### 69030 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2010 / Proposed Rules

he or she signs a form on which the TSP requests spousal information, including a spouse from whom the participant is legally separated, and a person with whom the participant is living in a relationship that constitutes a common law marriage in the jurisdiction in which they live. Where a participant is seeking to reclaim an account that has been forfeited pursuant to 5 CFR 1650.16, spouse also means the person to whom the participant was married on the withdrawal deadline. For purposes of 5 CFR 1651.5 and 5 CFR 1651.19, spouse also means the person to whom the participant was married on the date of the participant’s death.

* * * * *

Uniformed services beneficiary participant account means a beneficiary participant account that is established with a death benefit payment from a TSP account to which contributions were made by or on behalf of a member of the uniformed services.

* * * * * [FR Doc. 2010–28320 Filed 11–9–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6760–01–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2010–1109; Directorate Identifier 2010–NM–155–AD]** 

**RIN 2120–AA64**

**Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Model CL–600–2C10 (Regional Jet**  **Series 700, 701, & 702) Airplanes, Model CL–600–2D15 (Regional Jet**  **Series 705) Airplanes, and Model CL– 600–2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900)**  **Airplanes**

**AGENCY :**  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

**ACTION :**  Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

**SUMMARY :**  We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the products listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:
Rudder Travel Limiter (RTL) return spring, part number (P/N) E0650–069–2750S, failed prior to completion of the required endurance test. In addition, the replacement RTL return spring, P/N 670–93465–1 * * * was found to be susceptible to chafing on the primary actuator, which could also result in eventual dormant spring failure. There are two return springs in the RTL and if both springs failed, a subsequent mechanical disconnect of the RTL components would result in an unannunciated failure of the RTL. This, in turn, would permit an increase of rudder authority beyond normal structural limits and, in the event of a strong rudder input, controllability of the aeroplane could be affected.
* * * * *

The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

**DATES :**  We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 27,
2010.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may send comments by any of the following methods:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

• Fax: (202) 493–2251.

• Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–40, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 Co ˆ te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Que  ́ bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone 514–855–5000; fax 514–855–7401; e-mail thd.crj@aero.bombardier.com; Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. Examining the AD Docket

You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is in the **ADDRESSES** section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Cesar Gomez, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE–171, FAA, New York Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; telephone (516) 228– 7318; fax (516) 794–5531.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 
Comments Invited

We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the

**ADDRESSES** section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2010–1109; Directorate Identifier 2010–NM–155–AD ’’ at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD based on those comments.

We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF–2010–18, dated June 16, 2010 (referred to after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’ ), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states:
Rudder Travel Limiter (RTL) return spring, part number (P/N) E0650–069–2750S, failed prior to completion of the required endurance test. In addition, the replacement RTL return spring, P/N 670–93465–1 (see Note) was found to be susceptible to chafing on the primary actuator, which could also result in eventual dormant spring failure. There are two return springs in the RTL and if both springs failed, a subsequent mechanical disconnect of the RTL components would result in an unannunciated failure of the RTL. This, in turn, would permit an increase of rudder authority beyond normal structural limits and, in the event of a strong rudder input, controllability of the aeroplane could be affected.

Note: RTL return springs, P/N 670–93465– 1, were installed in production aeroplanes serial number 10266 (CL–600–2C10) and 15182 (CL–600–2D24) respectively and were introduced in-service by [Bombardier] Service Bulletin (SB) 670BA–27–047. SB 670BA–27–047 has since been superseded by [Bombardier] SB 670BA–27–055. This directive mandates repetitive [detailed] inspection of the RTL [for broken] return springs and [damage through the casing, or chafing of the casing of the] primary actuator, with replacement of parts as necessary.


### 69031 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2010 / Proposed Rules

Corrective actions include replacing any broken return springs with new return springs, repairing any chafing of the primary actuator on its casing, and replacing any primary actuator that has damage through its casing with a new actuator. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

Bombardier, Inc. has issued Service Bulletin 670BA–27–055, Revision A, dated August 6, 2010. The actions described in this service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI. FAA’s Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information provided in the MCAI and related service information.

We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are highlighted in a Note within the proposed AD. Costs of Compliance

Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD would affect about 477 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 2 work-hours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $81,090, or $170 per product. Authority for This Rulemaking

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA’s authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. ‘‘ Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, ’’ describes in more detail the scope of the Agency’s authority.

We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in ‘‘ Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. ’’ Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings

We 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. Is not a ‘‘ significant rule’’ under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and

3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

**PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES** 

1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

**§ 39.13 [Amended]**

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new AD:
Bombardier, Inc.: Docket No. FAA–2010– 1109; Directorate Identifier 2010–NM– 155–AD.

Comments Due Date

(a) We must receive comments by December 27, 2010.

Affected ADs

(b) None.
Applicability

(c) This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. Model CL–600–2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702) airplanes, serial numbers 10003 and subsequent; and Model CL–600–2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) and Model CL–600– 2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, serial numbers 15001 and subsequent; certificated in any category.
Subject

(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27: Flight controls.

Reason

(e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) states: Rudder Travel Limiter (RTL) return spring, part number (P/N) E0650–069–2750S, failed prior to completion of the required endurance test. In addition, the replacement RTL return spring, P/N 670–93465–1 * * * was found to be susceptible to chafing on the primary actuator, which could also result in eventual dormant spring failure. There are two return springs in the RTL and if both springs failed, a subsequent mechanical disconnect of the RTL components would result in an unannunciated failure of the RTL. This, in turn, would permit an increase of rudder authority beyond normal structural limits and, in the event of a strong rudder input, controllability of the aeroplane could be affected.
* * * * * Compliance

(f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done. Initial Inspections and Replacement/ Repair

(g) For airplanes that have accumulated 4,000 or less total flight hours as of the effective date of this AD: Before the accumulation of 6,000 total flight hours, do a detailed inspection of the RTL for broken return springs and damage through the casing, or chafing of the casing of the primary actuator, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–27–055, Revision A, dated August 6, 2010. Before further


### 69032 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2010 / Proposed Rules

flight, replace any broken return springs with new springs, and repair or replace with a new actuator any chafed or damaged primary actuator, as applicable, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–27– 055, Revision A, dated August 6, 2010. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 6,000 flight hours.

(h) For airplanes that have accumulated more than 4,000 total flight hours as of the effective date of this AD: Within 2,000 flight hours after the effective date of this AD, do a detailed inspection of the RTL for broken return springs and damage through the casing, or chafing of the casing of the primary actuator, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–27– 055, Revision A, dated August 6, 2010. Before further flight, replace any broken return springs with new springs, and repair or replace any chafed or damaged primary actuator with a new actuator, as applicable, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–27– 055, Revision A, dated August 6, 2010. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 6,000 flight hours. Credit for Actions Accomplished in Accordance With Previous Service Information

(i) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD in accordance with Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–27–055, dated May 11, 2010, are considered acceptable for compliance with the corresponding actions specified in this AD.

FAA AD Differences

Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

(j) The following provisions also apply to this AD:

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE–170, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; telephone 516–228–7300; fax 516–794– 5531. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority (or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service.

(3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120–
0056.

Related Information

(k) Refer to MCAI Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF–2010–18, dated June 16, 2010; and Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA–27–055, Revision A, dated August 6, 2010; for related information.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 2, 2010. Dionne Palermo, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–28338 Filed 11–9–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE**

**Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers** 

**33 CFR Part 334**

**Naval Surface Warfare Center, Potomac River, Dahlgren, VA; Danger**  **Zone**

**AGENCY :**  United States Army Corps of Engineers, Department of Defense.

**ACTION :**  Notice of proposed rulemaking and request for comments.

**SUMMARY :**  The Corps of Engineers is proposing to amend an existing permanent danger zone in the waters of the Upper Machodoc Creek and the Potomac River in the vicinity of Dahlgren in King George County, Virginia. The Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren conducts research, development, testing and evaluation of national defense systems on the Potomac River Test Range. Many of the tests are hazardous operations presenting a danger to persons or property in the danger zone. The proposed amendment is necessary to protect the public from hazardous operations such as firing large and small caliber guns and projectiles, aerial bombing, use of directed energy and operating manned or unmanned watercraft. The proposed amendment adds a 100-yard buffer to the Middle Danger Zone to prevent public contact with unexploded ordnance along the shoreline of Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren within this zone.

**DATES :**  Written comments must be submitted on or before December 10,
2010.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may submit comments, identified by docket number COE– 2010–0038, by any of the following methods:

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

E-mail: david.b.olson@usace.army.mil. Include the docket number, COE–2010–0038, in the subject line of the message.

Mail: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Attn: CECW–CO–R (David B. Olson), 441 G Street, NW., Washington, DC
20314–1000.

Hand Delivery/Courier: Due to security requirements, we cannot receive comments by hand delivery or courier.

Instructions: Direct your comments to docket number COE–2010–0038. All comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available on-line at http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the commenter indicates that the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI, or otherwiseprotected, through regulations.gov or email. The regulations.gov Web site is an anonymous access system, which means we will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail directly to the Corps without going through regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic