Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 141 / Friday, July 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules 43105 

before the introduction of this modification 

have not been systematically retrofitted. 

In case of rudder bar locking adjustment 

tube breaking in flight when adjusting the 

rudder pedals position, it might interfere 

with the rudder pedals which could lead to 

rudder jam or a restricted rudder movement 

and consequently, to reduced control of the 

sailplane. 

For the reason described above, this AD 

requires inspecting the rudder bar locking 

adjustment tube and, if necessary, replacing 

it. 

Actions and Compliance 

(f) Unless already done, do the following 

actions in accordance with Socie ́te ́ Nouvelle 

Centrair Service Bulletin No. 101–29, dated 

July 30, 2009: 

(1) Within the next 30 days after the 

effective date of this AD, inspect the rudder 

bar locking adjustment tube to determine if 

it has been reinforced and to determine if it 

has been damaged. 

(2) If the results of the inspection required 

in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD show that the 

rudder bar locking adjustment tube has not 

been reinforced and is not damaged, replace 

it with a reinforced rudder bar locking 

adjustment tube, part number (P/N) $Y186A, 

at the next scheduled maintenance event 

after the effective date of this AD but no later 

than 12 months after the effective date of this 

AD. 

(3) If the results of the inspection required 

in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD show that the 

rudder bar locking adjustment tube has not 

been reinforced but is damaged, replace it 

with a reinforced rudder bar locking 

adjustment tube, P/N $Y186A, before further 

flight. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/ 

or service information as follows: No 

differences. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(g) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Office, 

FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs 

for this AD, if requested using the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to 

ATTN: Greg Davison, Aerospace Engineer, 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, 

Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 

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

4090. Before using any approved AMOC on 

any glider to which the AMOC applies, notify 

your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in 

the FAA Flight Standards District Office 

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

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(3) Reporting Requirements: For any 

reporting requirement in this AD, 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 (EASA) AD No. 2010–0099, 

dated May 26, 2010; and Socie ́te ́ Nouvelle 

Centrair Service Bulletin No. 101–29, dated 

July 30, 2009, for related information. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on July 16, 

2010. 

Kim Smith, 

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–18021 Filed 7–22–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0734; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–CE–036–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; PIAGGIO 

AERO INDUSTRIES S.p.A Model 

PIAGGIO P–180 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. 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: 

Due to a manufacturing error, some rivets, 

required by drawings, were not installed in 

the joints between two ceiling beams and the 

rear pressurized bulkhead. 

If left uncorrected, long term fatigue stress 

could locally weaken the structure, 

compromising the fuselage structural 

integrity. 

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 September 7, 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. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Management Facility between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD 

docket contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(telephone (800) 647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sarjapur Nagarajan, Aerospace Engineer, 

FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 

Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, 

Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329– 

4145; fax: (816) 329–4090; e-mail: 

sarjapur.nagarajan@faa.gov. 

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–2010–0734; Directorate Identifier 

2010–CE–036–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

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 AD No.: 2010– 

0126, dated June 23, 2010 (referred to 

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

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

43106 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 141 / Friday, July 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The MCAI states: 

Due to a manufacturing error, some rivets, 

required by drawings, were not installed in 

the joints between two ceiling beams and the 

rear pressurized bulkhead. 

If left uncorrected, long term fatigue stress 

could locally weaken the structure, 

compromising the fuselage structural 

integrity. 

This AD requires the accomplishment of 

Piaggio Aero Industries (PAI) Service 

Bulletin (SB) 80–0268 original issue, which 

contains instructions to rework the affected 

area, thus restoring the fuselage design 

strength as well as the fatigue specifications 

of the structure. 

You may obtain further information by 

examining the MCAI in the AD docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

Piaggio Aero Industries S.p.A. has 

issued Service Bulletin (Mandatory) N.: 

80–0268, REV. 0, dated December 18, 

2008. The actions described in this 

service information are intended to 

correct the unsafe condition identified 

in the MCAI. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of the Proposed AD 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of another 

country, and is approved for operation 

in the United States. Pursuant to our 

bilateral agreement with this State of 

Design Authority, they have notified us 

of the unsafe condition described in the 

MCAI and service information 

referenced above. We are proposing this 

AD because we evaluated all 

information and determined the unsafe 

condition exists and is likely to exist or 

develop on other products of the same 

type design. 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the MCAI or Service Information 

We have reviewed the MCAI and 

related service information and, in 

general, agree with their substance. But 

we might have found it necessary to use 

different words from those in the MCAI 

to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. 

operators and is enforceable. In making 

these changes, we do not intend to differ 

substantively from the information 

provided in the MCAI and related 

service information. 

We might also have proposed 

different actions in this AD from those 

in the MCAI in order to follow FAA 

policies. Any such differences are 

highlighted in a Note within the 

proposed AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

will affect 6 products of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it would take 

about 30 work-hours per product to 

comply with the basic requirements of 

this proposed AD. The average labor 

rate is $85 per work-hour. Required 

parts would cost about $100 per 

product. 

Based on these figures, we estimate 

the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. 

operators to be $15,900, or $2,650 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 adding 

the following new AD: 

Piaggio Aero Industries S.p.A: Docket No. 

FAA–2010–0734; Directorate Identifier 

2010–CE–036–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by 

September 7, 2010. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to PIAGGIO AERO 

INDUSTRIES S.p.A Model PIAGGIO P–180 

airplanes, serial numbers 1166 through 1175, 

certificated in any category. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association of America 

(ATA) Code 53: Fuselage. 

Reason 

(e) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states: 

Due to a manufacturing error, some rivets, 

required by drawings, were not installed in 

the joints between two ceiling beams and the 

rear pressurized bulkhead. 

If left uncorrected, long term fatigue stress 

could locally weaken the structure, 

compromising the fuselage structural 

integrity. 

This AD requires the accomplishment of 

Piaggio Aero Industries (PAI) Service 

Bulletin (SB) 80–0268 original issue, which 

contains instructions to rework the affected 

area, thus restoring the fuselage design 

strength as well as the fatigue specifications 

of the structure. 

Actions and Compliance 

(f) Unless already done, within 200 hours 

time-in-service (TIS) after the effective date 

of this AD, replace the rivets of the joint 

brackets on the right-hand and left-hand 

beam with ‘‘Hi-Lok’’ fasteners, following the 

accomplishment instructions of Piaggio Aero 

Industries S.p.A. Service Bulletin 

(Mandatory) N.: 80–0268, REV. 0, dated 

December 18, 2008. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/ 

or service information as follows: No 

differences. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(g) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 141 / Friday, July 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules 43107 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Office, 

FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs 

for this AD, if requested using the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to 

ATTN: Sarjapur Nagarajan, Aerospace 

Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 

901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 

64106; telephone: (816) 329–4145; fax: (816) 

329–4090; e-mail: 

sarjapur.nagarajan@faa.gov. Before using any 

approved AMOC on any airplane to which 

the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate 

principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight 

Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking 

a PI, your local FSDO. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any 

requirement in this AD to obtain corrective 

actions from a manufacturer or other source, 

use these actions if they are FAA-approved. 

Corrective actions are considered FAAapproved 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 (EASA) AD No.: 2010–0126, 

dated June 23, 2010; and Piaggio Aero 

Industries S.p.A. Service Bulletin 

(Mandatory) N.: 80–0268, REV. 0, dated 

December 18, 2008, for related information. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on July 15, 

2010. 

Kim Smith, 

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–18019 Filed 7–22–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

16 CFR Parts 1508 and 1509 

Full-Size and Non-Full Size Baby Cribs: 

Withdrawal of Advance Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Withdrawal of advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Consumer Product Safety 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) is 

terminating a proceeding for the 

possible amendment of the 

Commission’s standards for full-size 

cribs, codified at 16 CFR part 1508, and 

for non-full-size cribs, codified at 16 

CFR part 1509 which the Commission 

began with publication of an advance 

notice of proposed rulemaking on 

December 16, 1996, 61 FR 65997. On 

August 14, 2008, the Consumer Product 

Safety Improvement Act of 2008 

(‘‘CPSIA’’) was enacted. Section 104(b) 

of the CPSIA requires the Commission 

to promulgate consumer product safety 

standards for durable infant or toddler 

products, which are to be ‘‘substantially 

the same as’’ applicable voluntary 

standards (or more stringent 

requirements if they would further 

reduce the risk of injury associated with 

the product). Elsewhere in this issue of 

the Federal Register, the Commission is 

proposing safety standards for full-size 

and non-full-size baby cribs in response 

to section 104(b) of the CPSIA. The crib 

standards the Commission is proposing 

include provisions that address the risks 

of injury identified in the 1996 ANPR. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patricia Edwards, Project Manager, 

Directorate for Engineering Sciences, 

Consumer Product Safety Commission, 

4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 

20814; telephone (301) 504–7577; 

pedwards@cpsc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

In 1973, the Commission issued 

mandatory regulations for full-size cribs, 

which were amended in 1982 and are 

codified at 16 CFR part 1508. In 1976, 

the Commission issued nearly identical 

regulations for non-full-size cribs, 

which were also amended in 1982, and 

are codified at 16 CFR part 1509. In 

1996, the Commission published an 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking 

(‘‘ANPR’’) which initiated a rulemaking 

proceeding for the possible amendment 

of the Commission’s crib regulations to 

address the risk of slats disengaging 

from cribs sides. 61 FR 65997 (Dec. 16, 

1996). After publication of the ANPR, 

the Commission staff worked with the 

voluntary standards group, ASTM 

International (formerly known as the 

American Society for Testing and 

Materials), which added provisions in 

its standard for full-size baby cribs, 

ASTM F 1169, to address this hazard. 

The Consumer Product Safety 

Improvement Act of 2008 (‘‘CPSIA’’, 

Pub. L. 110–314) was enacted on August 

14, 2008. Section 104(b) of the CPSIA 

requires the Commission to promulgate 

consumer product safety standards for 

durable infant or toddler products. 

These standards are to be ‘‘substantially 

the same as’’ applicable voluntary 

standards or more stringent than the 

voluntary standard if the Commission 

concludes that more stringent 

requirements would further reduce the 

risk of injury associated with the 

product. Elsewhere in this issue of the 

Federal Register, the Commission is 

issuing a proposed rule that would 

establish safety standards for full-size 

and non-full-size cribs that are 

substantially the same as voluntary 

standards ASTM F 1169–10, Standard 

Consumer Safety Specification for FullSize Baby Cribs, and ASTM F 406–10, 

Standard Consumer Safety 

Specification for Non-Full-Size Baby 

Cribs. The Commission proposes to 

incorporate these ASTM standards by 

reference with certain modifications to 

strengthen them. The proposed 

standards, as modified, would include 

provisions in both the full-size and nonfull-size crib standards that address the 

risk of crib slat disengagement the 

Commission identified in the ANPR. 

B. Withdrawal of the ANPR 

The rulemaking that the Commission 

is now initiating under section 104(b) of 

the CPSIA proposes to establish new 

requirements for full-size and non-full 

size cribs that will include the 

requirements of the Commission’s 

existing regulations codified at 16 CFR 

parts 1508 and 1509 and additional 

requirements in the ASTM voluntary 

standards. Because these new crib 

standards will include performance 

tests to address the risk of crib slat 

disengagement, the Commission is 

withdrawing the ANPR published 

December 16, 1996, 61 FR 65997, and 

terminating that rulemaking. 

Dated: July 14, 2010. 

Todd Stevenson, 

Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2010–17590 Filed 7–22–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

16 CFR Parts 1508 and 1509 

[CPSC Docket No. CPSC–2010–0075] 

Revocation of Requirements for FullSize Baby Cribs and Non-Full-Size 

Baby Cribs 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: Section 104(b) of the 

Consumer Product Safety Improvement 

Act of 2008 (‘‘CPSIA’’) requires the 

United States Consumer Product Safety 

Commission (‘‘CPSC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) 

to promulgate consumer product safety 

standards for durable infant or toddler 

products. These standards are to be 

‘‘substantially the same as’’ applicable 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS