23614 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 20, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

Amendment 25–61 (51 FR 26206, July 

21, 1986), specifically note that seats 

were excluded ‘‘because the recentlyadopted standards for flammability of 

seat cushions will greatly inhibit 

involvement of the seats.’’ 

Subsequently, the Final Rule at 

Amendment 25–83 (60 FR 6615, March 

6, 1995) clarified the definition of 

minimum panel size: ‘‘It is not possible 

to cite a specific size that will apply in 

all installations; however, as a general 

rule, components with exposed-surface 

areas of one square foot or less may be 

considered small enough that they do 

not have to meet the new standards. 

Components with exposed-surface areas 

greater than two square feet may be 

considered large enough that they do 

have to meet the new standards. Those 

with exposed-surface areas greater than 

one square foot, but less than two square 

feet, must be considered in conjunction 

with the areas of the cabin in which 

they are installed before a determination 

could be made.’’ 

On October 17, 1997, the FAA issued 

Policy Memorandum 97–112–39, 

Guidance for Flammability Testing of 

Seat/Console Installations, (http:// 

rgl.faa.gov). That memo was issued 

when it became clear that seat designs 

were evolving to include large, nonmetallic panels with surface areas that 

would impact survivability during a 

cabin-fire event, comparable to 

partitions or galleys. The memo noted 

that large-surface-area panels must 

comply with heat-release and smokeemission requirements, even if they 

were attached to a seat. If the FAA had 

not issued such policy, seat designs 

could have been viewed as a loophole 

to the airworthiness standards that 

would result in an unacceptable 

decrease in survivability during a cabinfire event. 

In October 2004, we focused attention 

on the appropriate flammability 

standards for passenger seats that 

incorporated non-traditional, large, nonmetallic panels in lieu of the traditional 

fabric-covered metal. The Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office and 

Transport Standards Staff reviewed this 

design and determined that it 

represented the kind and quantity of 

material that should be required to pass 

the heat-release and smoke-emissions 

requirements. We have determined that 

special conditions would be issued to 

apply the standards defined in 

§ 25.853(d) to seats designed with large, 

non-metallic panels. 

Applicability 

As discussed above, these special 

conditions are applicable to Boeing 

Model 757 series airplanes. It is not our 

intent, however, to require seats with 

large, non-metallic panels to meet 

§ 25.853, Appendix F, parts IV and V, if 

they are installed in cabins of airplanes 

that otherwise are not required to meet 

these standards. Because the heatrelease and smoke-emission testing 

requirements of § 25.853 per Appendix 

F, parts IV and V, are not part of the 

type-certification basis of the Model 

757, these special conditions are only 

applicable if the Model 757 series 

airplanes are in 14 CFR part 121 

operations. Section 121.312 requires 

compliance with the heat-release and 

smoke-emission testing requirements of 

§ 25.853, for certain airplanes, 

irrespective of the type-certification 

bases of those airplanes. For Model 757 

series airplanes, these are the airplanes 

that would be affected by these special 

conditions. Should NAT apply at a later 

date for a supplemental type certificate 

to modify any other model included on 

Type Certificate No. A2NM to 

incorporate the same novel or unusual 

design feature, the special conditions 

would apply to that model as well. 

Conclusion 

This action affects only certain novel 

or unusual design features on one model 

series of airplanes. It is not a rule of 

general applicability and it affects only 

the applicant who applied to the FAA 

for approval of these features on the 

airplane. 

Under standard practice, the effective 

date of final special conditions would 

be 30 days after the date of publication 

in the Federal Register; however, as the 

return-to-service date for the Boeing 

Model 757 series airplane, modified by 

NAT, is imminent, the FAA finds that 

good cause exists to make these special 

conditions effective upon issuance. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25 

Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

■ The authority citation for these 

special conditions is as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 

44702, 44704. 

The Special Conditions 

■ Accordingly, pursuant to the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the following special conditions are 

issued as part of the type-certification 

basis for Boeing Model 757 series 

airplanes modified by NAT. 

1. Except as provided in paragraph 3 

of these special conditions, compliance 

with Title 14 CFR part 25, Appendix F, 

parts IV and V, heat release and smoke 

emission, is required for seats that 

incorporate non-traditional, large, nonmetallic panels that may either be a 

single component or multiple 

components in a concentrated area in 

their design. 

2. The applicant may designate up to 

and including 1.5 square feet of nontraditional, non-metallic panel material 

per seat place that does not have to 

comply with special condition (1), 

above. A triple-seat assembly may have 

a total of 4.5 square feet excluded on 

any portion of the assembly (e.g., 

outboard-seat place 1 square foot; 

middle, 1 square foot; and inboard, 2.5 

square feet). 

3. Seats do not have to meet the test 

requirements of Title 14 CFR part 25, 

Appendix F, parts IV and V, when 

installed in compartments that are not 

otherwise required to meet these 

requirements. Examples include: 

a. Airplanes with passenger capacities 

of 19 or less, 

b. Airplanes that do not have § 25.853, 

Amendment 25–61 or later, in their 

certification basis and do not need to 

comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 

121.312, and 

c. Airplanes exempted from § 25.853, 

Amendment 25–61 or later. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 11, 

2009. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–11723 Filed 5–19–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–0462; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–NM–063–AD; Amendment 

39–15913; AD 2009–11–03] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Lockheed 

Model 382, 382B, 382E, 382F, and 382G 

Series Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for all 

Lockheed Model 382, 382B, 382E, 382F, 

and 382G series airplanes. This AD 

requires an inspection to identify 

discrepant barrel nuts in the upper wing 

joint, engine truss, and rear beam pylon 

support; and replacement of any 

discrepant barrel nut with a new barrel 

nut, if necessary. This AD results from 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 20, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 23615 

a report of severe cracking of multiple 

barrel nuts in the wing station (WS) 220 

upper wing joint found during 

scheduled maintenance. We are issuing 

this AD to prevent cracking of the barrel 

nuts in the upper wing joint, engine 

truss, and rear beam pylon support, 

which could result in reduced structural 

integrity of the affected part and 

consequent detachment of the wing or 

engine from the airplane. 

DATES: This AD is effective June 4, 2009. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in the AD 

as of June 4, 2009. 

We must receive comments on this 

AD by July 20, 2009. 

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. 

For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Lockheed Continued 

Airworthiness Project Office, Attention 

Airworthiness, 86 South Cobb Drive, 

Marietta, Georgia 30063–0567; 

telephone 770–494–5444; fax 770–494– 

5445; e-mail ams.portal@lmco.com; 

Internet http:// 

www.lockheedmartin.com/ams/tools/ 

TechPubs.html. 

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 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: Carl 

Gray, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe 

Branch, ACE–117A, FAA, Atlanta 

Aircraft Certification Office, One Crown 

Center, 1895 Phoenix Boulevard, Suite 

450, Atlanta, Georgia 30349; telephone 

(770) 703–6131; fax (770) 703–6097. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We received a report of severe 

cracking of multiple barrel nuts in the 

wing station (WS) 220 upper wing joint 

found during scheduled maintenance. 

Deformed thread locking barrel nuts 

having a certain part number were 

identified as having greater potential for 

cracking during routine service. The 

affected nut might also be installed at 

the quick engine change (QEC) lower 

attachment to the truss mount and at the 

outer wing station (OWS) 330 rear beam 

pylon attach fitting. This condition, if 

not corrected, could result in reduced 

structural integrity of the affected part 

and consequent detachment of the wing 

or engine from the airplane. 

Relevant Service Information 

We reviewed Lockheed Alert Service 

Bulletin A382–57–91, Revision 1, dated 

March 25, 2009. The service bulletin 

describes procedures for an inspection 

to identify discrepant barrel nuts (with 

deformed thread locking, impression 

stamp ‘‘K,’’ no impression stamp, or 

cracking) in the upper wing joint, 

engine truss, and rear beam pylon 

support; and replacement of any 

discrepant barrel nut with a new barrel 

nut, if necessary. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This AD 

We are issuing this AD because we 

evaluated all the relevant information 

and determined the unsafe condition 

described previously is likely to exist or 

develop in other products of these same 

type designs. This AD requires 

accomplishing the actions specified in 

the service information described 

previously, except as discussed under 

‘‘Differences Between the AD and the 

Service Information.’’ 

Differences Between the AD and the 

Service Information 

Although the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Lockheed Alert Service 

Bulletin A382–57–91, Revision 1, dated 

March 25, 2009, specify that operators 

may contact the manufacturer for 

disposition of certain repair conditions, 

this AD would require operators to 

repair those conditions using a method 

approved by the FAA. 

The Accomplishment Instructions of 

Lockheed Alert Service Bulletin A382– 

57–91, Revision 1, dated March 25, 

2009, recommend inspecting to identify 

discrepant barrel nuts before further 

flight, but we have determined that this 

compliance time would not give 

operators enough time to inspect all 

affected airplanes. In developing an 

appropriate compliance time for this 

AD, we considered the manufacturer’s 

recommendation, the degree of urgency 

associated with the subject unsafe 

condition, the average utilization of the 

affected fleet, and the time necessary to 

perform the inspection (1 work-hour). In 

light of all these factors, we find that a 

30-day compliance time represents an 

appropriate time for affected airplanes 

to continue to operate without 

compromising safety. These differences 

have been coordinated with the 

manufacturer. 

FAA’s Justification and Determination 

of the Effective Date 

Because of our requirement to 

promote safe flight of civil aircraft and 

thus the critical need to prevent 

cracking of certain barrel nuts which 

could result in reduced structural 

integrity of the affected part and 

consequent detachment of the wing or 

engine, and the short compliance time 

involved with this action, this AD must 

be issued immediately. 

Because an unsafe condition exists 

that requires the immediate adoption of 

this AD, we find that notice and 

opportunity for prior public comment 

hereon are impracticable and that good 

cause exists for making this amendment 

effective in less than 30 days. 

Comments Invited 

This AD is a final rule that involves 

requirements affecting flight safety, and 

we did not provide you with notice and 

an opportunity to provide your 

comments before it becomes effective. 

However, we invite you to send any 

written data, views, or arguments about 

this AD. Send your comments to an 

address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 

2009–0462; Directorate Identifier 2009– 

NM–063–AD’’ at the beginning of your 

comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this AD. We will consider all 

comments received by the closing date 

and may amend this 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 AD. 

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: 

23616 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 20, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

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 

This AD will not have federalism 

implications under Executive Order 

13132. This AD will 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 that this AD: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under 

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. 

You can find our regulatory 

evaluation and the estimated costs of 

compliance in the AD Docket. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

■ Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 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: 

2009–11–03 Lockheed: Amendment 39– 

15913. Docket No. FAA–2009–0462; 

Directorate Identifier 2009–NM–063–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This airworthiness directive (AD) is 

effective June 4, 2009. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to all Lockheed Model 

382, 382B, 382E, 382F, and 382G series 

airplanes, certificated in any category. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 57: Wings. 

Unsafe Condition 

(e) This AD results from a report of severe 

cracking of multiple barrel nuts in the wing 

station (WS) 220 upper wing joint found 

during scheduled maintenance. We are 

issuing this AD to prevent cracking of the 

barrel nuts in the upper wing joint, engine 

truss, and rear beam pylon support, which 

could result in reduced structural integrity of 

the affected part and consequent detachment 

of the wing or engine from the airplane. 

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. 

Inspection/Replacement if Necessary 

(g) Within 30 days after the effective date 

of this AD: Do a general visual inspection to 

identify discrepant barrel nuts in the upper 

wing joint, engine truss, and rear beam pylon 

support, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Lockheed 

Alert Service Bulletin A382–57–91, Revision 

1, dated March 25, 2009. Except as provided 

by paragraph (h) of this AD, if any discrepant 

barrel nut is found, before further flight, 

replace the barrel nut with a new barrel nut 

in accordance with the service bulletin. 

Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a 

general visual inspection is: ‘‘A visual 

examination of an interior or exterior area, 

installation, or assembly to detect obvious 

damage, failure, or irregularity. This level of 

inspection is made from within touching 

distance unless otherwise specified. A mirror 

may be necessary to ensure visual access to 

all surfaces in the inspection area. This level 

of inspection is made under normally 

available lighting conditions such as 

daylight, hangar lighting, flashlight, or 

droplight and may require removal or 

opening of access panels or doors. Stands, 

ladders, or platforms may be required to gain 

proximity to the area being checked.’’ 

Exception to Corrective Action Instructions 

(h) If any discrepant barrel nut is found 

during the inspection required by this AD, 

and Lockheed Alert Service Bulletin A382– 

57–91, Revision 1, dated March 25, 2009, 

specifies contacting Lockheed for appropriate 

action: Before further flight, replace the 

discrepant barrel nut using a method 

approved by the Manager, Atlanta Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA. For a repair 

method to be approved by the Manager, 

Atlanta ACO, as required by this paragraph, 

the Manager’s approval letter must 

specifically refer to this AD. 

Credit for Actions Done Using Previous 

Service Information 

(i) Actions done before the effective date of 

this AD in accordance with Lockheed Alert 

Service Bulletin A382–57–91, dated March 6, 

2009, are acceptable for compliance with the 

corresponding requirements of this AD. 

Reporting Not Required 

(j) Although Lockheed Alert Service 

Bulletin A382–57–91, Revision 1, dated 

March 25, 2009, specifies to submit certain 

information to the manufacturer, this AD 

does not include that requirement. 

Parts Installation 

(k) As of the time specified in paragraph 

(k)(1) or (k)(2) of this AD, as applicable, no 

person may install, on any airplane, a barrel 

nut in the upper wing joint, engine truss, and 

rear beam pylon support unless the barrel nut 

has been modified in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Lockheed 

Alert Service Bulletin A382–57–91, Revision 

1, dated March 25, 2009. 

(1) For unmarked barrel nuts with a 

deformed thread locking style: As of 30 days 

after the effective date of this AD. 

(2) For all other discrepant barrel nuts: As 

of the effective date of this AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(l)(1) The Manager, Atlanta ACO, 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: Carl 

Gray, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, 

ACE–117A, Atlanta ACO, FAA, One Crown 

Center, 1895 Phoenix Boulevard, Suite 450, 

Atlanta, Georgia 30349; telephone (770) 703– 

6131; fax (770) 703–6097. 

(2) To request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 

39.19. 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. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(m) You must use Lockheed Alert Service 

Bulletin A382–57–91, Revision 1, dated 

March 25, 2009, to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference of 

this service information under 5 U.S.C. 

552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Lockheed Continued 

Airworthiness Project Office, Attention 

Airworthiness, 86 South Cobb Drive, 

Marietta, Georgia 30063–0567; telephone 

770–494–5444; fax 770–494–5445; e-mail 

ams.portal@lmco.com; Internet http:// 

www.lockheedmartin.com/ams/tools/ 

TechPubs.html. 

(3) You may review copies of the service 

information at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 20, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 23617 

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. 

(4) You may also review copies of the 

service information that is incorporated by 

reference at the National Archives and 

Records Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go 

to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/ 

code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 7, 

2009. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–11590 Filed 5–19–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–0035; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–NM–096–AD; Amendment 

39–15909; AD 2009–10–13] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Saab AB, 

Saab Aerosystems Model 340A (SAAB/ 

SF340A) and SAAB 340B Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. This 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: 

Field experiences have revealed cracks in 

the frames and closing angle on the forward 

engine cowl door * * *. 

In case of a damaged frame and/or closing 

angle, the forward engine cowl door can 

loosen during flight and depart from the 

aircraft. 

* * * * * 

We are issuing this AD to require 

actions to correct the unsafe condition 

on these products. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective June 

24, 2009. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of a certain publication listed in this AD 

as of June 24, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in person at the 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Docket Operations, M–30, West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Shahram Daneshmandi, Aerospace 

Engineer, International Branch, ANM– 

116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 227–1112; fax (425) 227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to include an AD that would 

apply to the specified products. That 

NPRM was published in the Federal 

Register on February 17, 2009 (74 FR 

7384). That NPRM proposed to correct 

an unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The MCAI states: 

Field experiences have revealed cracks in 

the frames and closing angle on the forward 

engine cowl door NS STA [nacelle station] 

203 and 250. 

In case of a damaged frame and/or closing 

angle, the forward engine cowl door can 

loosen during flight and depart from the 

aircraft. 

This AD is issued to require a detailed 

inspection to find out if there are any cracks 

[or deformations or wear damage] in the 

frames and/or the closing angles. The 

inspection is on four points on each of the 

forward engine cowl doors. 

The corrective action depends on if the 

crack, deformation, or wear damage is 

within or outside certain defined limits, 

and includes doing a repair either in 

accordance with the specified service 

information, or contacting Saab for 

repair instructions and doing the repair. 

You may obtain further information by 

examining the MCAI in the AD docket. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

received no comments on the NPRM or 

on the determination of the cost to the 

public. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the available data and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting the AD 

as proposed. 

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 required different 

actions in this AD from those in the 

MCAI in order to follow our FAA 

policies. Any such differences are 

highlighted in a NOTE within the AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD will affect 

141 products of U.S. registry. We also 

estimate that it will take about 2 workhours per product to comply with the 

basic requirements of this AD. The 

average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. 

Based on these figures, we estimate the 

cost of this AD to the U.S. operators to 

be $22,560, or $160 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 AD will not 

have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD will 

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 AD: 

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