### 1560 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules

petitioner states it has been working with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency since 2002 to improve public information about existing tritium exit signs. Background and Summary of Petitioner’s Assertions

The petitioner performed an evaluation on the lack of control of tritium exit signs and contamination of landfill leachate (the final report ‘‘ Lack of Tritium Exit Signs Control and Contamination of Landfill Leachate, ’’ dated July 2009, is included as part of the petition), and stated that it found that the majority of unaccounted for tritium exit signs are disposed of in solid waste landfills where they become potential sources of groundwater and surface water contamination. The petitioner states that a minority of tritium exit signs are returned to the manufacturer for recycling, or disposed of as low-level radioactive waste.

The petitioner asserts that from the standpoint of the existing market, specific changes to new tritium exit signs will improve recognition and thus accountability. The labeling should be in several locations on the sign, with a larger font, and the expiration date should be distinctly legible to a fire or building inspector without taking down the sign. The petitioner also states that manufacturers do not always demonstrate accountability in dispensing exit signs to the proper recipients, and recipients are not informed of proper ownership and regulatory requirements provided in NUREG–1556, Vol 16, Appendix L, and 10 CFR 31.5 of the NRC’s regulations. The online vendors do not always highlight that tritium is radioactive and that it has special ‘‘general licensing ’’ requirements. The petitioner asserts that radiation trefoil should be displayed on the front and back of advertisements.

The petitioner believes that, given the recent Walmart experience with the tritium exit signs, general licensing is successful only when the user understands that these devices are radioactive and subject to controls. Also, in light of the current general lack of controls, specific licensee manufacturers should be responsible for informing customers of the proper disposal of expired and used tritium exit signs. From the standpoint of solid waste management officials, the petitioner believes that the NRC should exercise its full regulatory authority to prevent the disposal of tritium exit signs in landfills.

The petitioner further asserts that, though not in NRC’s purview, advances in photo-luminescent technology over the past decade have demonstrated effective alternate technology for places without electricity. Efficient Light Emitting Diodes with backup batteries are being used where electricity is available. These technologies togetherreplace the need for tritium selfluminescent exit signs. The petitioner states that solid waste management officials simply want to stop tritium exit sign disposal in landfills. Proposed Action

The petitioner requests that the NRC revise its regulations and/or guidance to improve the labeling and accountability of tritium exit signs. The petitioner states that it would ideally like to see tritium exit sign technology immediately replaced by alternative technologies.

The petitioner requests that NRC revise its regulations and/or guidance to

state:

1. The labeling should be in several locations on the sign, with larger font.

2. An expiration date should be distinctly legible to a fire or building inspector without taking down the sign.

3. The radiation trefoil should be displayed on the front and back of advertisements.

Also, the petitioner recommends a national collection effort with distinct milestones and goals should be undertaken to consolidate all expired and disused tritium exit signs. The petitioner requests that NRC organize a meeting with ASTSWMO and all interested stakeholders to set a new path forward on this issue.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of January 2010.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 2010–347 Filed 1–11–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 7590–01–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2009–1254; Directorate Identifier 2009–NM–040–AD]** 

**RIN 2120–AA64**

**Airworthiness Directives; BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model**  **BAe 146 and Avro 146–RJ70A, 146– RJ85A, and 146–RJ100A 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: During the removal of the wing removable leading edge on a BAe 146 aircraft for a repair (not related to the subject addressed by this AD), corrosion was found on the wing fixed leading edge structure. The investigation determined that the existing scheduled environmental and fatigue inspections would not have detected the corrosion or fatigue damage. Corrosion or fatigue damage in this area, if not detected and corrected, could lead to degradation of the structural integrity of the wing.

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 February 26, 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 BAE Systems Regional Aircraft, 13850 McLearen Road, Herndon, Virginia 20171; telephone 703–736–1080; e-mail raebusiness@baesystems.com; Internet http://www.baesystems.com/Businesses/ RegionalAircraft/index.htm. 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,


### 1561 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules

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 :**  Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–1175; fax (425) 227–1149.

