2826 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

risk or penalize institutions with 

programs that present higher risks? 

3. How should the FDIC measure and 

assess whether an institution’s board of 

directors is effectively overseeing the 

design and implementation of the 

institution’s compensation program? 

4. As an alternative to the FDIC’s 

contemplated approach (see q. 1), 

should the FDIC consider the use of 

quantifiable measures of 

compensation—such as ratios of 

compensation to some specified 

variable—that relate to the institution’s 

health or performance? If so, what 

measure(s) and what variables would be 

appropriate? 

5. Should the effort to price the risk 

posed to the DIF by certain 

compensation plans be directed only 

toward larger institutions; institutions 

that engage only in certain types of 

activities, such as trading; or should it 

include all insured depository 

institutions? 

6. How large (that is, how many basis 

points) would an adjustment to the 

initial risk-based assessment rate of an 

institution need to be in order for the 

FDIC to have an effective influence on 

compensation practices? 

7. Should the criteria used to adjust 

the FDIC’s risk-based assessment rates 

apply only to the compensation systems 

of insured depository institutions? 

Under what circumstances should the 

criteria also consider the compensation 

programs of holding companies and 

affiliates? 

8. How should the FDIC’s risk-based 

assessment system be adjusted when an 

employee is paid by both the insured 

depository institution and its related 

holding company or affiliate? 

9. Which employees should be subject 

to the compensation criteria that would 

be used to adjust the FDIC’s risk-based 

assessment rates? For example, should 

the compensation criteria be applicable 

only to executives and those employees 

who are in a position to place the 

institution at significant risk? If the 

criteria should only be applied to 

certain employees, how would one 

identify these employees? 

10. How should compensation be 

defined? 

11. What mix of current compensation 

and deferred compensation would best 

align the interests of employees with the 

long-term risk of the firm? 

12. Employee compensation programs 

commonly provide for bonus 

compensation. Should an adjustment be 

made to risk-based assessment rates if 

certain bonus compensation practices 

are followed, such as: Awarding 

guaranteed bonuses; granting bonuses 

that are greatly disproportionate to 

regular salary; or paying bonuses all-atonce, which does not allow for deferral 

or any later modification? 

13. For the purpose of aligning an 

employee’s interests with those of the 

institution, what would be a reasonable 

period for deferral of the payment of 

variable or bonus compensation? Is the 

appropriate deferral period a function of 

the amount of the award or of the 

employee’s position within the 

institution (that is, large bonus awards 

or awards for more senior employees 

would be subject to greater deferral)? 

14. What would be a reasonable 

vesting period for deferred 

compensation? 

15. Are there other types of employee 

compensation arrangements that would 

have a greater potential to align the 

incentives of employees with those of 

the firm’s other stakeholders, including 

the FDIC? 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

At this stage of the rulemaking 

process it is difficult to determine with 

precision whether any future 

regulations will impose information 

collection requirements that are covered 

by the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(‘‘PRA’’) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

Following the FDIC’s evaluation of the 

comments received in response to this 

ANPR, the FDIC expects to develop a 

more detailed description regarding 

incorporating employee compensation 

criteria into the risk assessment system, 

and, if appropriate, solicit comment in 

compliance with PRA. 

Dated at Washington, DC, this 12th day of 

January 2010. 

By order of the Board of Directors. 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. 

Robert E. Feldman, 

Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–718 Filed 1–15–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6714–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0040; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–NM–203–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Sicma Aero 

Seat 88xx, 89xx, 90xx, 91xx, 92xx, 

93xx, 95xx, and 96xx Series Passenger 

Seat Assemblies, Installed on Various 

Transport Category 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: 

Cracks have been found on seats [with] 

backrest links P/N (part number) 90–000200– 

104–1 and 90–000200–104–2. These cracks 

can significantly affect the structural integrity 

of seat backrests. 

Failure of the backrest links could result 

in injury to an occupant during 

emergency landing conditions. 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 March 5, 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 Sicma Aero 

Seat, 7, Rue Lucien Coupet, 36100 

ISSOUDUN, France; telephone 33 (0) 2 

54 03 39 39; fax 33 (0) 2 54 03 39 00; 

e-mail: 

customerservices@sicma.zodiac.com; 

Internet: http://www.sicma.zodiac.com/ 

en/. 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 or 425–227–1152. 

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 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 2827 

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: 

Jeffrey Lee, Aerospace Engineer, Boston 

Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 

Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New 

England Executive Park, Burlington, 

Massachusetts 01803; telephone (781) 

238–7161; fax (781) 238–7170. 

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–2010–0040; Directorate Identifier 

2008–NM–203–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 have lengthened the 30-day 

comment period for proposed ADs that 

address MCAI originated by aviation 

authorities of other countries to provide 

adequate time for interested parties to 

submit comments. The comment period 

for these proposed ADs is now typically 

45 days, which is consistent with the 

comment period for domestic transport 

ADs. 

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 

The Direction Generale de l’Aviation 

Civile (DGAC), which is the 

airworthiness authority for France, has 

issued French Airworthiness Directive 

2001–613(AB), dated December 12, 2001 

(referred to after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to 

correct an unsafe condition for the 

specified products. The MCAI states: 

Cracks have been found on seats [with] 

backrest links P/N (part number) 90–000200– 

104–1 and 90–000200–104–2. These cracks 

can significantly affect the structural integrity 

of seat backrests. 

Failure of the backrest links could result 

in injury to an occupant during 

emergency landing conditions. The 

required actions include a general visual 

inspection for cracking of backrest links; 

replacement with new, improved links 

if cracking is found; and eventual 

replacement of all links with new, 

improved links. 

You may obtain further information 

by examining the MCAI in the AD 

docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

Sicma Aero Seat has issued Service 

Bulletin 90–25–013, Issue 3, dated 

December 19, 2001, including Annex 1, 

Issue 1, dated June 26, 2001. 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 611 seats on 4 products of 

U.S. registry. We also estimate that it 

would take about 1 work-hour per seat 

to comply with the basic requirements 

of this proposed AD. The average labor 

rate is $80 per work-hour. Required 

parts would cost about $0 per seat. 

Where the service information lists 

required parts costs that are covered 

under warranty, we have assumed that 

there will be no charge for these costs. 

As we do not control warranty coverage 

for affected parties, some parties may 

incur costs higher than estimated here. 

Based on these figures, we estimate the 

cost of the proposed AD on U.S. 

operators to be $48,880, or $80 per seat. 

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: 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

2828 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

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: 

Sicma Aero Seat: Docket No. FAA–2010– 

0040; Directorate Identifier 2008–NM– 

203–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by March 5, 

2010. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Sicma Aero Seat 

88xx, 89xx, 90xx, 91xx, 92xx, 93xx, 95xx, 

and 96xx series passenger seat assemblies 

identified in Annex 1, Issue 1, dated June 26, 

2001, of Sicma Aero Seat Service Bulletin 

90–25–013, Issue 3, dated December 19, 

2001, that have backrest links having part 

numbers (P/Ns) 90–000200–104–1 and 90– 

000200–104–2; and that are installed on, but 

not limited to, the airplanes identified in 

Table 1 of this AD, certificated in any 

category. This AD does not apply to Sicma 

Aero Seat series 9140, 9166, 9173, 9174, 

9184, 9188, 9196, 91B7, 91B8, 91C0, 91C2, 

91C3, 91C4, 91C5, 9301, and 9501 passenger 

seat assemblies. 

TABLE 1—CERTAIN AFFECTED MODELS

Manufacturer Model 

Airbus ........................................................................................................ A300 Airplanes. 

Airbus ........................................................................................................ A310, A318, A319, A320, A321, A330–200 and A330–300 Series Airplanes. 

ATR—GIE Avions de Transport Re ́gional ................................................ ATR42–200, –300, –320, and –500 Airplanes. 

ATR—GIE Avions de Transport Re ́gional ................................................ ATR72–101, –201, –102, –202, –211, –212, and –212A Airplanes. 

The Boeing Company ............................................................................... 727, 727C, 727–100, 727–100C, 727–200, and 727–200F Series Airplanes. 

The Boeing Company ............................................................................... 737–100, –200, –200C, –300, –400, –500, –600, –700, –700C, –800, 

–900, and –900ER Series Airplanes. 

The Boeing Company ............................................................................... 747–100, 747–100B, 747–100B SUD, 747–200B, 747–200C, 747– 

200F, 747–300, 747–400, 747–400D, 747–400F, 747SR, and 747SP 

Series Airplanes. 

The Boeing Company ............................................................................... 757–200, –200PF, –200CB, and –300 Series Airplanes. 

The Boeing Company ............................................................................... 767–200, –300, –300F, and –400ER Series Airplanes. 

The Boeing Company ............................................................................... 777–200, 777–300, 777–300ER, 777–200LR, and 777F Series Airplanes. 

Bombardier, Inc ........................................................................................ CL–600–1A11 (CL–600), CL–600–2A12 (CL–601), and CL–600–2B16 

(CL–601–3A, CL–601–3R, and CL–604) Airplanes. 

Bombardier, Inc ........................................................................................ CL–600–2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) Airplanes. 

Bombardier, Inc ........................................................................................ CL–600–2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702) Airplanes. 

Bombardier, Inc ........................................................................................ CL–600–2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) Airplanes. 

Bombardier, Inc ........................................................................................ CL–600–2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) Airplanes. 

Bombardier, Inc ........................................................................................ DHC–8–100, DHC–8–200, DHC–8–300, and DHC–8–400 Airplanes. 

Fokker Services B.V ................................................................................. F.27 Mark 050, 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 Airplanes. 

Fokker Services B.V ................................................................................. F.28 Mark 0070, 0100, 1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 Airplanes. 

McDonnell Douglas Corporation .............................................................. DC–8–11, DC–8–12, DC–8–21, DC–8–31, DC–8–32, DC–8–33, DC– 

8–41, DC–8–42, DC–8–43, DC–8–51, DC–8–52, DC–8–53, DC–8– 

55, DC–8F–54, DC–8F–55, DC–8–61, DC–8–62, DC–8–63, DC–8– 

61F, DC–8–62F, DC–8–63F, DC–8–71, DC–8–72, DC–8–73, DC–8– 

71F, DC–8–72F, and DC–8–73F Airplanes. 

McDonnell Douglas Corporation .............................................................. DC–9–11, DC–9–12, DC–9–13, DC–9–14, DC–9–15, DC–9–15F, DC– 

9–21, DC–9–31, DC–9–32, DC–9–32 (VC–9C), DC–9–32F, DC–9– 

33F, DC–9–34, DC–9–34F, DC–9–32F (C–9A, C–9B), DC–9–41, 

DC–9–51, DC–9–81 (MD–81), DC–9–82 (MD–82), DC–9–83 (MD– 

83), and DC–9–87 (MD–87) Airplanes. 

McDonnell Douglas Corporation .............................................................. DC–10–10, DC–10–10F, DC–10–15, DC–10–30, DC–10–30F (KC–10A 

and KDC–10), DC–10–40, and DC–10–40F Airplanes. 

McDonnell Douglas Corporation .............................................................. MD–11 and MD–11F Airplanes. 

Note 1: This AD applies to Sicma Aero Seat 

passenger seat assemblies as installed on any 

airplane, regardless of whether the airplane 

has been otherwise modified, altered, or 

repaired in the area subject to the 

requirements of this AD. For airplanes that 

have been modified, altered, or repaired so 

that the performance of the requirements of 

this AD is affected, the owner/operator must 

request approval for an alternative method of 

compliance according to paragraph (g)(1) of 

this AD. The request should include an 

assessment of the effect of the modification, 

alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition 

addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe 

condition has not been eliminated, the 

request should include specific proposed 

actions to address it. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 25: Equipment/Furnishings. 

Reason 

(e) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states: 

Cracks have been found on seats [with] 

backrest links P/N (part number) 90–000200– 

104–1 and 90–000200–104–2. These cracks 

can significantly affect the structural integrity 

of seat backrests. 

Failure of the backrest links could result in 

injury to an occupant during emergency 

landing conditions. The required actions 

include a general visual inspection for 

cracking of the backrest links; replacement 

with new, improved links if cracking is 

found; and eventual replacement of all links 

with new, improved links. 

Actions and Compliance 

(f) Unless already done, do the following 

actions. 

(1) At the later of the compliance times 

specified in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and (f)(1)(ii) 

of this AD, do a general visual inspection of 

the backrest links having P/Ns 90–000200– 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2010 / Proposed Rules 2829 

104–1 and 90–000200–104–2, in accordance 

with Part One of Sicma Aero Seat Service 

Bulletin 90–25–013, Issue 3, dated December 

19, 2001: 

(i) Before 6,000 flight hours on the backrest 

link since new. 

(ii) Within 900 flight hours or 5 months 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs later. 

(2) If, during the inspection required by 

paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, cracking is found 

between the side of the backrest link and the 

lock-out pin hole but the cracking does not 

pass this lock-out pin hole (refer to Figure 2 

of Sicma Aero Seat Service Bulletin 90–25– 

013, Issue 3, dated December 19, 2001): 

Within 600 flight hours or 3 months after 

doing the inspection, whichever occurs first, 

replace both backrest links of the affected 

seat with new, improved backrest links 

having P/Ns 90–100200–104–1 and 90– 

100200–104–2, in accordance with Part Two 

of Sicma Aero Seat Service Bulletin 90–25– 

013, Issue 3, dated December 19, 2001. 

(3) If, during the inspection required by 

paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, cracking is found 

that passes beyond the lock-out pin hole 

(refer to Figure 2 of Sicma Aero Seat Service 

Bulletin 90–25–013, Issue 3, dated December 

19, 2001): Before further flight, replace both 

backrest links of the affected seat with new, 

improved backrest links having P/Ns 90– 

100200–104–1 and 90–100200–104–2, in 

accordance with Part Two of Sicma Aero Seat 

Service Bulletin 90–25–013, Issue 3, dated 

December 19, 2001. 

(4) If no cracking is found during the 

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

AD: Do the replacement required by 

paragraph (f)(5) of this AD at the compliance 

time specified in paragraph (f)(5) of this AD. 

(5) At the later of the compliance times 

specified in paragraphs (f)(5)(i) and (f)(5)(ii) 

of this AD, replace the links, P/Ns 90– 

000200–104–1 and 90–000200–104–2, with 

new improved links, P/Ns 90–100200–104–1 

and 90–100200–104–2, in accordance with 

Part Two of Sicma Aero Seat Service Bulletin 

90–25–013, Issue 3, dated December 19, 

2001. Doing this replacement for an affected 

passenger seat assembly terminates the 

inspection requirements of paragraph (f)(1) of 

this AD for that passenger seat assembly. 

(i) Before 12,000 flight hours on the 

backrest links, P/Ns 90–000200–104–1 and 

90–000200–104–2, since new. 

(ii) Within 900 flight hours or 5 months 

after the effective date of this AD, whichever 

occurs later. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: The 

MCAI specifies doing repetitive inspections 

for cracking of links having over 12,000 flight 

hours since new until the replacement of the 

link is done. This AD does not include those 

repetitive inspections because we have 

reduced the compliance time for replacing 

those links. This AD requires replacing the 

link before 12,000 flight hours since new or 

within 900 flight hours or 5 months of the 

effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 

latest. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(g) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, Boston Aircraft 

Certification 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: Jeffrey Lee, 

Aerospace Engineer, Boston Aircraft 

Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller 

Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, 

Burlington, Massachusetts 01803; telephone 

(781) 238–7161; fax (781) 238–7170. 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. 

(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 

(h) Refer to MCAI French Airworthiness 

Directive 2001–613(AB), dated December 12, 

2001; and Sicma Aero Seat Service Bulletin 

90–25–013, Issue 3, dated December 19, 

2001, including Annex 1, Issue 1, dated June 

26, 2001; for related information. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 

8, 2010. 

Stephen P. Boyd, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–697 Filed 1–15–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0042; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–NM–010–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Saab AB, 

Saab Aerosystems Model SAAB 340A 

(SAAB/SF340A) and SAAB 340B 

Airplanes Modified in Accordance With 

Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) 

SA00244WI–D, ST00146WI–D, or 

SA984GL–D 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a 

new airworthiness directive (AD) for 

certain Saab AB, Saab Aerosystems 

Model SAAB 340A (SAAB/SF340A) and 

SAAB 340B airplanes. This proposed 

AD would require inspecting the 

fuselage surface for corrosion and 

cracking behind the external adapter 

plate of the antennae installation, and 

repair if necessary. This proposed AD 

results from a report of a crack found 

behind the external adapter plate of the 

antennae during inspection. Similar 

cracking was found on two additional 

airplanes, and extensive corrosion was 

found on one airplane. We are 

proposing this AD to detect and correct 

corrosion and cracking behind the 

external adapter plate of the antennae of 

certain safe-life structure, which could 

result in reduced structural integrity 

and consequent rapid depressurization 

of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by March 5, 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 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS