Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 94 / Monday, May 18, 2009 / Proposed Rules 23131 

Propeller Blade Root Outer Sleeve Visual 

Inspections 

(1) At the next 1,600 flight hours (FH) 

aircraft check after the effective date of this 

AD, or, after any blade accumulates 15,000 

FH time-in-service, whichever occurs later, 

visually inspect all propeller blade root outer 

sleeves for cracks. 

(2) Thereafter, at intervals not to exceed 

1,600 FH, visually inspect all propeller blade 

root outer sleeves for cracks. 

(3) Before further flight, remove any 

propeller blades found with cracked root 

outer sleeves during the visual inspections in 

paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(2) of this AD. 

FAA AD Differences 

(f) None. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(g) The Manager, Boston Aircraft 

Certification Office, FAA, Engine and 

Propeller Directorate, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

Related Information 

(h) Refer to European Aviation Safety 

Agency AD 2008–0033, dated February 19, 

2008, and Dowty Propellers Alert Service 

Bulletin No. SF340–61–A106, Revision 1, 

dated March 20, 2008, for related 

information. 

(i) Contact Terry Fahr, Aerospace Engineer, 

Boston Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 

Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New 

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 

01803; e-mail: terry.fahr@faa.gov; telephone 

(781) 238–7155; fax (781) 238–7170, for more 

information about this AD. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

May 8, 2009. 

Peter A. White, 

Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–11423 Filed 5–15–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–0545; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–NE–16–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Dowty 

Propellers Models R354/4–123–F/13, 

R354/4–123–F/20, R375/4–123–F/21, 

R389/4–123–F/25, R389/4–123–F/26, 

and R390/4–123–F/27 Propellers 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM); 

reopening of the comment period. 

SUMMARY: This supplemental NPRM 

revises an earlier proposed 

airworthiness directive (AD), applicable 

to Dowty Propellers Models R354/4– 

123–F/13, R354/4–123–F/20, R375/4– 

123–F/21, R389/4–123–F/25, R389/4– 

123–F/26, and R390/4–123–F/27 

propellers. That proposed AD would 

have required initial and repetitive 

visual inspections of propeller blade 

root outer sleeves for cracks, and 

removal before further flight of propeller 

blades with cracked blade root outer 

sleeves. That proposed AD resulted 

from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

issued by the European Aviation Safety 

Agency (EASA) to identify and correct 

an unsafe condition on certain Dowty 

propellers. This supplemental NPRM 

revises the proposed AD to correct the 

listing of propeller models affected. This 

supplemental NPRM results from the 

discovery that we need to correct one of 

the propeller model numbers affected, 

and to remove an erroneous propeller 

model number. We are proposing this 

AD to prevent blade counterweight 

release, which could result in injury or 

damage to the airplane. The MCAI 

describes the unsafe condition as: 

A number of propeller blade outer sleeves 

have been found with cracks since 1996. 

Testing has shown that blade retention 

integrity is not affected by this cracking. 

However, this condition, if not detected and 

corrected, can lead to blade counterweight 

release, possibly resulting in damage to the 

aircraft and injury to occupants or persons on 

the ground. 

We are proposing this AD to prevent 

blade counterweight release, which 

could result in injury or damage to the 

airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by June 17, 2009. 

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: 

Terry Fahr, Aerospace Engineer, Boston 

Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 

Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 

New England Executive Park, 

Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail: 

terrance.fahr@faa.gov; telephone (781) 

238–7155; fax (781) 238–7170. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2008–0545; Directorate Identifier 

2008–NE–16–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). 

Discussion 

EASA, which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued EASA AD 2008– 

0033, dated February 19, 2008, to 

correct an unsafe condition for the 

specified products. The EASA AD 

states: 

A number of propeller blade outer sleeves 

have been found with cracks since 1996. 

Testing has shown that blade retention 

integrity is not affected by this cracking. 

However, this condition, if not detected and 

corrected, can lead to blade counterweight 

release, possibly resulting in damage to the 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
23132 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 94 / Monday, May 18, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

aircraft and injury to occupants or persons on 

the ground. 

You may obtain further information 

by examining the MCAI in the AD 

docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

Dowty Propellers has issued Alert 

Service Bulletin No. SF340–61–A106, 

Revision 1, dated March 20, 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. This Supplemental 

NPRM requires initial and repetitive 

visual inspections of propeller blade 

root outer sleeves for cracks, and 

removal before further flight of propeller 

blades with cracked blade root outer 

sleeves. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

considered the comments received on 

the original NPRM. 

Request To Reference the Latest Service 

Bulletin 

One commenter, Colgan Air, requests 

that we reference the latest service 

bulletin, which is Dowty Propellers 

Alert Service Bulletin No. SF340–61– 

A106, Revision 1, dated March 20, 2008. 

We agree and changed that reference 

in this Supplemental NPRM. 

Request To Clarify Airplane 

Manufacturer 

One commenter, SAAB AB, SAAB 

Aerosystems, requests that we clarify 

that ‘‘340B airplanes’’ should be referred 

to as ‘‘SAAB 340B airplanes’’. 

We agree and clarified that reference 

in this Supplemental NPRM. 

Need To Correct the Listing of Propeller 

Models Affected 

We discovered the need to correct the 

listing of the propeller models affected 

that was included in the original NPRM 

published in the Federal Register on 

June 30, 2008 (73 FR 36819). That 

listing, which is Dowty Propellers 

models R354/4–123–F/13, R354/4–123– 

F/20, R354/4–123–F/21, R375/4–123–F/ 

21, R389/4–123–F/25, R354/4–123–F/ 

26, and R390/4–123–F/27 propellers, is 

changed in this Supplemental NPRM to 

Dowty Propellers Models R354/4–123– 

F/13, R354/4–123–F/20, R375/4–123–F/ 

21, R389/4–123–F/25, R389/4–123–F/ 

26, and R390/4–123–F/27 propellers. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the available data, 

including the comments received, and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require making the 

changes described previously. We 

determined that these changes will not 

increase the economic burden on any 

operator or increase the scope of the 

Supplemental NPRM. 

Costs of Compliance 

Based on the service information, we 

estimate that this proposed AD would 

affect about 292 propellers installed on 

airplanes of U.S. registry. We also 

estimate that it would take 0.5 workhour per propeller to visually inspect 

for cracks. 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 $11,680. 

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: 

Dowty Propellers: Docket No. FAA–2008– 

0545; Directorate Identifier 2008–NE– 

16–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by June 17, 

2009. 

Affected Airworthiness Directives (ADs) 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Dowty Propellers 

Models R354/4–123–F/13, R354/4–123–F/20, 

R375/4–123–F/21, R389/4–123–F/25, R389/ 

4–123–F/26, and R390/4–123–F/27 

propellers. These propellers are installed on, 

but not limited to, Saab AB, Saab 

Aerosystems SF340A and SAAB SF340B 

airplanes. 

Reason 

(d) European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA) AD No. 2008–0033, dated February 

19, 2008, states: 

A number of propeller blade outer sleeves 

have been found with cracks since 1996. 

Testing has shown that blade retention 

integrity is not affected by this cracking. 

However, this condition, if not detected and 

corrected, can lead to blade counterweight 

release, possibly resulting in damage to the 

aircraft and injury to occupants or persons on 

the ground. 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 94 / Monday, May 18, 2009 / Proposed Rules 23133 

This AD requires initial and repetitive 

visual inspections of propeller blade root 

outer sleeves for cracks, and removal before 

further flight of propeller blades with cracked 

blade root outer sleeves. We are issuing this 

AD to prevent blade counterweight release, 

which could result in injury or damage to the 

airplane. 

Actions and Compliance 

(e) Unless already done, do the following 

actions. 

Propeller Blade Root Outer Sleeve Visual 

Inspections 

(1) At the next 1,600 flight hours (FH) 

aircraft check after the effective date of this 

AD, or, after any blade accumulates 15,000 

FH time-in-service, whichever occurs later, 

visually inspect all propeller blade root outer 

sleeves for cracks. 

(2) Thereafter, at intervals not to exceed 

1,600 FH, visually inspect all propeller blade 

root outer sleeves for cracks. 

(3) Before further flight, remove any 

propeller blades found with cracked root 

outer sleeves during the visual inspections in 

paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(2) of this AD. 

FAA AD Differences 

(f) None. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(g) The Manager, Boston Aircraft 

Certification Office, FAA, Engine and 

Propeller Directorate, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

Related Information 

(h) Refer to European Aviation Safety 

Agency AD 2008–0033, dated February 19, 

2008, and Dowty Propellers Alert Service 

Bulletin No. SF340–61–A106, Revision 1, 

dated March 20, 2008, for related 

information. 

(i) Contact Terry Fahr, Aerospace Engineer, 

Boston Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 

Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New 

England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 

01803; e-mail: terry.fahr@faa.gov; telephone 

(781) 238–7155; fax (781) 238–7170, for more 

information about this AD. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

May 8, 2009. 

Peter A. White, 

Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–11478 Filed 5–15–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Bureau of Customs and Border 

Protection 

19 CFR Part 101 

[Docket No. USCBP–2008–0047] 

Extension of Port Limits of Columbus, 

OH 

AGENCY: Customs and Border Protection, 

DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: This notice of proposed 

rulemaking proposes to extend the 

geographical limits of the port of 

Columbus, Ohio, to include the 

Rickenbacker Intermodal Terminal and 

additional territory that likely will be 

needed for supporting infrastructure so 

that it will be within the newly defined 

port limits. The proposed change would 

make the boundaries more easily 

identifiable to the public. The proposed 

change is part of CBP’s continuing 

program to more efficiently utilize its 

personnel, facilities, and resources, and 

to provide better service to carriers, 

importers, and the general public. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before July 17, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number, by one of 

the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments 

via docket number USCBP–2008–0047. 

• Mail: Border Security Regulations 

Branch, Office of International Trade, 

Customs and Border Protection, 1300 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW. (Mint 

Annex), Washington, DC 20229. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number for this rulemaking. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. For 

detailed instructions on submitting 

comments and additional information 

on the rulemaking process, see the 

‘‘Public Participation’’ heading of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Submitted 

comments may also be inspected on 

regular business days between the hours 

of 9 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. at the Office of 

International Trade, Customs and 

Border Protection, 799 9th Street, NW., 

5th Floor, Washington, DC. 

Arrangements to inspect submitted 

comments should be made in advance 

by calling Mr. Joseph Clark at (202) 325– 

0118. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Wendy M. Cooper, Office of Field 

Operations, 202–344–2057. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Public Participation 

Interested persons are invited to 

participate in this rulemaking by 

submitting written data, views, or 

arguments on all aspects of the notice of 

proposed rulemaking. DHS also invites 

comments that relate to the economic, 

environmental, or federalism effects that 

might result from this proposal. 

Comments that will provide the most 

assistance to the Department in 

developing these procedures will 

reference a specific portion of the 

proposal, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include data, 

information, or authority that support 

such recommended change. 

II. Background 

As part of its continuing efforts to 

provide better service to carriers, 

importers, and the general public, CBP 

is proposing to extend the port 

boundaries for the port of entry at 

Columbus, Ohio. 

The Columbus Regional Airport 

Authority has partnered with the 

Norfolk Southern Corporation to create 

an intermodal facility immediately 

adjacent to Rickenbacker International 

Airport. The creation of the new 

Rickenbacker Intermodal Terminal is an 

important part of the Columbus 

Regional Airport Authority’s plan to 

address a capacity problem at current 

facilities in the area. The terminal is 

located to the south of the current port 

boundaries. In order to accommodate 

the new facility and the necessary 

additional territory for supporting 

infrastructure so that it falls within the 

newly defined port limits, CBP is 

proposing to amend the port limits of 

the port of Columbus, Ohio. This 

proposed change will make the port 

boundaries more easily identifiable to 

the public. CBP has determined that this 

proposed change will result in better 

service that is provided to the public by 

the port by addressing a capacity 

problem at current facilities in the area. 

The proposed change will not require a 

change in the staffing or workload at the 

port. 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS