Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 222 / Thursday, November 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 70623 

14 12 CFR 620.5(i)(2)(i)(B) allows aggregated 

disclosure in the annual report of compensation 

paid to senior officers. 15 12 CFR 620.15 provides for the notice to the 

FCA and shareholders by System banks and 

associations when an institution is not in 

compliance with the minimum permanent capital 

standards required by the FCA. 

senior officer compensation amounts on 

an individual basis to facilitate the 

vote? 14

(15) Should System institutions be 

required to issue current reports on 

events, facts, or circumstances that 

management considers material or 

significant to the operations or financial 

condition of a System institution, 

similar to the notice on changes in 

capital levels described in § 620.15? 15 If 

so, what form should the report take, 

what types of events should be reported, 

and what timeframe would be 

appropriate for its issuance? 

(16) To ensure that certain payments 

to institution directors do not create the 

potential for a conflict of interest, or 

appearance thereof, should payments 

made to System institution directors in 

connection with a restructuring or 

downsizing of the board, or as a result 

of a merger, consolidation or other form 

of institutional reorganization be 

allowed or disallowed? 

(a) Under what circumstances would 

such payments constitute a conflict of 

interest or an appearance thereof? 

(b) If allowed, how and when should 

such payments be disclosed? 

(17) Should FCA remove from 

§§ 620.30(c) and 630.6(a)(3) the ability 

of a board of directors to deny a request 

for resources from its audit committee? 

Dated: November 12, 2010. 

Mary Alice Donner, 

Acting Secretary, Farm Credit Administration 

Board. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29025 Filed 11–17–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6705–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–1152; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–CE–026–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; DORNIER 

LUFTFAHRT GmbH Models Dornier 

228–100, Dornier 228–101, Dornier 

228–200, Dornier 228–201, Dornier 

228–202, and Dornier 228–212 

Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above that would 

supersede an existing AD. 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: 

The TC Holder received from operators, 

whose fleets are operated in demanding 

operating-conditions and with very frequent 

Short Take-Off and Landing (STOL) 

operations, reports of cracks located in the 

web of fuselage frame 19. On 05 February 

2007, EASA issued Airworthiness Directive 

(AD) 2007–0028 which mandated Alert 

Service Bulletin (ASB) 228–266 and required 

an inspection of the frame 19 on all Dornier 

228 aeroplanes. In addition, the TC Holder 

also initiated a flight-test campaign including 

strain measurements as well as finite element 

modelling and fatigue analyses to better 

understand the stress distribution onto the 

frame 19 and the associated structural 

components. 

The results of these investigations 

confirmed that STOL operations diminish 

extensively the fatigue life of the frame 19. 

Fuselage frame 19 supports the rear 

attachment of the Main Landing Gear (MLG). 

This condition, if not corrected, could cause 

rupture of frame 19, leading to subsequent 

collapse of a MLG. 

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 January 3, 2011. 

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 W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact RUAG 

Aerospace Services GmbH, Dornier 228 

Customer Support, P.O. Box 1253, 

82231 Wessling, Germany; telephone: + 

49 (0) 8153–302280; fax: + 49 (0) 8153– 

303030. You may review copies of the 

referenced service information at the 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 

Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. 

For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call 816–329– 

4148. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Management Facility 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 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: Greg 

Davison, Glider Program Manager, FAA, 

Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, 

Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 

telephone: (816) 329–4130; fax: (816) 

329–4090. 

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–2010–1152; Directorate Identifier 

2009–CE–026–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 because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

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 

On May 11, 2007, we issued AD 

2007–11–03, Amendment 39–15060 (72 

FR 28591; May 22, 2007). That AD 

required actions intended to address an 

unsafe condition on the products listed 

above. 

Since we issued AD 2007–11–03, the 

type certificate holder initiated a series 

of flight-test analyses to include strain 

measurements as well as finite element 

modeling and fatigue analyses to better 

understand the stress distribution onto 

frame 19 and the associated structural 

components. The analyses’ findings 

confirmed that extreme short take-off 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
70624 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 222 / Thursday, November 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

and landing operations diminish 

extensively the fatigue life of frame 19. 

Consequently, a structure significant 

item inspection has been added. 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued AD No. 2009– 

0085, dated April 14, 2009 (referred to 

after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an 

unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The MCAI states: 

The TC Holder received from operators, 

whose fleets are operated in demanding 

operating-conditions and with very frequent 

Short Take-Off and Landing (STOL) 

operations, reports of cracks located in the 

web of fuselage frame 19. On 05 February 

2007, EASA issued Airworthiness Directive 

(AD) 2007–0028 which mandated Alert 

Service Bulletin (ASB) 228–266 and required 

an inspection of the frame 19 on all Dornier 

228 aeroplanes. In addition, the TC Holder 

also initiated a flight-test campaign including 

strain measurements as well as finite element 

modelling and fatigue analyses to better 

understand the stress distribution onto the 

frame 19 and the associated structural 

components. 

The results of these investigations 

confirmed that STOL operations diminish 

extensively the fatigue life of the frame 19. 

Fuselage frame 19 supports the rear 

attachment of the Main Landing Gear (MLG). 

This condition, if not corrected, could cause 

rupture of frame 19, leading to subsequent 

collapse of a MLG. 

For the reasons described above, this new 

AD requires installation of reinforcements 

and butt straps on frame 19 at the lower part 

of the fuselage for aeroplanes used in 

operations where this frame may be subject 

to high stress and recurring inspections of 

that frame for all aeroplanes. 

You may obtain further information by 

examining the MCAI in the AD docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

DORNIER LUFTFAHRT GmbH has 

issued: 

• RUAG Alert Service Bulletin No. 

ASB–228–266, dated December 1, 2006; 

and 

• Dornier 228 Time Limits/ 

Maintenance Checks Manual, 

Temporary Revision No. 05–27, dated 

August 4, 2008. 

The actions described in this service 

information are intended to correct the 

unsafe condition identified in the 

MCAI. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of the 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 this State of 

Design Authority, they have notified us 

of the unsafe condition described in the 

MCAI and service information 

referenced above. We are proposing this 

AD because we evaluated all 

information and determined the unsafe 

condition exists and is likely to exist or 

develop on other products of the same 

type design. 

Differences Between This Proposed 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 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

will affect 17 products of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it would take 

about 6 work-hours per product to 

comply with the basic requirements of 

this proposed AD. The average labor 

rate is $85 per work-hour. Required 

parts would cost about $0 per product. 

Based on these figures, we estimate 

the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. 

operators to be $8,670, or $510 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 

removing Amendment 39–15060 (72 FR 

28591; May 22, 2007), and adding the 

following new AD: 

DORNIER LUFTFAHRT GmbH: Docket No. 

FAA–2010–1152; Directorate Identifier 

2009–CE–026–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by January 

3, 2011. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This AD supersedes AD 2007–11–03, 

Amendment 39–15060. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to DORNIER 

LUFTFAHRT GmbH Model Dornier 228–100, 

Dornier 228–101, Dornier 228–200, Dornier 

228–201, Dornier 228–202, and Dornier 228– 

212 airplanes, all serial numbers, that are 

certificated in any category. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 222 / Thursday, November 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 70625 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association of America 

(ATA) Code 53: Fuselage. 

Reason 

(e) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states: 

The TC Holder received from operators, 

whose fleets are operated in demanding 

operating-conditions and with very frequent 

Short Take-Off and Landing (STOL) 

operations, reports of cracks located in the 

web of fuselage frame 19. On 05 February 

2007, EASA issued Airworthiness Directive 

(AD) 2007–0028 which mandated Alert 

Service Bulletin (ASB) 228–266 and required 

an inspection of the frame 19 on all Dornier 

228 aeroplanes. In addition, the TC Holder 

also initiated a flight-test campaign including 

strain measurements as well as finite element 

modelling and fatigue analyses to better 

understand the stress distribution onto the 

frame 19 and the associated structural 

components. 

The results of these investigations 

confirmed that STOL operations diminish 

extensively the fatigue life of the frame 19. 

Fuselage frame 19 supports the rear 

attachment of the Main Landing Gear (MLG). 

This condition, if not corrected, could cause 

rupture of frame 19, leading to subsequent 

collapse of a MLG. 

For the reasons described above, this new 

AD requires installation of reinforcements 

and butt straps on frame 19 at the lower part 

of the fuselage for aeroplanes used in 

operations where this frame may be subject 

to high stress and recurring inspections of 

that frame for all aeroplanes. 

Actions and Compliance 

(f) Unless already done, do the following 

actions: 

(1) For all airplanes, within 25 hours timein-service (TIS) after June 26, 2007 (the 

effective date of AD 2007–11–03), visually 

inspect the affected fuselage frame 19 using 

the instructions in Dornier 228 RUAG Alert 

Service Bulletin No. ASB–228–266, dated 

December 1, 2006. 

(2) If any crack is found during the 

inspection required in paragraph (f)(1) of this 

AD, before further flight, contact RUAG 

Aerospace Services GmbH, Dornier 228 

Customer Support, P.O. Box 1253, 82231 

Wessling, Germany; telephone: +49-(0)8153– 

30–2280; fax: +49-(0)8153–30–3030; e-mail: 

customersupport.dornier228@ruag.com for 

FAA-approved repair instructions and 

incorporate the repair on the airplane. 

(3) After accomplishment of paragraph 

(f)(1) or (f)(2) of this AD, as applicable, 

repetitively thereafter do Structural 

Significant Item (SSI) Task No. 53.37 of 

Structure Inspection Program of Dornier 228 

Time Limits/Maintenance Checks Manual, 

Temporary Revision No. 05–27, dated August 

4, 2008, at intervals not to exceed 2,400 

landings or 72 months, whichever occurs 

first. 

(g) If the number of landings is unknown, 

calculate the compliance times of landings in 

this AD by using hours TIS. Multiply the 

number of hours TIS by 0.8 to come up with 

the number of landings. For the purpose of 

this AD: 

(1) 800 landings equals 1,000 hours TIS; 

and 

(2) 1,600 landings equals 2,000 hours TIS. 

FAA AD Differences 

NOTE: This AD differs from the MCAI and/ 

or service information as follows: 

(1) The MCAI requires different 

compliance times for airplanes operated in 

different conditions. The FAA is not able to 

enforce compliance times based on airplane 

operations since there is no way of 

determining the amount of operations in 

different conditions. To ensure the unsafe 

condition is addressed adequately and 

timely, we are requiring the inspection for all 

airplanes following a guideline combining 

number of landings and life limits. 

(2) The service information allows flight 

with known cracks provided they do not 

exceed a certain limit. FAA policy does not 

allow flight with cracks in primary structure. 

Since the fuselage is considered primary 

structure, we are mandating repair before 

further flight after any crack is found. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(h) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Office, 

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: Greg Davison, Glider Program Manager, 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, 

Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 

telephone: (816) 329–4130; fax: (816) 329– 

4090. Before using any approved AMOC on 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector 

(PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District 

Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local 

FSDO. 

(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, 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 current 

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 

be approximately 5 minutes per response, 

including the time for reviewing instructions, 

completing and reviewing the collection of 

information. All responses to this collection 

of information are mandatory. Comments 

concerning the accuracy of this burden and 

suggestions for reducing the burden should 

be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence 

Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn: 

Information Collection Clearance Officer, 

AES–200. 

Related Information 

(i) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety 

Agency (EASA) AD No.: 2009–0085, dated 

April 14, 2009; RUAG Alert Service Bulletin 

No. ASB–228–266, dated December 1, 2006; 

and Dornier 228 Time Limits/Maintenance 

Checks Manual, Temporary Revision No. 

05–27, dated August 4, 2008, for related 

information. For service information related 

to this AD, contact RUAG Aerospace Services 

GmbH, Dornier 228 Customer Support, P.O. 

Box 1253, 82231 Wessling, Germany; 

telephone: + 49 (0) 8153–302280; fax: + 49 

(0) 8153–303030. You may review copies of 

the referenced service information at the 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, 

Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information 

on the availability of this material at the 

FAA, call 816–329–4148. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on 

November 10, 2010. 

Earl Lawrence, 

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29110 Filed 11–17–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employee Benefits Security 

Administration 

29 CFR Part 2520 

RIN 1210–AB18 

Annual Funding Notice for Defined 

Benefit Plans 

AGENCY: Employee Benefits Security 

Administration, Labor. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This document contains a 

proposed regulation that, on adoption, 

would implement the annual funding 

notice requirement in the Employee 

Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 

(ERISA), as amended by the Pension 

Protection Act of 2006 (PPA) and the 

Worker, Retiree, and Employer Recovery 

Act of 2008 (WRERA). As amended, 

section 101(f) of ERISA generally 

requires the administrators of all 

defined benefit plans, not just 

multiemployer defined benefit plans, to 

furnish an annual funding notice to the 

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

(PBGC), participants, beneficiaries, and 

certain other persons. A funding notice 

must include, among other information, 

the plan’s funding target attainment 

percentage or funded percentage, as 

applicable, over a period of time, as well 

as other information relevant to the 

plan’s funded status. This document 

also contains proposed conforming 

amendments to other regulations under 

ERISA, such as the summary annual 

report regulation, which became 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS