"Northwest Airlines, Inc.",,,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28881-0004/attachment_1.tif,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28881-0004/attachment_1.pdf",,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 38,FAA-2007-28921-0007,1,union_alias,80384af5,2007-09-25T04:00:00Z,0,Boeing Commercial Airplanes ,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28921-0007/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 39,FAA-2007-28921-0008,1,union_alias,80384af6,2007-09-26T04:00:00Z,0,Air Transport Association - Comments ,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28921-0008/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 40,FAA-2007-28943-0006,1,union_alias,80384af7,2007-09-18T04:00:00Z,0,Boeing Commercial Airplanes,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28943-0006/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 41,FAA-2007-28973-0005,1,union_alias,803848d9,2007-09-19T04:00:00Z,0,Japan Airlines International,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28973-0005/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 42,FAA-2007-28988-0007,1,union_alias,803848e1,2007-09-21T04:00:00Z,0,The Boeing Company ,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28988-0007/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 43,FAA-2007-28989-0007,1,union_alias,80384af8,2007-09-20T04:00:00Z,0,The Boeing Company,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28989-0007/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 44,FAA-2007-28990-0007,1,union_alias,80384af9,2007-09-17T04:00:00Z,0,The Boeing Company,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-28990-0007/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 45,FAA-2007-29001-0002,1,union_alias,803848ee,2007-09-17T04:00:00Z,0,GE Aviation,"The service bulletin revision dates need to be updated. Revision 2 was approved on August 28, 2007 and applies to all 3 SBs. GE Service Bulletin (SB) No. CF34–8C–AL S/B 73–0030, Revision 2, dated August 28, 2007, SB No. CF34–8E–AL S/B 73–0015, Revision 2, dated August 28, 2007, and SB No. CF34–10E S/B 72–0067, Revision 2, dated August 28, 2007. Appears in two places: (1) Relevant Service Information and (2) PART 39 - AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES, 2.(g), Onetime test of the FMU. ",,,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 46,FAA-2007-29001-0003,1,tombstone_preserved,,2007-09-17T00:00:00Z,1,GE Aviation,,11.05.2007 - This is a duplicate of item FAA-2007-29001-0002.,,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 47,FAA-2007-29031-0006,1,union_alias,80384afa,2007-09-21T04:00:00Z,0,The Boeing Company ,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-29031-0006/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 48,FAA-2007-29045-0006,1,union_alias,803848fa,2007-09-21T04:00:00Z,0,The Boeing Company,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-29045-0006/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 49,FAA-2007-29073-0008,1,union_alias,80384afd,2007-09-26T04:00:00Z,0,Air Transport Association ,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FAA-2007-29073-0008/attachment_1.pdf,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 50,FAA-2007-29117-0007,1,tombstone_preserved,,2007-09-17T00:00:00Z,1,GE Aviation ,,"10/23/2007 - Withdrawn at request of US DOT/FAA, ANM-114.",,,,FAA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 51,FAA-2025-0558-0267,1,keep_both_alias,mah-7npk-9l3p,,,,,,,,,FAA-2025:2025-01-01:2025-12-31 52,FAA-2025-0558-0267,2,keep_both_alias,mar-70ic-gnrh,,,,,,,,,FAA-2025:2025-01-01:2025-12-31 53,FAA-2026-0661-0096,1,keep_both_alias,mpp-hxq7-ikkz,,,,,,,,,FAA-2026:2026-01-01:2026-07-31 54,FAA-2026-0661-0096,2,keep_both_alias,mq8-bl54-7swa,,,,,,,,,FAA-2026:2026-01-01:2026-07-31 55,FMCSA-2004-18940-1146,1,union_alias,803840ac,2007-09-20T04:00:00Z,0,David Jones - Comments,"I want to post my objection to the plan to require automakers in the US to install EDR's in all vehicles. I understand the potential benefits to some institutions but feel it is a gross invasion of my privacy. We consumers pay for the cars and trucks and therefore own the EDR in the vehicle IF they are installed. However, the data would be ""taken"" by any governmental or institutional group who desired it and used against the consumers as they see fit. I object to that ability. Sincerely, David Jones ",,,,,FMCSA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 56,FMCSA-2004-19608-2526,1,union_alias,80384359,2007-09-26T04:00:00Z,0,Steve M. Nelson - Comments,"In regards to the continued problems you seem to be having deciding what is a safe and resonable program for the hours of service I'd like to put my suggestion in for consideration. First,I'd like to say I've been a driver for 22yrs and in all this time I've had the question ""What purpose does the 8 day week serve?"". No other industry uses this and as a result in my opinion until this is eliminated we will never be able to have a ""normal"" work week.I know that has been your goal for the last couple of years so,with this in mind I submit the following plan. 70 hrs in 7 days instead of 8. Forget about the 34 hr restart, revert to the 10 hrs driving following 10 hrs off instead of 11. Keep the 14 hr clock once logged onto either ""on duty or on duty not driving"" status. This will allow a driver to put in 10 hrs a day Monday through Sunday giving him/her 14 hrs a day off duty or 14 hrs on duty Monday through Friday giving him/her 10 hours a day off.Then after sitting for the weekend, start again Monday morning with the hours he/she worked the previous Monday. This would allow a driver to actually get on a routine that works with their individual sleep periods that their body is used to as well as work a 7 day work week that will work with the rest of the country and it's industry. The 8 day week serves no purpose but get in the way of a normal scedule as we can't work the given hours we are allowed to drive daily without running out of hours on a day that doesn't exist on any calender. So please examine this idea and feel free to contact me if you have any questions about this idea. Thank You, Steve Nelson 423-645-1603 Keeping the 14 hour clock once on duty would be a good idea ",,,,,FMCSA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 57,FMCSA-2005-20560-0017,1,union_alias,80384596,2007-08-23T04:00:00Z,0,Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety - Comments,,,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/FMCSA-2005-20560-0017/attachment_1.doc,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FMCSA-2005-20560-0017/attachment_1.pdf",,,FMCSA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 58,FMCSA-2006-26602-0003,1,union_alias,803846be,2007-09-17T04:00:00Z,0,New York State DMV - Comments,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FMCSA-2006-26602-0003/attachment_1.pdf,,,FMCSA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 59,FMCSA-2007-28055-2438,1,union_alias,80384794,2007-09-17T04:00:00Z,0,Gordon E. Jacobs - Comments,"Stop the assult of Mexican trucks/driver from coming across the U.S. borders. Concerns: Safety Security Jobs lost Insurance on Mexican trucks I am concerned about the safety on our highways. Safety inspections of Mexican trucks vs. U.S. standard are not the same. What about explosives and chemicals in these trucks? Can we and will our officials inspect all trucks and cargo at the border? I don't think so, not from what I read and hear coming out the D.C.. What about Terrorist and illegals coming across in these trucks? What about insurance coverage? what will happen if a major misshap occurs and across border insurance is involved? What about all the trucker jobs that will be lost when these Mexican truck once these trucks are allowed to go anywhere in the U.S.????? We need to stop this assult on our Great country!!!!!!!! ",,,,,FMCSA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 60,FMCSA-2007-28055-2439,1,union_alias,80384795,2007-09-17T04:00:00Z,0,Wanda J. Lowery - Comments,"Please do not allow Mexican Trucking Companies to come into the USA for business or any other reason. The government won't be able to guarantee our security or safety if they allow the Mexican Trucks on our highways just as they do not now have enough security or safety coverage for the US Trucking companies. This is a fact which most US Citizens are totally aware and for the government to think that we believe otherwise is totaly ludicrous. God knows what kinds of disasters US Citizens shall have to endure if the government allows those truck on our highways...We still believe in a government by the people, for the people and we were not asked...Not once have I had an opportunity to vote on this issue or voice my opinion until now. ",,,,,FMCSA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 61,FMCSA-2007-28536-0002,1,union_alias,80384806,2007-09-27T04:00:00Z,0,Danae M. Harter - Comments,"I am submitting a comment on the behalf of Kevin D. Wilson, who is trying to obtain an exemption for an out of state waiver regaurding his diabetes. I have known Kevin since before he was diagnosed, and have accompanied him to all of his appointment since then. He has outstanding control over his diabetes. I have never known him to disregaurd his health in a dangerous manner. He keep a very close eye on his blood sugar and adheres to his doctors order for treatment of his diabetes. He is now and always has been in very good health, and I see no reason as to why he should not recieve an exemption. ",,,,,FMCSA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 62,FMCSA-2007-29254-0005,1,union_alias,80385660,2007-09-21T04:00:00Z,0,Barb Sachau - Comments,"RE FEDERAL REGISTER OF TODAY PG 54098 DOT FMCSA DOCKET 2007 29254 AGE FOR OPERATING A COMMERCIAL VEHICLE - EXEMPTION FOR UNDER 21 I OPPOSE ANY SUCH EXEMPTION FOR JCRANE OR ANY OTHER PROFITEERS. YOU SHOULD BE 21 TO OPERATE THIS VEHICLE ON INTERSTATE ROADS. THOSE UNDER 21 HAVE NO SENSE AND WILL KILL OTHER DRIVERS. YOU NEED MATURE DRIVERS FOR THESE PONDEROUIS VEHICLES. YOU WILL ALLOW ANY OLD THING TO GO ON OUR ROADS, WONT YOU? PUBLIC SAFETY MUST BE LAST ON THE LIST OF FMCSA. TRUCK COMPANY PROFITEERING IS FIRST PRIOIRITY, ENDANGERING ALL AMERICANS. B.S ACHAU 15 ELM ST FLORHAM PARK NJ 07932 ",,,,,FMCSA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 63,FMCSA-2007-29254-0006,1,union_alias,80385661,2007-09-27T04:00:00Z,0, Road Safe America - Comments,"This is absurd. It is surprising that this would even be considered. Please do not allow this outrageous exception. ",,,,,FMCSA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 64,FRA-2006-25268-0003,1,union_alias,803845a1,2007-09-17T04:00:00Z,0,Colorado Railcar Manufacturing - Comments,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FRA-2006-25268-0003/attachment_1.pdf,,,FRA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 65,FRA-2006-25268-0004,1,union_alias,803845a2,2007-09-24T04:00:00Z,0,California Department of Transportation - Comments,,,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/FRA-2006-25268-0004/attachment_1.tif,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FRA-2006-25268-0004/attachment_1.pdf",,,FRA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 66,FRA-2006-25268-0005,1,union_alias,803845a3,2007-09-27T04:00:00Z,0,People of The State of California and the Public Utilities Commission - Comments,,,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/FRA-2006-25268-0005/attachment_1.doc,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FRA-2006-25268-0005/attachment_1.pdf",,,FRA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 67,FRA-2006-25268-0006,1,union_alias,803845a4,2007-09-27T04:00:00Z,0,American Public Transportation Association - Comments,,,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/FRA-2006-25268-0006/attachment_1.doc,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FRA-2006-25268-0006/attachment_1.pdf",,,FRA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 68,FRA-2006-25268-0007,1,union_alias,803845a5,2007-09-28T04:00:00Z,0,Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (Caltrain) - Comments,,,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/FRA-2006-25268-0007/attachment_1.tif,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FRA-2006-25268-0007/attachment_1.pdf",,,FRA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 69,FRA-2006-25268-0008,1,union_alias,803845a6,2007-09-28T04:00:00Z,0,Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen - Comments ,,,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/FRA-2006-25268-0008/attachment_1.tif,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FRA-2006-25268-0008/attachment_1.pdf",,,FRA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 70,FRA-2006-25564-0011,1,union_alias,80384981,2007-09-20T04:00:00Z,0,Brotherhood of Railway Carmen - Comments ,,,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/FRA-2006-25564-0011/attachment_1.doc,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FRA-2006-25564-0011/attachment_1.pdf",,,FRA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 71,FRA-2006-25630-0007,1,union_alias,8038498b,2007-09-25T04:00:00Z,0,Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen - Comments,,,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/FRA-2006-25630-0007/attachment_1.tif,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FRA-2006-25630-0007/attachment_1.pdf",,,FRA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 72,FRA-2006-26099-0667,1,union_alias,8038468f,2006-11-21T05:00:00Z,0,Robert Gervais - Comments,,,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/FRA-2006-26099-0667/attachment_1.tif,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FRA-2006-26099-0667/attachment_1.pdf",,,FRA-2006:2006-01-01:2006-12-31 73,FTA-2006-25737-0009,1,union_alias,80384990,2007-09-25T04:00:00Z,0,"Allen W. Marshall, III - Comments","I want to comment on the FTA's proposed rule change that would allow New Starts funding for transit projects to be diverted to highway construction and away from projects such as the proposed commuter rail from Atlanta to Macon, Georgia. My wife and I have traveled the world, and we have never seen a world-class city that did not have commuter rail to its suburbs. The proposed ""brain train"" would connect University of Georgia campuses in Griffin and Athens to each other and to/through Atlanta. We do not need more highways clogged with more cars; that plan has failed repeatedly and obviously. Over 20 percent of our population commutes to Atlanta daily. What we need is alternative forms of commuter transportation, namely commuter rail. I have developed a model for the revitalization of small towns in America that is privately funded. I have options on 20 addresses in Griffin's core downtown and am raising $6-million of private funds to restore and re-populate those buildings with viable businesses. See the website at www.renaissancegriffin.com While not dependent on rail, it would be tremendously enhanced by it. Many times as a child and young adult I rode the Nancy Hanks, a train that once ran on these rails tying together Atlanta, Macon and Savannah and points between. Griffin has a great desire and need for this commuter rail service. You will be hearing from many of us as we make our plea to you. Please do not divert money from commuter rail. Please leave it in place and add to it instead. Thank you for your consideration. Allen Marshall ",,,,,FTA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 74,FTA-2006-25737-0010,1,union_alias,8038498f,2007-09-27T04:00:00Z,0,Albert J. Mallinckrodt - Comments,,,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/FTA-2006-25737-0010/attachment_1.doc,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FTA-2006-25737-0010/attachment_1.pdf",,,FTA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 75,FTA-2006-26604-0004,1,union_alias,803846c4,2007-09-26T04:00:00Z,0,American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials - Comments,,,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FTA-2006-26604-0004/attachment_1.pdf,,,FTA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 76,FTA-2006-26604-0005,1,union_alias,803846c5,2007-09-28T04:00:00Z,0,Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority - Comments,,,"https://downloads.regulations.gov/FTA-2006-26604-0005/attachment_1.tif,https://downloads.regulations.gov/FTA-2006-26604-0005/attachment_1.pdf",,,FTA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 77,FTA-2007-29075-0003,1,union_alias,803848fc,2007-09-24T04:00:00Z,0,Anonymous - Comments,"Comments are being accepted until October 9, then the first reports are due October 29. How will FTA manage review and issue the final document in time for the states to gather the information from the providers and then RE-ENTER it into the system. Will we be penalized if our reports are late? ",,,,,FTA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 78,NHTSA-1998-4124-1070,1,union_alias,80382524,2007-09-19T04:00:00Z,0,Nate Zordman - Comments," Will buy a car with DRL's as long as they can be disabled! And the Automatic Light Control should be disabled also! ",,,,,NHTSA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 79,NHTSA-1998-4124-1071,1,union_alias,80382527,2007-09-20T04:00:00Z,0,Kenneth Cheung - Comments," I have wondered how to turn off lights. I go on military bases quite often, and the gate guard does not appreciate being blinded by oncoming headlights. The sign at the gate usually says to dim lights (ie, turn off lights), but I am unable to do that with my Pontiac Grand Am 2000. There may be something in the owners manual that I missed, but I did not find a way to turn off the lights, they are set to come on even without my turning the switch on. ",,,,,NHTSA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 80,NHTSA-1998-4124-1072,1,union_alias,80382528,2007-09-24T04:00:00Z,0,Eric Gixer - Comments," I finally have been able to get rid of DRL in my Pontiac GP. Now I need to figure out how be rid of them on my Buick Regal. ",,,,,NHTSA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 81,NHTSA-1998-4124-1073,1,union_alias,80382529,2007-09-25T04:00:00Z,0,Chris Daeger - Comments," I do hope we will eventually see the end of these DRL lights. Personally I am tired of being blinded by these drivers who probably unknowingly they are doing so. I have adjusted my mirrors at night and also flash oncoming cars in the daytime as well. Sometimes there are too many to continually try to get them to turn down their lights. I have also noticed that when I do flash my brights at them to get them to turn them off or down, most ignore me or they are doing something else or looking in other directions or away. Are these drivers being arrogant or are they under a false sense of security, thinking ""I have these lights on, I can be seen, and I can pay attention to other matters in my car instead of paying attention to the road"". Whatever the case is, I will continue to hold on my high beams steady as I approach, trying to get them to turn their DRLs off, just as anyone should when you approach drivers with their highbeams on at night. Flashing does not work as it only makes them think there is a cop ahead, but I do enjoy the brake lights come on I see at times. Besides, only an idiot would want to drive a vehicle that appears to be cross-eyed. ",,,,,NHTSA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 82,NHTSA-1998-4124-1074,1,union_alias,8038252a,2007-09-26T04:00:00Z,0,Niko Pfaffee - Comments," I have difficulties assessing the distance and speed of oncoming vehicles with DRL when I wait in an intersection to make a left turn. I also fear to overlook a single car with no DRL in a group of DRL equipped vehicles. Being in Canada, this is a regular occurance. I think the car industry is the modern mafia, shamelessly extorting more and more money from car owners with no defenses. Automobiles are purposely equipped with obstacles against self- help repairs. (e. g. an ever changing array of special-tools-required fasteners, on board computers and other nonsense gadgets that take control away from the owner). I feel like ripping all the redundant wiring out of a new car and rewire it simply with switches and relays that do what I want them to do when I want them to do it. My only defense is driving 20 year old Toyotas. ",,,,,NHTSA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 83,NHTSA-1998-4124-1075,1,union_alias,8038252b,2007-09-27T04:00:00Z,0,Richard Heyman - Comments," I disabled my DRLs upon delivery. The history of this goes back to motorcycles.. ",,,,,NHTSA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 84,NHTSA-1998-4124-1076,1,union_alias,8038252c,2007-09-27T04:00:00Z,0,Geoffrey Way - Comments," The original concept for DRLs was to compensate for a lighting deficiency. We don't have such a deficiency in the United States! ",,,,,NHTSA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 85,NHTSA-2000-7580-1295,1,union_alias,8038379d,2007-09-18T04:00:00Z,0,Kerry A. Dunfee - Comments,"This is a safety related item, seat belts are mandatory and extensions should be furnished for the ones that need them. ",,,,,NHTSA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 86,NHTSA-2000-7580-1296,1,union_alias,803837a1,2007-09-20T04:00:00Z,0,Bryant Larsen - Comments,"I understand that you are accepting comments about the need to have seatbelt's fit everybody, including those above 215 lbs. I would like to say that I think every vehicle manufacturer should be required to make seatbelt extenders available. I am disappointed that Honda chose not to provide extenders. ",,,,,NHTSA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 87,NHTSA-2000-7580-1297,1,union_alias,803837a2,2007-09-25T04:00:00Z,0,Virginia R. Bennett - Comments,"I was insulted by the American Honda company when I learned that I could not get a seat belt extender for the Honda Accord my husband and I had just purchased. They stated seat belt extenders were not safe and therefore would not be available. Our previous car was a Ford Taurus and a seat belt extender was provided to us upon request from a Ford Dealership free of charge. I used this safely for the 5 1/2 years since I requested it, which was most of the time we owned the Taurus. It makes no sense that one is not available from Honda. State law requires me to wear a seat belt and I need about 2-3 inches of additional seat belt length to plug in my seat belt. Most car companies provide a seat belt extender to customers who ask free of charge. All airlines that I know of also provide seat belt extenders. If the law requires I wear a seat belt at all times while in the car on the road and the police can pull me over simply for not wearing a seat belt, I must be provided with a seat belt that fits since I have requested it from Honda. The law requires companies to accommodate any person's disability and I see not being able to fit in the seat belt as a disability when the law requires me to do so. Therefore we need to make a law that requires car companies to make available to any customer who can fit in their car a seat belt that fits them or a seat belt extender that allows them to wear their seat belt. I cannot believe that car companies would not willingly provide this to all their customers. This is discriminatory. Discrimination on the basis of physical characteristics or disabilities is against the law. Please immediately adjust seat belt laws to to require all car companies to allow all people who can fit in their car to have a seat belt that fits them. My other issue is that if every car company would have a universal seat belt there could be just one seat belt extender created that would fit all seat belts and this would eliminate the problem of not being able to wear a seat belt in some cars. Please rush into law the appropriate fitting of all auto customers who can fit in the car with seat belt extenders to fit them. ",,,,,NHTSA-2007:2007-01-01:2007-12-31 88,NHTSA-2002-11419-0411-0001,1,keep_both_alias,80391206,,,,,,,,,NHTSA-2003:2003-01-01:2003-12-31 89,NHTSA-2002-11419-0411-0001,2,keep_both_alias,80391346,,,,,,,,,NHTSA-2003:2003-01-01:2003-12-31 90,NHTSA-2002-11419-0411-0002,1,keep_both_alias,80391207,,,,,,,,,NHTSA-2003:2003-01-01:2003-12-31 91,NHTSA-2002-11419-0411-0002,2,keep_both_alias,80391347,,,,,,,,,NHTSA-2003:2003-01-01:2003-12-31 92,NHTSA-2002-11419-17934-0001,1,keep_both_alias,8038b528,,,,,,,,,NHTSA-2003:2003-01-01:2003-12-31 93,NHTSA-2002-11419-17934-0001,2,keep_both_alias,8038b689,,,,,,,,,NHTSA-2003:2003-01-01:2003-12-31 94,NHTSA-2002-11419-17934-0002,1,keep_both_alias,8038b529,,,,,,,,,NHTSA-2003:2003-01-01:2003-12-31 95,NHTSA-2002-11419-17934-0002,2,keep_both_alias,8038b68a,,,,,,,,,NHTSA-2003:2003-01-01:2003-12-31 96,NHTSA-2002-11419-17934-0003,1,keep_both_alias,8038b52a,,,,,,,,,NHTSA-2003:2003-01-01:2003-12-31 97,NHTSA-2002-11419-17934-0003,2,keep_both_alias,8038b68b,,,,,,,,,NHTSA-2003:2003-01-01:2003-12-31 98,NHTSA-2002-11419-17934-0004,1,keep_both_alias,8038b52b,,,,,,,,,NHTSA-2003:2003-01-01:2003-12-31 99,NHTSA-2002-11419-17934-0004,2,keep_both_alias,8038b68c,,,,,,,,,NHTSA-2003:2003-01-01:2003-12-31 100,NHTSA-2002-11419-17934-0005,1,keep_both_alias,8038b52c,,,,,,,,,NHTSA-2003:2003-01-01:2003-12-31