**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–2009–1254; Directorate Identifier 2009–NM–040–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 European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA Airworthiness Directive 2009–0014, dated January 21, 2009 (referred to after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’ ), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states:

During the removal of the wing removable leading edge on a BAe 146 aircraft for a repair (not related to the subject addressed by this AD), corrosion was found on the wing fixed leading edge structure. The investigation determined that the existing scheduled environmental and fatigue inspections would not have detected the corrosion or fatigue damage.

Corrosion or fatigue damage in this area, if not detected and corrected, could lead to degradation of the structural integrity of the wing.

For the reason described above, this AD requires repetitive inspections of the wing fixed leading edge and front spar structure for corrosion and/or fatigue damage [e.g., cracking] and repair, depending on findings. There are two alternative inspection methods: Method 1 is a combination of a detailed visual inspection and a visual inspection; Method 2 is a detailed visual inspection. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited has issued Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57–072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 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 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 1 product of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 12 work-hours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $960. 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,


### 1562 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules

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:
BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited: Docket No. FAA–2009–1254; Directorate Identifier 2009–NM–040–AD.

Comments Due Date

(a) We must receive comments by February 26, 2010.

Affected ADs

(b) None.
Applicability

(c) This AD applies to BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Model BAe 146–100A, –200A, and –300A series airplanes; and Model Avro 146–RJ70A, 146–RJ85A, and 146–RJ100A airplanes; certificated in any category, all serial numbers.
Subject

(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57: Wings.

Reason

(e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) states:

During the removal of the wing removable leading edge on a BAe 146 aircraft for a repair (not related to the subject addressed by this AD), corrosion was found on the wing fixed leading edge structure. The investigation determined that the existing scheduled environmental and fatigue inspections would not have detected the corrosion or fatigue damage.

Corrosion or fatigue damage in this area, if not detected and corrected, could lead to degradation of the structural integrity of the wing.

For the reason described above, this AD requires repetitive inspections of the wing fixed leading edge and front spar structure for corrosion and/or fatigue damage [ e.g., cracking] and repair, depending on findings. There are two alternative inspection methods: Method 1 is a combination of a detailed visual inspection and a visual inspection; Method 2 is a detailed visual inspection.
Actions and Compliance

(f) Unless already done, do the following actions.

(1) At the applicable time identified in paragraph (f)(1)(i), (f)(1)(ii), or (f)(1)(iii) of this AD: Perform a detailed visual inspection and visual inspection (Method 1) or a detailed visual inspection (Method 2) for cracking and corrosion of the wing fixed leading edge and front spar structure, in accordance with paragraph 2.C. or 2.D., as applicable, of the Accomplishment Instructions of BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57– 072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008.

(i) For airplanes with less than 9 years since date of issuance of the original airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original export certificate of airworthiness as of the effective date of this AD: Within 18 months after the effective date of this AD.

(ii) For airplanes with 9 years or more, but less than 15 years, since date of issuance of the original airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original export certificate of airworthiness as of the effective date of this AD: Within 18 months after the effective date of this AD or within 16 years since date of issuance of the original airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original export certificate of airworthiness, whichever occurs first.

(iii) For airplanes with 15 years or more since entry into service as of the effective date of this AD: Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD.

Note 1: Where BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57– 072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008, refers to a ‘‘visual inspection, ’’ this term describes an inspection using visual inspection equipment as defined in Appendix 3 of the service bulletin. In other BAE SYSTEMS instructions for continued airworthiness, including the MPD and the CPCP, such an inspection is referred to as a

‘‘ Special Detailed Inspection’’ (SDI).

Note 2: At the discretion of the aircraft owner/operator, corrosion protection may be embodied on those areas subject to a detailed visual inspection, in accordance with paragraph 2.E. or paragraph 2.F. of BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57–072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008. Embodiment of enhanced corrosion protection in accordance with paragraph 2.E. BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57–072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008, allows the interval of the repetitive inspection (as required by paragraph (f)(2) of this AD) to be extended in the area(s) of application in accordance with paragraph (f)(2)(i) or (f)(2)(ii) of this AD, as applicable.

(2) After doing the initial inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, at the applicable intervals specified in paragraph (f)(2)(i) or (f)(2)(ii) of this AD, accomplish the repetitive inspections of the wing fixed leading edge and front spar structure for cracking and corrosion in the ‘‘ area of inspection’’ specified in Table 1 of paragraph 1.D., ‘‘ Compliance, ’’ of BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57–072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008. Do the inspections in accordance with paragraph 2.C. (Method 1) or paragraph 2.D. (Method 2) of BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57–072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008. Where previously applied, enhanced corrosion protection may then be re-applied, as an option, in accordance with paragraph 2.E. of BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57–072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008. Perform the repetitive inspections at the times specified in paragraph (f)(2)(i) or (f)(2)(ii) of this AD, as applicable.

(i) For airplanes having enhanced corrosion protection that was applied during the previous inspection: Inspect at intervals not to exceed 144 months.

(ii) For airplanes not having enhanced corrosion protection that was applied during the previous inspection: Inspect at intervals not to exceed 72 months.

(3) After doing the initial inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, at intervals not to exceed 36,000 flight cycles, accomplish fatigue inspections in accordance with paragraph 2.C. (Method 1) or paragraph 2.D. (Method 2) of BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57–072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008.

(4) If any cracking or corrosion is found during any inspection required by this AD, before further flight, repair in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57–072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008.

(5) No repair terminates the inspection requirements of this AD.

(6) Actions done before the effective date of this AD in accordance with BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57–072, dated September 25, 2008, are considered acceptable for compliance with the corresponding actions specified in this AD.

(7) Submit a report of the findings (both positive and negative) of the inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD to Customer Liaison, Customer Support (Building 37), BAE Systems (Operations) Limited, Prestwick International Airport, Ayrshire, KA9 2RW, Scotland; fax +44 (0) 1292 675432; e-mail raengliaison@baesystems.com, at the applicable time specified in paragraphs (f)(7)(i) and (f)(7)(ii) of this AD. The report must include the inspection results, a description of any discrepancies found, the airplane serial number, and the number of landings and flight hours on the airplane.

(i) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the inspection.

(ii) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 30 days after the effective date of this
AD.

Note 3: The inspections required by this AD prevail over the Maintenance Review Board Report (MRBR), Maintenance Planning Document (MPD), Corrosion Prevention and Control Programme (CPCP), and Supplemental Structural Inspection Document (SSID) inspections defined in paragraph 1.C.(3) of BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57–072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008.

FAA AD Differences

Note 4: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information as follows: Where


### 1563 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 7 / Tuesday, January 12, 2010 / Proposed Rules

the EASA AD refers to ‘‘ since entry into service, ’’ this AD specifies the date of issuance of the original airworthiness certificate or the date of issuance of the original export certificate of airworthiness.

Other FAA AD Provisions

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

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 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: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–1175; fax (425) 227–1149. 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

(h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness Directive 2009– 0014, dated January 21, 2009; and BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.57–072, Revision 1, dated September 25, 2008; for related information.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January
6, 2010. Stephen P. Boyd, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 2010–381 Filed 1–11–10; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION** 

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2009–1250; Directorate Identifier 2008–NM–169–AD]** 

**RIN 2120–AA64**

**Airworthiness Directives; BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model**  **BAe 146–100A, –200A, and –300A Series Airplanes, and Model Avro 146–**  **RJ70A, 146–RJ85A, and 146–RJ100A 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 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: In 1991, the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) issued AD 015–08–91 [which corresponds to FAA AD 93–01–11], requiring the accomplishment of inspections of, and in case of crack findings, corrective actions on, the wing top skin at rib ‘0’ of pre-modification HCM00851C BAe 146 series aircraft in accordance with British Aerospace Service Bulletin (SB) 57–41 dated 26 July 1991. Recently, BAE Systems (Operations) Ltd has determined that a revised inspection programme for the wing top skin and joint strap at rib ‘0’ on all BAe 146 and AVRO 146–RJ aircraft is necessary to assure the continued structural integrity of this area. Cracking of the wing centre section top skin, if undetected, could lead to structural failure and consequent loss of the aircraft.

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 February 26, 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 BAE Systems Regional Aircraft, 13850 McLearen Road, Herndon, Virginia 20171; telephone 703–736–1080; e-mail raebusiness@baesystems.com; Internet http://www.baesystems.com/Businesses/ RegionalAircraft/index.htm. 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 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 :**  Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–1175; fax (425) 227–1149.

**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–2009–1250; Directorate Identifier 2008–NM–169–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