57880 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 184 / Thursday, September 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

(3) Other assets owned by the 

applicant, 

(4) Third party pledges of property 

not owned by the applicant, and 

(5) Repayment ability under 

paragraph (c) of this section. 

* * * * * 

12. Amend paragraph § 764.356 by 

adding paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 764.356 Appraisal and valuation 

requirements. 

* * * * * 

(c) In the case of an equine loss loan: 

(1) The applicant’s Federal income tax 

and business records will be the 

primary source of financial information. 

Sales receipts, invoices, or other official 

sales records will document the sales 

price of individual animals. 

(2) If the applicant does not have 3 

complete years of business records, the 

Agency will obtain the most reliable and 

reasonable information available from 

sources such as the Cooperative 

Extension Service, universities, and 

breed associations to document 

production for those years for which the 

applicant does not have a complete year 

of business records. 

Signed in Washington, DC, on September 

17, 2010. 

Jonathan W. Coppess, 

Administrator, Farm Service Agency. 

[FR Doc. 2010–23830 Filed 9–22–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–05–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0854; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–NM–261–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model 

A310 Series 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: 

During High Time Equipment (HTE) 

reviews conducted within the scope of the 

A310 aircraft Design Service Goal (DSG) 

extension work, Airbus discovered that the 

splined couplings and the sliding bearings of 

the flap transmission system could be 

affected by corrosion and wear, especially 

when their protective components such as 

wiper rings and rubber gaiters could become 

defective. 

This condition, if not detected and 

corrected, could degrade the functional 

integrity of the flap transmission system. 

* * * * * 

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 November 8, 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 Airbus SAS— 

EAW (Airworthiness Office), 1 Rond 

Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac 

Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 

96; fax +33 5 61 93 44 51; e-mail: 

account.airworth-eas@airbus.com; 

Internet http://www.airbus.com. You 

may review copies of the referenced 

service information at the FAA, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. 

For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call 425–227– 

1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Operations 

office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is in 

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan 

Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 227–2125; 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–2010–0854; Directorate Identifier 

2009–NM–261–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 

On January 16, 2007, we issued AD 

2007–02–22, Amendment 39–14909 (72 

FR 3708, January 26, 2007). That AD 

required actions intended to address an 

unsafe condition on the products listed 

above. 

Since we issued AD 2007–02–22, the 

European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2006–0111R1, 

dated August 26, 2009 (referred to after 

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

condition for the specified products. 

The MCAI states: 

During High Time Equipment (HTE) 

reviews conducted within the scope of the 

A310 aircraft Design Service Goal (DSG) 

extension work, Airbus discovered that the 

splined couplings and the sliding bearings of 

the flap transmission system could be 

affected by corrosion and wear, especially 

when their protective components such as 

wiper rings and rubber gaiters could become 

defective. 

This condition, if not detected and 

corrected, could degrade the functional 

integrity of the flap transmission system. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 184 / Thursday, September 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules 57881 

For the reason described above, this AD 

requires repetitive inspections of the flap 

transmission system and associated 

components [for any missing, damaged, or 

incorrectly installed rubber gaiter, wiper 

rings and straps], and corrective action(s), 

depending on findings. [The corrective action 

is replacing missing, damaged, or incorrectly 

installed components.] 

This [EASA] AD has been revised to 

correct the compliance time of 400 flight 

cycles in paragraph (3) into 400 flight hours. 

In addition, paragraph (4) has been 

introduced to clarify that the corrective 

actions do not end the requirement to 

continue the repetitive inspections, and some 

editorial changes for reasons of 

standardization. These do not affect the 

requirements of this AD as originally 

intended. 

You may obtain further information by 

examining the MCAI in the AD docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

Airbus has issued Mandatory Service 

Bulletin A310–27–2099, Revision 01, 

dated March 21, 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 46 products of U.S. registry. 

The actions that are required by AD 

2007–02–22 and retained in this 

proposed AD take about 3 work-hours 

per product, at an average labor rate of 

$85 per work hour. Based on these 

figures, the estimated cost of the 

currently required actions is $255 per 

product. 

We estimate that it would take about 

3 work-hours per product to comply 

with the revised requirements of this 

proposed AD. The average labor rate is 

$85 per work-hour. Based on these 

figures, we estimate the cost of the 

proposed AD on U.S. operators to be 

$11,730, or $255 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 39–14909 (72 FR 

3708, January 26, 2007) and adding the 

following new AD: 

Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2010–0854; 

Directorate Identifier 2009–NM–261–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by 

November 8, 2010. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This AD supersedes AD 2007–02–22, 

Amendment 39–14909. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to all Airbus Model 

A310–203, –204, –221, –222, –304, –322, 

–324, and –325 airplanes; certificated in any 

category. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 27: Flight controls. 

Reason 

(e) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states: 

During High Time Equipment (HTE) 

reviews conducted within the scope of the 

A310 aircraft Design Service Goal (DSG) 

extension work, Airbus discovered that the 

splined couplings and the sliding bearings of 

the flap transmission system could be 

affected by corrosion and wear, especially 

when their protective components such as 

wiper rings and rubber gaiters could become 

defective. 

This condition, if not detected and 

corrected, could degrade the functional 

integrity of the flap transmission system. 

* * * * * 

Compliance 

(f) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
57882 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 184 / Thursday, September 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Restatement of Requirements of AD 2007– 

02–22, With Revised Service Information 

and Reduced Compliance Time for 

Corrective Action 

Initial and Repetitive Inspections 

(g) Within 2,500 flight cycles after March 

2, 2007 (the effective date of AD 2007–02– 

22): Do a detailed inspection for any missing, 

damaged, or incorrectly installed wiper rings 

in the splined couplings of the flap 

transmission shafts; and a detailed inspection 

for any missing, damaged, or incorrectly 

installed rubber gaiters and straps on the 

sliding bearing/plunging joints of the flap 

transmission; in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Service Bulletin A310–27–2099, dated 

February 17, 2006; or Airbus Mandatory 

Service Bulletin A310–27–2099, Revision 01, 

dated March 21, 2008. Repeat the inspections 

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 2,500 

flight cycles. After the effective date of this 

AD, use only Airbus Mandatory Service 

Bulletin A310–27–2099, Revision 01, dated 

March 21, 2008. 

Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a 

detailed inspection is: ‘‘An intensive 

examination of a specific item, installation, 

or assembly to detect damage, failure, or 

irregularity. Available lighting is normally 

supplemented with a direct source of good 

lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. 

Inspection aids such as mirror, magnifying 

lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface 

cleaning and elaborate procedures may be 

required.’’ 

Corrective Actions 

(h) If any damaged, missing or incorrectly 

installed wiper rings, rubber gaiters, or straps 

are found during any inspection required by 

paragraph (g) of this AD: At the applicable 

time in paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD, 

replace the applicable component with a 

serviceable component in accordance with 

the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Service Bulletin A310–27–2099, dated 

February 17, 2006; or Airbus Mandatory 

Service Bulletin A310–27–2099, Revision 01, 

dated March 21, 2008. After the effective date 

of this AD, use only Airbus Mandatory 

Service Bulletin A310–27–2099, Revision 01, 

dated March 21, 2008. 

(1) For airplanes on which the inspection 

required by paragraph (g) of this AD has been 

done before the effective date of this AD: 

Within 400 flight cycles after accomplishing 

the inspection. 

(2) For airplanes on which the inspection 

required by paragraph (g) of this AD has not 

been done on or after the effective date of this 

AD: Within 400 flight hours after 

accomplishing the inspection required by 

paragraph (g) of this AD. 

New Requirements of This AD 

Actions 

(i) Accomplishment of the actions required 

by paragraph (h) do not terminate the 

repetitive inspections required by paragraph 

(g) of this AD. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: No 

differences. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(j) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, International 

Branch, 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: 

Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind 

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057– 

3356; telephone (425) 227–2125; 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. AMOCs 

approved previously in accordance with AD 

2007–02–22, Amendment 39–14909, are 

approved as AMOCs for the corresponding 

provisions of paragraphs (g) and (h) of this 

AD. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(3) Reporting Requirements: For any 

reporting requirement in this AD, under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved the information collection 

requirements and has assigned OMB Control 

Number 2120–0056. 

Related Information 

(k) Refer to MCAI European Aviation 

Safety Agency Airworthiness Directive 2006– 

0111R1, dated August 26, 2009; and Airbus 

Mandatory Service Bulletin A310–27–2099, 

Revision 01, dated March 21, 2008; for 

related information. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 10, 2010. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–23738 Filed 9–22–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0855; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NM–066–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Model 737–300, –400, and 

–500 Series Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to 

supersede an existing airworthiness 

directive (AD) that applies to all Model 

737–300, –400, and –500 series 

airplanes. The existing AD currently 

requires repetitive inspections for 

discrepancies of the fuse pins of the 

inboard and outboard midspar fittings of 

the nacelle strut, and corrective actions 

if necessary. This proposed AD would 

add replacing the midspar fuse pins 

with new, improved fuse pins, which 

would terminate the repetitive 

inspections. This proposed AD results 

from a report of corrosion damage of the 

chrome runout on the head side found 

on all four midspar fuse pins of the 

nacelle strut. Additionally, a large 

portion of the chrome plate was missing 

from the corroded area of the shank. We 

are proposing this AD to prevent 

damage of the fuse pins of the inboard 

and outboard midspar fittings of the 

nacelle strut, which could result in 

reduced structural integrity of the fuse 

pins, and consequent loss of the strut 

and separation of the engine from the 

airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by November 8, 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. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1