27906 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 112 / Friday, June 12, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

other information collection burdens 

imposed on the public. This action does 

not impose any reporting or 

recordkeeping requirements. It pertains 

solely to the collection of debts owed to 

the federal government. 

Executive Order 12630 (Taking of 

Private Property) 

This action would not affect a taking 

of private property or otherwise have 

taking implications under Executive 

Order 12630, ‘‘Governmental Actions 

and Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights.’’ 

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice 

Reform) 

This action meets applicable 

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of 

Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice 

Reform,’’ to minimize litigation, 

eliminate ambiguity, and reduce 

burden. 

Executive Order 13045 (Protection of 

Children) 

Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (April 23, 1997, 

62 FR 19885), requires that agencies 

issuing economically significant rules, 

which also concern an environmental 

health or safety risk that an agency has 

reason to believe may 

disproportionately affect children, must 

include an evaluation of the 

environmental health and safety effects 

of the regulation on children. Section 5 

of Executive Order 13045 directs an 

agency to submit for a covered 

regulatory action an evaluation of its 

environmental health or safety effects 

on children. The EAC has determined 

that these rules are not covered 

regulatory actions as defined under 

Executive Order 13045. This 

determination is based upon the fact 

that this action is not economically 

significant under Executive Order 

12866, because the changes proposed 

would not have an impact of $100 

million or more in any one year, and do 

not constitute an environmental health 

risk or safety risk that would 

disproportionately affect children. 

Executive Order 12372 

(Intergovernmental Review) 

The regulations implementing 

Executive Order 12372 regarding 

intergovernmental consultation on 

federal programs and activities do not 

apply to this rulemaking. 

Executive Order 13211 (Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use) 

The EAC has analyzed this action 

under Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use.’’ This proposal is 

not a significant energy action within 

the meaning of section 4(b) of the 

Executive Order. This rule involves 

internal procedures of the collection of 

debts owed to the federal government, is 

not economically significant, and will 

not have a significant adverse effect on 

the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. 

List of Subjects 11 CFR Part 9430 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Debts, Claims. 

■ In consideration of the foregoing, EAC 

amends title 11, Code of Federal 

Regulations, chapter II, by adding Part 

9430 to read as follows: 

PART 9430—DEBT COLLECTION 

Sec. 

9430.1 Cross-reference to executive branchwide debt collection regulations 

9430.2 [Reserved] 

9430.3 [Reserved] 

9430.4 [Reserved] 

9430.5 [Reserved] 

Authority: 31 U.S.C. 3716(b); 31 U.S.C. 

3711(d)(2); 31 CFR parts 900–904, 

§ 9430.1 Cross-reference to executive 

branch-wide debt collection regulations. 

The U.S. Election Assistance 

Commission adopts the regulations at 31 

CFR parts 900–904, governing 

administrative collection, offset, 

compromise, and the suspension or 

termination of collection activity for 

civil claims for money, funds, or 

property, as defined by 31 U.S.C. 

3701(b). 

§ 9430.2 [Reserved] 

§ 9430.3 [Reserved] 

§ 9430.4 [Reserved] 

§ 9430.5 [Reserved] 

Thomas R. Wilkey, 

Executive Director, U.S. Election Assistance 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. E9–13859 Filed 6–11–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–KF–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–0284; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–CE–016–AD; Amendment 

39–15939; AD 2009–12–16] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Dornier 

Luftfahrt GmbH Models Dornier 228– 

100, Dornier 228–101, Dornier 228–200, 

Dornier 228–201, Dornier 228–202, and 

Dornier 228–212 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are superseding an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD) for 

the products listed above. This AD 

results from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

issued 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: 

The manufacturer reported findings of 

missing primer on the internal of the elevator 

and rudder of aircraft S/N 8200. The aircraft 

S/N 8200 was with RUAG for maintenance 

purposes. Investigation performed by RUAG 

showed that the paint removal procedure for 

the rudder and elevator was changed from a 

paint stripping with brush and scraper to a 

procedure where the parts were submerged 

in a tank filled with hot liquid stripper. The 

stripper is called TURCO 5669 from Henkel 

Surface Technologies. The stripping process 

is described in the Technical Process Bulletin 

No. 238799 dated 09/01/1999. This paint 

stripping process change was not 

communicated to and not approved by the 

TC–Holder. 

We are issuing this AD to require 

actions to correct the unsafe condition 

on these products. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective July 

17, 2009. 

On July 17, 2009, the Director of the 

Federal Register approved the 

incorporation by reference of certain 

publications listed in this AD. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in person at the 

Docket Management Facility, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC 20590. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg 

Davison, Glider Program Manager, 901 

Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 112 / Friday, June 12, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 27907 

Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329– 

4130; fax: (816) 329–4090. 

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 March 30, 2009 (74 FR 

14097), and proposed to supersede AD 

2008–08–15, Amendment 39–15467 (73 

FR 21220; April 21, 2008). That NPRM 

proposed to correct an unsafe condition 

for the specified products. The MCAI 

states that: 

The manufacturer reported findings of 

missing primer on the internal of the elevator 

and rudder of aircraft S/N 8200. The aircraft 

S/N 8200 was with RUAG for maintenance 

purposes. Investigation performed by RUAG 

showed that the paint removal procedure for 

the rudder and elevator was changed from a 

paint stripping with brush and scraper to a 

procedure where the parts were submerged 

in a tank filled with hot liquid stripper. The 

stripper is called TURCO 5669 from Henkel 

Surface Technologies. The stripping process 

is described in the Technical Process Bulletin 

No. 238799 dated 09/01/1999. This paint 

stripping process change was not 

communicated to and not approved by the 

TC–Holder. 

Corrosion damage can occur through 

insufficient surface protection. 

Consequently, the MCAI requires a 

detailed visual inspection of the inner 

structure of the rudder and elevator for 

signs of corrosion, de-bonded primer 

(yellow-green), and any deviation of 

surface protection. If the inspection 

results show corrosion beyond the 

acceptable level or areas with debonded primer, the inspection results 

have to be reported to RUAG Aerospace 

Services GmbH for further decisions. If 

necessary, repair the affected parts in 

accordance with the applicable repair 

instruction obtained from RUAG 

Aerospace Services GmbH. 

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 FAA policies. 

Any such differences are highlighted in 

a note within the AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD will affect 

17 products of U.S. registry. We also 

estimate that it will take about 3 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 $4,080, or $240 per product. 

We have no way of determining the 

number of airplanes or the associated 

costs of any follow-on repairs or 

replacements that might be required by 

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: 

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 

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 AD and placed it in the AD Docket. 

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 the NPRM, 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. 

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 

removing Amendment 39–15467 (73 FR 

21220; April 21, 2008) and adding the 

following new AD: 

2009–12–16 Dornier Luftfahrt GmbH: 

Amendment 39–15939; Docket No. 

FAA–2009–0284; Directorate Identifier 

2009–CE–016–AD. 

Effective Date 

(a) This airworthiness directive (AD) 

becomes effective July 17, 2009. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This AD supersedes AD 2008–08–15, 

Amendment 39–15467. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Dornier 228–100, 

Dornier 228–101, Dornier 228–200, Dornier 

228–201, Dornier 228–202, and Dornier 228– 

212 airplanes, all serial numbers, that: 

(1) Are certificated in any category; and 

27908 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 112 / Friday, June 12, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

(2) have had the rudder and/or elevator 

replaced or repaired at Fairchild Dornier or 

RUAG between the year 2000 and 2005. The 

concerned rudder and elevator part numbers 

and serial numbers are listed on page 7 of 

RUAG Aerospace Defence Technology 

Dornier 228 Service Bulletin No. SB–228–270 

(includes undated attachments 1 and 2 to 

SB–228–270 Rev. 1), Rev. No. 1, dated 

November 28, 2008. 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association of America 

(ATA) Code 51: Standard Practices/ 

Structures. 

Reason 

(e) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states: 

The manufacturer reported findings of 

missing primer on the internal of the elevator 

and rudder of aircraft S/N 8200. The aircraft 

S/N 8200 was with RUAG for maintenance 

purposes. Investigation performed by RUAG 

showed that the paint removal procedure for 

the rudder and elevator was changed from a 

paint stripping with brush and scraper to a 

procedure where the parts were submerged 

in a tank filled with hot liquid stripper. The 

stripper is called TURCO 5669 from Henkel 

Surface Technologies. The stripping process 

is described in the Technical Process Bulletin 

No. 238799 dated 09/01/1999. This paint 

stripping process change was not 

communicated to and not approved by the 

TC-Holder. 

Corrosion damage can occur through 

insufficient surface protection. Consequently, 

the MCAI requires a detailed visual 

inspection of the inner structure of the 

rudder and elevator for signs of corrosion, debonded primer (yellow-green), and any 

deviation of surface protection. If the 

inspection results show corrosion beyond the 

acceptable level or areas with de-bonded 

primer, the inspection results have to be 

reported to RUAG Aerospace Services GmbH 

for further decisions. If necessary, repair the 

affected parts in accordance with the 

applicable repair instruction obtained from 

RUAG Aerospace Services GmbH. 

Actions and Compliance 

(f) Unless already done, do the following 

actions: 

(1) Within 2 months after July 17, 2009 (the 

effective date of this AD), do a detailed visual 

inspection on the inner structure of the 

rudder and elevator for signs of corrosion, debonded primer (yellow-green), and any other 

deviation of surface protection following 

RUAG Aerospace Defence Technology 

Dornier 228 Service Bulletin No. SB–228–270 

(includes undated attachments 1 and 2 to 

SB–228–270 Rev. 1), Rev. No. 1, dated 

November 28, 2008. 

(2) If you find corrosion or areas with debonded primer as a result of the inspection 

required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, before 

further flight, do the following: 

(i) Report the inspection results to RUAG 

Aerospace Services GmbH, Dornier 228 

Customer Support, P.O. Box 1253, 82231 

Wessling, Federal Republic of Germany, 

telephone: +49 (0) 8153–30–2280; fax: +49 (0) 

8153–30–3030 and request FAA-approved 

repair instructions following RUAG 

Aerospace Defence Technology Dornier 228 

Service Bulletin No. SB–228–270 (includes 

undated attachments 1 and 2 to SB–228–270 

Rev. 1), Rev. No. 1, dated November 28, 2008. 

(ii) Repair corrosion following FAAapproved repair instructions obtained from 

RUAG Aerospace Services GmbH. 

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 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 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 German AD D–2007– 

350R1, dated January 30, 2009; and RUAG 

Aerospace Defence Technology Dornier 228 

Service Bulletin No. SB–228–270 (includes 

undated attachments 1 and 2 to SB–228–270 

Rev. 1), Rev. No. 1, dated November 28, 2008, 

for related information. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(i) You must use RUAG Aerospace Defence 

Technology Dornier 228 Service Bulletin No. 

SB–228–270 (includes undated attachments 1 

and 2 to SB–228–270 Rev. 1), Rev. No. 1, 

dated November 28, 2008, 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 RUAG Aerospace Services 

GmbH, Dornier 228 Customer Support, P.O. 

Box 1253, 82231 Wessling, Federal Republic 

of Germany, telephone: +49 (0) 8153–30– 

2280; fax: +49 (0) 8153–30–3030; E-mail: 

custsupport.dornier228@ruag.com; Internet: 

http://www.ruag.com/. 

(3) You may review copies of the service 

information incorporated by reference for 

this AD at the FAA, Central Region, Office of 

the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Kansas 

City, Missouri 64106. For information on the 

availability of this material at the Central 

Region, call (816) 329–3768. 

(4) You may also review copies of the 

service information incorporated by reference 

for this AD 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 Kansas City, Missouri, on June 4, 

2009. 

Kim Smith, 

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–13693 Filed 6–11–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–0523; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–NM–018–AD; Amendment 

39–15934; AD 2009–12–11] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model 

A340–541 and –642 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule; request for 

comments. 

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: 

Following a refined Finite Element Model 

(FEM) analysis of the Nose Landing Gear 

(NLG) actuator fitting installed on the roof 

panel of the NLG box of all A340–500/–600 

aircraft, it has been demonstrated that 

potential fatigue cracks can be initiated on 

the NLG actuator fitting flanges. 

This situation, if not corrected, could lead 

to inadvertent extension of the NLG which 

could adversely affect the aircraft’s continued 

safe flight or [could result in] failure to 

retract the NLG which, in combination with 

an engine failure, could adversely affect the 

aircraft’s safe take off.