17630 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

findings and conclusions as to whether 

FHFA made a demand that was 

substantially in excess of the decision in 

the underlying adversary adjudication 

and that was unreasonable when 

compared with that decision; and, if at 

issue, whether the applicant has 

committed a willful violation of the law 

or otherwise acted in bad faith, or 

whether special circumstances would 

make the award unjust. 

(e) In decisions on applications filed 

pursuant to § 1203.4(b), the adjudicative 

officer must include written findings 

and conclusions as to whether the 

applicant is a prevailing party and 

whether the position of FHFA was 

substantially justified; and, if at issue, 

whether the applicant unduly 

protracted or delayed the underlying 

adversary adjudication or whether 

special circumstance make the award 

unjust. 

§ 1203.27 Review by FHFA. 

Within 30 days after the adjudicative 

officer issues an initial decision under 

§ 1203.26, either the applicant or agency 

counsel may request the Director to 

review the initial decision of the 

adjudicative officer. The Director may 

also decide, at his or her discretion, to 

review the initial decision. If review is 

ordered, the Director must issue a final 

decision on the application for award or 

remand the application for award to the 

adjudicative officer for further 

proceedings under § 1203.25. 

§ 1203.28 Judicial review. 

Any party, other than the United 

States, that is dissatisfied with the final 

decision on an application for award of 

fees and expenses under this part may 

seek judicial review as provided in 5 

U.S.C. 504(c)(2). 

§ 1203.29 Payment of award. 

To receive payment of an award of 

fees and other expenses granted under 

this part, the applicant must submit a 

copy of the final decision that grants the 

award and a certification that the 

applicant will not seek review of the 

decision in the United States courts to 

the Director, Federal Housing Finance 

Agency, 1700 G Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20552. FHFA must pay 

the amount awarded to the applicant 

within 60 days of receipt of the 

submission of the copy of the final 

decision and the certification, unless 

judicial review of the award has been 

sought by any party to the proceedings. 

CHAPTER XVII—OFFICE OF FEDERAL 

HOUSING ENTERPRISE OVERSIGHT, 

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN 

DEVELOPMENT 

PART 1705—[REMOVED] 

2. Remove part 1705. 

Dated: April 1, 2010. 

Edward J. DeMarco, 

Acting Director, Federal Housing Finance 

Agency. 

[FR Doc. 2010–7889 Filed 4–6–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8070–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0364; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–NE–27–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce 

plc RB211 Trent 700 and Trent 800 

Series Turbofan Engines 

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) 

issued 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: In completing a review of 

Engine Manual repair/acceptance limits 

for titanium compressor shafts, RollsRoyce has found the specified limits to 

be incorrect such that the shot peened 

surface layer at life critical features (the 

axial dovetail slots) may have been 

inadvertently removed in-service. 

Removal of the shot peened layer results 

in increased vulnerability of the part to 

tensile stresses, which could reduce the 

life of the shaft to below the published 

life limits. 

We are proposing this AD to prevent 

failure of the intermediate-pressure (IP) 

and high-pressure (HP) shaft, which 

could result in an overspeed condition, 

possible uncontained disc failure and 

damage to the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by May 24, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and follow 

the instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

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 the 

same as the Mail address provided in 

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

James Lawrence, Aerospace Engineer, 

Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine 

and Propeller Directorate, 12 New 

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 

01803; e-mail: james.lawrence@faa.gov; 

telephone (781) 238–7176; fax (781) 

238–7199. 

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–2010–0364; Directorate Identifier 

2009–NE–27–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 with FAA 

personnel concerning this proposed AD. 

Using the search function of the Web 

site, anyone can find and read the 

comments in any of our dockets, 

including, if provided, the name of the 

individual who sent the comment (or 

signed the comment on behalf of an 

association, business, labor union, etc.). 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 17631 

You may review the DOT’s complete 

Privacy Act Statement in the Federal 

Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 

FR 19477–78). 

Discussion 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2009–0021 

(Corrected February 9, 2009), dated 

February 6, 2009 (referred to after this 

as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe 

condition for the specified products. 

The MCAI states: 

In completing a review of Engine Manual 

repair/acceptance limits for titanium 

compressor shafts, Rolls-Royce has found the 

specified limits to be incorrect such that the 

shot peened surface layer at life critical 

features (the axial dovetail slots) may have 

been inadvertently removed in-service. 

Removal of the shot peened layer results in 

increased vulnerability of the part to tensile 

stresses, which could reduce the life of the 

shaft to below the published life limits. The 

acceptable limits for material loss on these 

surfaces have now been corrected in the 

Engine Manual. 

This AD identifies shafts for which such 

dressing operations have been known to have 

been carried out and requires that an 

inspection for compliance with the corrected 

Engine Manual limits be accomplished and 

that the shafts be dispositioned accordingly. 

You may obtain further information by 

examining the MCAI in the AD docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

Rolls-Royce plc has issued Alert 

Service Bulletin RB.211–72–AG086, 

dated December 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 This Proposed AD 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of the United 

Kingdom, and is approved for operation 

in the United States. Pursuant to our 

bilateral agreement with the United 

Kingdom, 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 

provided by EASA and determined the 

unsafe condition exists and is likely to 

exist or develop on other products of the 

same type design. 

Costs of Compliance 

Based on the service information, we 

estimate that this proposed AD would 

affect about 12 products of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it would take 

about 8 work-hours per product to 

comply with this proposed AD. The 

average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. 

Required parts would cost about 

$15,000 per product. Based on these 

figures, we estimate the cost of the 

proposed AD on U.S. operators to be 

$188,160. Our cost estimate is exclusive 

of possible warranty coverage. 

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, 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: 

Rolls-Royce plc: Docket No. FAA–2010– 

0364; Directorate Identifier 2009–NE– 

27–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by May 24, 

2010. 

Affected Airworthiness Directives (ADs) 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Rolls-Royce plc 

model (RR) RB211 Trent 768–60, 772–60, 

772B–60, 875–17, 877–17, 884–17, 884B–17, 

892–17, 892B–17, and 895–17 turbofan 

engines that have a compressor shaft listed 

by part number and serial number in Table 

1 of this AD. These engines are installed on, 

but not limited to, Airbus A330 series and 

Boeing 777 series airplanes. 

Reason 

(d) This AD results from a review of engine 

manual repair/acceptance limits for titanium 

compressor shafts by RR. We are issuing this 

AD to prevent failure of the intermediatepressure (IP) and high-pressure (HP) shaft, 

which could result in an overspeed 

condition, possible uncontained disc failure 

and damage to the airplane. 

Actions and Compliance 

(e) Unless already done, do the following 

actions. 

(1) Perform a one-time, piece-part, fullfocused inspection of the IP and HP 

compressor shafts listed by part number and 

serial number in Table 1 of this AD before 

exceeding the compliance period specified in 

Table 1 of this AD. 

(2) Guidance on full-focused inspections 

and acceptance limits can be found in the 

current, applicable RR engine manual. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

17632 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 66 / Wednesday, April 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1—LIST OF AFFECTED SHAFTS

Engine series Affected component Part No. Shaft serial No. 

Compliance 

period 

(flight cycles in 

service after 

December 4, 

2008.) 

Trent 800 ................................ 1–8 IP Compressor Shaft ...... FK24100 ................................ MW0115238 ........................... 750 

Trent 800 ................................ 1–4 HP Compressor Shaft ..... FK32580 ................................ MW0115512 ........................... 750 

Trent 800 ................................ 1–4 HP Compressor Shaft ..... FK32580 ................................ MW0004708 ........................... 2000 

Trent 800 ................................ 1–4 HP Compressor Shaft ..... FK32580 ................................ MW00063868 ......................... 2500 

Trent 800 ................................ 1–8 IP Compressor Shaft ...... FK24100 ................................ DN65507 ................................ 2500 

Trent 800 ................................ 1–8 IP Compressor Shaft ...... FK24100 ................................ DN65158 ................................ 2500 

Trent 800 ................................ 1–4 HP Compressor Shaft ..... FK32580 ................................ MW0125467 ........................... 3500 

Trent 800 ................................ 1–4 HP Compressor Shaft ..... FW11590 ............................... DN65189 ................................ 3500 

Trent 800 ................................ 1–8 IP Compressor Shaft ...... FK24100 ................................ MW0091518 ........................... 3500 

Trent 800 ................................ 1–8 IP Compressor Shaft ...... FK24100 ................................ MW0126365 ........................... 3500 

Trent 800 ................................ 1–8 IP Compressor Shaft ...... FK24100 ................................ DN66422 ................................ 4750 

Trent 800 ................................ 1–8 IP Compressor Shaft ...... FK24100 ................................ MW0203314 ........................... 4750 

Trent 700 ................................ 1–8 IP Compressor Shaft ...... FK22279 ................................ DN63228 ................................ 3250 

Trent 700 ................................ 1–8 IP Compressor Shaft ...... FK26048 ................................ MW0026046 ........................... 4500 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, Engine Certification 

Office, FAA, has the authority to approve 

AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the 

procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

Related Information 

(g) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness 

Directive 2009–0021 (Corrected 09 February, 

2009), dated February 6, 2009, for related 

information. 

(h) Contact James Lawrence, Aerospace 

Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, 

Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New 

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 

01803; e-mail: james.lawrence@faa.gov; 

telephone (781) 238–7176; fax (781) 238– 

7199, for more information about this AD. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

March 31, 2010. 

Peter A. White, 

Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–7830 Filed 4–6–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0342; Directorate 

Identifier 2002–NE–08–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; BombardierRotax GmbH Type 912 F, 912 S, and 

914 F Series Reciprocating Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to 

supersede an existing airworthiness 

directive (AD) for certain serial numbers 

(S/Ns) of Bombardier-Rotax GmbH type 

912 F and 914 F series reciprocating 

engines. That AD currently requires 

initial and repetitive visual inspections 

of the engine crankcase for cracks. This 

proposed AD would require those same 

inspections, would add the 912 S series 

to the affected population, add a test 

procedure to determine the engine 

suitability for a special flight permit, 

and would change applicability from 

engine S/N to crankcase S/N. This 

proposed AD results from an increase in 

the affected crankcase population. We 

are proposing this AD to prevent oil loss 

caused by cracks in the engine 

crankcase, which could lead to in-flight 

failure of the engine and forced landing. 

DATES: We must receive any comments 

on this proposed AD by June 7, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following 

addresses to comment on this proposed 

AD. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and follow 

the instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

Contact BRP–Rotax GmbH & Co. KG, 

Welser Strasse 32, A–4623 Gunskirchen, 

Austria, for the service information 

identified in this proposed AD. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Richard Woldan, Aerospace Engineer, 

Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine 

and Propeller Directorate, 12 New 

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 

01803–5299; telephone (781) 238–7136; 

fax (781) 238–7199. 

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–2010–0342; Directorate Identifier 

2002–NE–08–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 with FAA 

personnel concerning this proposed AD. 

Using the search function of the Web 

site, anyone can find and read the 

comments in any of our dockets, 

including, if provided, the name of the 

individual who sent the comment (or 

signed the comment on behalf of an 

association, business, labor union, etc.). 

You may review the DOT’s complete 

Privacy Act Statement in the Federal 

Register published on April 11, 2000 

(65 FR 19477–78). 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS