26312 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 2, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

10, 92 Stat. 2951 as amended by Pub. L. 102– 

486, sec. 7902, 106 Stat. 3123 (42 U.S.C. 

5851); sec. 102, Pub. L. 91–190, 83 Stat. 853 

(42 U.S.C. 4332); secs. 131, 132, 133, 135, 

137, 141, Pub. L. 97–425, 96 Stat. 2229, 2230, 

2232, 2241, sec. 148, Pub. L. 100–203, 101 

Stat. 1330–235 (42 U.S.C. 10151, 10152, 

10153, 10155, 10157, 10161, 10168); sec. 

1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note); 

sec. 651(e), Pub. L. 109–58, 119 Stat. 806–10 

(42 U.S.C. 2014, 2021, 2021b, 2111). 

Section 72.44(g) also issued under secs. 

142(b) and 148(c), (d), Pub. L. 100–203, 101 

Stat. 1330–232, 1330–236 (42 U.S.C. 

10162(b), 10168(c),(d)). Section 72.46 also 

issued under sec. 189, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 

2239); sec. 134, Pub. L. 97–425, 96 Stat. 2230 

(42 U.S.C. 10154). Section 72.96(d) also 

issued under sec. 145(g), Pub. L. 100–203, 

101 Stat. 1330–235 (42 U.S.C. 10165(g)). 

Subpart J also issued under secs. 2(2), 2(15), 

2(19), 117(a), 141(h), Pub. L. 97–425, 96 Stat. 

2202, 2203, 2204, 2222, 2244 (42 U.S.C. 

10101, 10137(a), 10161(h)). Subparts K and L 

are also issued under sec. 133, 98 Stat. 2230 

(42 U.S.C. 10153) and sec. 218(a), 96 Stat. 

2252 (42 U.S.C. 10198). 

2. In § 72.214, Certificate of 

Compliance 1014 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 72.214 List of approved spent fuel 

storage casks. 

* * * * * 

Certificate Number: 1014. 

Initial Certificate Effective Date: May 

31, 2000. 

Amendment Number 1 Effective Date: 

July 15, 2002. 

Amendment Number 2 Effective Date: 

June 7, 2005. 

Amendment Number 3 Effective Date: 

May 29, 2007. 

Amendment Number 4 Effective Date: 

January 8, 2008. 

Amendment Number 5 Effective Date: 

July 14, 2008. 

Amendment Number 6 Effective Date: 

August 17, 2009. 

SAR Submitted by: Holtec 

International. 

SAR Title: Final Safety Analysis 

Report for the HI–STORM 100 Cask 

System. 

Docket Number: 72–1014. 

Certificate Expiration Date: June 1, 

2020. 

Model Number: HI–STORM 100. 

* * * * * 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day 

of May 2009. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

R.W. Borchardt, 

Executive Director for Operations. 

[FR Doc. E9–12618 Filed 6–1–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–0465; Directorate 

Identifier 2007–NM–244–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model 

A310–203, –204, –221, –222, –304, 

–322, –324, and –325 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: 

DGAC [Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation 

Civile] France issued AD F–2005–078 [which 

corresponds to FAA AD 2006–02–06] to 

require the modification (Airbus 

modification 13023), defined in Airbus SB 

[service bulletin] A310–53–2124, to increase 

the service life of junctions of center box 

upper frame bases to upper fuselage arches. 

This structural modification falls within the 

scope of the work related to the extension of 

the service life of A310 aircraft and 

widespread fatigue damage evaluations. 

The threshold timescales for 

accomplishment of the tasks as defined in SB 

A310–53–2124 were refined and reduced. 

* * * 

* * * * * 

The unsafe condition is fatigue 

cracking of the frame foot run-outs, 

which could lead to rupture of the frame 

foot and cracking in adjacent frames and 

skin, and which could result in reduced 

structural integrity of the fuselage. 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 July 2, 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 

W12–40, 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 or 425–227–1152. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Operations 

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

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom 

Stafford, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98055–4056; telephone 

(425) 227–1622; fax (425) 227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2009–0465; Directorate Identifier 

2007–NM–244–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 we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 2, 2009 / Proposed Rules 26313 

Discussion 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2008–0212, 

dated December 4, 2008 (referred to 

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

unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The MCAI states: 

DGAC [Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation 

Civile] France issued AD F–2005–078 [which 

corresponds to FAA AD 2006–02–06, 

Amendment 39–14458, 71 FR 3214, January 

20, 2006] to require the modification (Airbus 

modification 13023), defined in Airbus SB 

[service bulletin] A310–53–2124, to increase 

the service life of junctions of center box 

upper frame bases to upper fuselage arches. 

This structural modification falls within the 

scope of the work related to the extension of 

the service life of A310 aircraft and 

widespread fatigue damage evaluations. 

The threshold timescales for 

accomplishment of the tasks as defined in SB 

A310–53–2124 were refined and reduced. 

Consequently, EASA issued AD 2007–0238 

to require compliance with Revision 1 of SB 

A310–53–2124 at the reduced compliance 

times, superseding (the requirements of) 

DGAC France AD F–2005–078. Subsequently, 

Airbus identified reference material that was 

erroneously introduced into Airbus SB 

A310–53–2124 Revision 1. As a result, the SB 

instructions could not be accomplished 

properly. Operators that tried to apply SB 

A310–53–2124 at Revision 1 had to contact 

Airbus; see also Airbus SBIT [service bulletin 

information telex] ref. 914.0135/08, dated 03 

March 2008. 

Consequently, AD 2007–0238 was revised 

to exclude reference to Airbus SB A310–53– 

2124 Revision 1 and to require 

accomplishment of the task(s) as described in 

the original SB A310–53–2124 instead, 

although retaining the reduced compliance 

times introduced by AD 2007–0238 at 

original issue. This new [EASA] AD is 

published to refer to Airbus SB A310–53– 

2124 Revision 02, the corrected version that 

is to be used to meet the requirements of this 

AD. 

The unsafe condition is fatigue 

cracking of the frame foot run-outs, 

which could lead to rupture of the frame 

foot and cracking in adjacent frames and 

skin, and which could result in reduced 

structural integrity of the fuselage. You 

may obtain further information by 

examining the MCAI in the AD docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

Airbus has issued Mandatory Service 

Bulletin A310–53–2124, Revision 02, 

dated May 22, 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 Note within the proposed 

AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

Based on the service information, we 

estimate that this proposed AD would 

affect about 68 products of U.S. registry. 

We also estimate that it would take 

about 41 work-hours per product to 

comply with the basic requirements of 

this proposed AD. The average labor 

rate is $80 per work-hour. Required 

parts would cost about $4,400 per 

product. Where the service information 

lists required parts costs that are 

covered under warranty, we have 

assumed that there will be no charge for 

these costs. As we do not control 

warranty coverage for affected parties, 

some parties may incur costs higher 

than estimated here. Based on these 

figures, we estimate the cost of the 

proposed AD on U.S. operators to be 

$522,240, or $7,680 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 39–14458 (71 FR 

3214, January 20, 2006) and adding the 

following new AD: 

Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2009–0465; 

Directorate Identifier 2007–NM–244–AD. 

26314 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 2, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by July 2, 

2009. 

Affected ADs 

(b) The proposed AD supersedes AD 2006– 

02–06, Amendment 39–14458. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Airbus Models 

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

–324 and –325 airplanes; all serial numbers; 

certificated in any category; except those 

airplanes on which Airbus Mandatory 

Service Bulletin A310–53–2124, dated April 

4, 2005, has been accomplished, or Airbus 

Modification 13023 has been accomplished 

in production. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53: Fuselage. 

Reason 

(e) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states: 

DGAC [Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation 

Civile] France issued AD F–2005–078 [which 

corresponds to FAA AD 2006–02–06, 

Amendment 39–14458, 71 FR 3214, January 

20, 2006] to require the modification (Airbus 

modification 13023), defined in Airbus SB 

[service bulletin] A310–53–2124, to increase 

the service life of junctions of center box 

upper frame bases to upper fuselage arches. 

This structural modification falls within the 

scope of the work related to the extension of 

the service life of A310 aircraft and 

widespread fatigue damage evaluations. 

The threshold timescales for 

accomplishment of the tasks as defined in SB 

A310–53–2124 were refined and reduced. 

Consequently, EASA issued AD 2007–0238 

to require compliance with Revision 1 of SB 

A310–53–2124 at the reduced compliance 

times, superseding (the requirements of) 

DGAC France AD F–2005–078. Subsequently, 

Airbus identified reference material that was 

erroneously introduced into Airbus SB 

A310–53–2124 Revision 1. As a result, the SB 

instructions could not be accomplished 

properly. Operators that tried to apply SB 

A310–53–2124 at Revision 1 had to contact 

Airbus; see also Airbus SBIT [service bulletin 

information telex] ref. 914.0135/08, dated 03 

March 2008. 

Consequently, AD 2007–0238 was revised 

to exclude reference to Airbus SB A310–53– 

2124 Revision 1 and to require 

accomplishment of the task(s) as described in 

the original SB A310–53–2124 instead, 

although retaining the reduced compliance 

times introduced by AD 2007–0238 at 

original issue. This new [EASA] AD is 

published to refer to Airbus SB A310–53– 

2124 Revision 02, the corrected version that 

is to be used to meet the requirements of this 

AD. 

The unsafe condition is fatigue cracking of 

the frame foot run-outs, which could lead to 

rupture of the frame foot and cracking in 

adjacent frames and skin, and which could 

result in reduced structural integrity of the 

fuselage. 

New Requirements of This AD: Actions and 

Compliance 

(f) Unless already done, do the following 

actions. 

(1) Except for airplanes identified in 

paragraph (f)(2) of this AD, at the later of the 

times specified in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and 

(f)(1)(ii) of this AD, accomplish inspections 

by rotating probe for cracking of holes H1 

through H29 on FR 43 through 46 inclusive, 

and inspections of holes H1 through H29 on 

FR 43 through 46 inclusive to determine the 

edge distance of the hole, in accordance with 

the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Mandatory Service Bulletin A310–53–2124, 

Revision 02, dated May 22, 2008 (‘‘the 

service bulletin’’). If no cracking is found and 

the edge distance is equal to or greater than 

the distance specified in the 

Accomplishment Instructions of the service 

bulletin, before further flight, do the cold 

expansion of the most fatigue sensitive 

fastener holes, as identified in the service 

bulletin. 

(i) Inspect at the applicable time indicated 

in Table 1 of this AD. Airbus Model A310– 

304, –322, –324, and –325 airplanes with an 

average flight time (AFT) equal to or less than 

3.17 flight hours are short range airplanes. 

Airbus Model A310–304, –322, –324, and 

–325 with an AFT exceeding 3.17 flight 

hours are long range airplanes. 

(ii) Within 500 flight cycles or 800 flight 

hours after the effective date of this AD, 

whichever occurs first. 

TABLE 1—COMPLIANCE TIMES

Affected airplanes Inspection modification threshold, whichever occurs later 

Model A310–304, –322, –324 and –325 short 

range airplanes.

Prior to accumulation of 26,500 flight cycles 

or 74,300 flight hours since first flight of the 

airplane, whichever occurs first.

Within 3,000 flight cycles after the effective 

date of this AD, without exceeding 29,200 

flight cycles or 81,800 flight hours since first 

flight, whichever occurs first. 

Model A310–304, –322, –324 and –325 long 

range airplanes.

Prior to accumulation of 23,400 flight cycles 

or 117,100 flight hours since first flight of 

the airplane, whichever occurs first.

Within 3,000 flight cycles after the effective 

date of this AD, without exceeding 25,800 

flight cycles or 129,000 flight hours since 

first flight, whichever occurs first. 

Model A310–203, –204, –221, and A310–222 .. Prior to accumulation of 23,400 flight cycles 

or 46,800 flight hours since first flight of the 

airplane, whichever occurs first.

Within 3,000 flight cycles after the effective 

date of this AD, without exceeding 28,800 

flight cycles or 57,700 flight hours since first 

flight, whichever occurs first. 

Note 1: To establish the average flight time, 

take the accumulated flight time (counted 

from the take-off up to the landing) and 

divide by the number of accumulated flight 

cycles. This gives the average flight time per 

flight cycle. 

(2) For airplanes that have been modified 

before the effective date of this AD in 

accordance with Airbus Mandatory Service 

Bulletin A310–53–2124, Revision 01, dated 

May 3, 2007: Within 500 flight cycles or 800 

flight hours after the effective date of this AD, 

whichever occurs first, contact Airbus and 

follow their corrective actions. 

(3) If, during any inspection required by 

paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, any cracking is 

found or if the edge distance is less than the 

distance specified in Airbus Mandatory 

Service Bulletin A310–53–2124, Revision 02, 

dated May 22, 2008, before further flight, 

contact Airbus and follow their corrective 

actions. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 2: 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, 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: 

Tom Stafford, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind 

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055– 

4056; telephone (425) 227–1622; fax (425) 

227–1149. Before using any approved AMOC 

on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your principal maintenance inspector 

(PMI) or principal avionics inspector (PAI), 

as appropriate, or lacking a principal 

inspector, your local Flight Standards District 

Office. The AMOC approval letter must 

specifically reference this AD. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 2, 2009 / Proposed Rules 26315 

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, 

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 Union 

Airworthiness Directive 2008–0212, dated 

December 4, 2008; and Airbus Mandatory 

Service Bulletin A310–53–2124, Revision 02, 

dated May 22, 2008; for related information. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 15, 

2009. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–12740 Filed 6–1–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–0497; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–NM–019–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Empresa 

Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. 

(EMBRAER) Model ERJ 170 Airplanes; 

and Model ERJ 190–100 LR, –100 IGW, 

–100 STD, –200 STD, –200 LR, and 

–200 IGW Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. This proposed 

AD results from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

originated by an aviation authority of 

another country to identify and correct 

an unsafe condition on an aviation 

product. The MCAI describes the unsafe 

condition as: 

It has been found the possibility of cracks 

developing in the ram air turbine (RAT) 

machined support, located in the forward 

compartment [zone 124] of [the] aircraft, due 

to downlock pin not [being] pull[ed] during 

its retraction. In case of RAT failure or 

malfunction, it will not provide electrical 

power to essential systems of [the] aircraft in 

[an] electrical emergency situation. 

* * * * * 

Lack of electrical power could result 

in reduced controllability of the 

airplane. 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 July 2, 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, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Empresa 

Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. 

(EMBRAER), Technical Publications 

Section (PC 060), Av. Brigadeiro Faria 

Lima, 2170–Putim–12227–901 Sa ̃o Jose 

dos Campos–SP–BRASIL; telephone: 

+55 12 3927–5852 or +55 12 3309–0732; 

fax: +55 12 3927–7546; e-mail: 

distrib@embraer.com.br; Internet: http:// 

www.flyembraer.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 

or 425–227–1152. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Operations 

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

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kenny Kaulia, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 227–2848; fax (425) 227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2009–0497; Directorate Identifier 

2009–NM–019–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 we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

The Ageˆncia Nacional de Aviac ̧a ̃o 

Civil (ANAC), which is the aviation 

authority for Brazil, has issued Brazilian 

Airworthiness Directives 2008–10–05 

and 2008–10–06, both dated November 

10, 2008 (referred to after this as ‘‘the 

MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe condition 

for the specified products. The MCAI 

states: 

It has been found the possibility of cracks 

developing in the ram air turbine (RAT) 

machined support, located in the forward 

compartment [zone 124] of [the] aircraft, due 

to downlock pin not [being] pull[ed] during 

its retraction. In case of RAT failure or 

malfunction, it will not provide electrical 

power to essential systems of [the] aircraft in 

[an] electrical emergency situation. 

* * * * * 

Lack of electrical power could result in 

reduced controllability of the airplane. 

Corrective actions include a detailed 

visual inspection for cracking of the 

RAT machined support, replacing the 

support with a new part if any crack is 

found, and reinforcing or replacing the 

support if no crack is found. You may 

obtain further information by examining 

the MCAI in the AD docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

Embraer has issued Service Bulletins 

170–53–0057, dated February 21, 2008; 

and 190–53–0027, dated February 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 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