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, 18477-18479 [E9-9327]

Download as PDF 18477 Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 74, No. 77 Thursday, April 23, 2009 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 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. Federal Aviation Administration Examining the AD Docket This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules. 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2009–0261; Directorate Identifier 2009–CE–017–AD] 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: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); extension of the comment period. SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier NPRM 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: rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS Excessive wear on a guide pin of a power lever has been detected during inspections. The total loss of the pin could cause loss of the flight idle stop and lead to inadvertent activation of the beta mode in flight. The inadvertent activation of beta mode in flight can result in loss of control 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 May 26, 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 VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:23 Apr 22, 2009 Jkt 217001 You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg Davison, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329–4130; fax: (816) 329–4090. 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–2009–0261; Directorate Identifier 2009–CE–017–AD’’ at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD because of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD. Discussion We proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 with an earlier NPRM for the specified products, which was published in the Federal Register on PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 March 25, 2009 (74 FR 12737). That earlier NPRM proposed to require actions intended to address the unsafe condition for the products listed above. Since that NPRM was issued, we realized our interpretation of the initial compliance time was different than that in the MCAI and service bulletin based on differences between the FAA’s regulatory authority and that of the State of Design. In particular, the FAA does not specifically mandate inspections at 9,600 hours time-in-service (TIS) and at 1,200-hour TIS intervals without issuing an AD. The intent of the MCAI was based on these inspection intervals being mandatory. Therefore, the following should be incorporated into the NPRM: • Those airplanes that did not have the guide pins inspected within 9,600 hours TIS should be inspected within 100 hours TIS; • Those airplanes with more than 1,200 hours TIS since the last inspection and that have not had the pins replaced since that inspection should have the inspection done again within 100 hours TIS; • All airplanes should be inspected at intervals not to exceed 1,200 hours TIS, unless the pins are replaced; and • Replacement of the pins would allow 9,600 hours TIS before a followon inspection. Relevant Service Information RUAG Aerospace Defence Technology has issued Dornier 228 Alert Service Bulletin ASB–228–279, dated December 19, 2008. The actions described in this service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI. FAA’s Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design. Certain changes described above expand the scope of the earlier NPRM. E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 18478 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 77 / Thursday, April 23, 2009 / Proposed Rules As a result, we have determined that it is necessary to extend the comment period to provide additional opportunity for the public to comment on the proposed AD. Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service Information We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information provided in the MCAI and related service information. We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are highlighted in a NOTE within the proposed AD. rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS Costs of Compliance Based on the service information, we estimate that this AD will affect 17 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 20 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 $10 per product. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $27,370, or $1,610 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 VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:23 Apr 22, 2009 Jkt 217001 under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation: 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new AD: The total loss of the pin could cause loss of the flight idle stop and lead to inadvertent activation of the beta mode in flight. The inadvertent activation of beta mode in flight can result in loss of control of the airplane. For the reasons described above, this new EASA Airworthiness Directive (AD) introduces a repetitive detailed inspection of the guide pins of the power and condition levers and requires the replacement of the pins that exceed the allowable wear-limits. Actions and Compliance (f) Do the following actions per the instructions in RUAG Aerospace Defence Technology Dornier 228 Alert Service Bulletin ASB–228–279, dated December 19, 2008: (1) Initial Inspection: Unless already done within the last 1,200 hours TIS as of the effective date of this AD, inspect upon accumulating 9,600 hours on the guide pins of the power and condition levers or within the next 100 hours TIS after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later. (2) Repetitive Inspections: Inspect within 1,200 hours since the last inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,200 hours TIS. (3) Replacement: Replace the guide pins as follows: (i) Before further flight, after any inspection required in paragraphs (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this AD, where any guide pin exceeds the acceptable wear-limits as defined in the service bulletin; and (ii) Prior to any required inspection, you may install new power and condition levers guide pins instead of doing the inspections required in this AD. You must then inspect or install new pins upon accumulating 9,600 hours TIS and follow the repetitive inspection intervals of this AD if replacement is not made. Note 1: If the hours TIS of the throttle box assembly is unknown, you may use the hours TIS of the airplane to determine the compliance time for the inspection. FAA AD Differences DORNIER LUFTFAHRT GmbH: Docket No. FAA–2009–0261; Directorate Identifier 2009–CE–017–AD. Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information as follows: No differences. Comments Due Date (a) We must receive comments by May 26, 2009. 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. Affected ADs (b) None. Applicability (c) This AD applies to Models Dornier 228– 100, Dornier 228–101, Dornier 228–200, Dornier 228–201, Dornier 228–202, and Dornier 228–212 airplanes, all serial numbers, certificated in any category. Subject (d) Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 76: Engine Controls. Reason (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) states: Excessive wear on a guide pin of a power lever has been detected during inspections. PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 77 / Thursday, April 23, 2009 / Proposed Rules Corrective actions are considered FAAapproved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority (or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service. (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056. Related Information (h) Refer to MCAI EASA AD No.: 2009– 0031, dated February 18, 2009; and RUAG Aerospace Defence Technology Dornier 228 Alert Service Bulletin ASB–228–279, dated December 19, 2008, for related information. Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April 16, 2009. Kim Smith, Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E9–9327 Filed 4–22–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R04–OAR–2005–SC–0002–200535(b); FRL–8894–7] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; South Carolina; NOX SIP Call Phase II rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a source-specific State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control on April 14, 2005. This revision responds to EPA’s regulation entitled, ‘‘Interstate Ozone Transport: Response to Court Decisions on the Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) SIP Call, NOX SIP Call Technical Amendments, and Section 126 Rules,’’ otherwise known as the ‘‘NOX SIP Call Phase II.’’ This revision meets the requirements of the NOX SIP Call Phase II, which requires South Carolina to submit NOX SIP Call Phase II revisions necessary to achieve applicable, incremental reductions of NOX, including emission reductions from large internal combustion engines. Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Corporation Station 140 (Transco) is the only facility in South Carolina affected by the NOX SIP Call Phase II. The intended effect of this SIP revision is to reduce emissions of NOX originating in the State of South VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:23 Apr 22, 2009 Jkt 217001 Carolina to help attain and maintain the national ambient air quality standard for ozone. This action is being taken pursuant to section 110 of the Clean Air Act. In the Final Rules Section of this Federal Register, EPA is approving the State’s source-specific SIP revision as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this rule, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this document. Any parties interested in commenting on this document should do so at this time. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before May 26, 2009. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– OAR–2005–SC–0002, by one of the following methods: 1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. E-mail: ward.nacosta@epa.gov. 3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2005–SC– 0002,’’ Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Nacosta C. Ward, Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office’s normal hours of operation. The Regional Office’s official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal holidays. Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to submit comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nacosta C. Ward, Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 18479 Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The telephone number is (404) 562–9140. Ms. Ward can also be reached via electronic mail at ward.nacosta@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For additional information see the direct final rule which is published in the Rules Section of this Federal Register. Dated: April 10, 2009. Beverly H. Banister, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. [FR Doc. E9–9223 Filed 4–22–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 [EPA–R05–OAR–2009–0219; FRL–8894–9] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Michigan; Redesignation of the Detroit-Ann Arbor Area to Attainment for Ozone AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to make a determination under the Clean Air Act (CAA) that the Detroit-Ann Arbor nonattainment area has attained the 8hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The DetroitAnn Arbor area includes Lenawee, Livingston, Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, St. Clair, Washtenaw, and Wayne Counties. This determination is based on quality-assured ambient air quality monitoring data for the 2006–2008 ozone seasons that demonstrate that the 8-hour ozone NAAQS has been attained in the area. EPA is proposing to approve a request from the State of Michigan to redesignate the Detroit-Ann Arbor area to attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) submitted this request on March 6, 2009. In proposing to approve this request EPA is also proposing to approve, as a revision to the Michigan State Implementation Plan (SIP), the State’s plan for maintaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS through 2020 in the area. EPA is proposing to approve the 2005 base year emissions inventory for the Detroit-Ann Arbor area as meeting the requirements of section 182(a)(1) of the CAA. EPA also finds adequate and is proposing to approve the State’s 2020 E:\FR\FM\23APP1.SGM 23APP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 77 (Thursday, April 23, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18477-18479]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-9327]


========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 77 / Thursday, April 23, 2009 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 18477]]



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0261; Directorate Identifier 2009-CE-017-AD]
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: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); extension of 
the comment period.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier NPRM 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:

    Excessive wear on a guide pin of a power lever has been detected 
during inspections. The total loss of the pin could cause loss of 
the flight idle stop and lead to inadvertent activation of the beta 
mode in flight. The inadvertent activation of beta mode in flight 
can result in loss of control 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 May 26, 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.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility 
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory 
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street 
address for the Docket Office (telephone (800) 647-5527) is in the 
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly 
after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg Davison, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, 
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 
64106; telephone: (816) 329-4130; fax: (816) 329-4090.

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-2009-0261; 
Directorate Identifier 2009-CE-017-AD'' at the beginning of your 
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We 
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend 
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We 
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we 
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 with an earlier NPRM for the 
specified products, which was published in the Federal Register on 
March 25, 2009 (74 FR 12737). That earlier NPRM proposed to require 
actions intended to address the unsafe condition for the products 
listed above.
    Since that NPRM was issued, we realized our interpretation of the 
initial compliance time was different than that in the MCAI and service 
bulletin based on differences between the FAA's regulatory authority 
and that of the State of Design. In particular, the FAA does not 
specifically mandate inspections at 9,600 hours time-in-service (TIS) 
and at 1,200-hour TIS intervals without issuing an AD. The intent of 
the MCAI was based on these inspection intervals being mandatory. 
Therefore, the following should be incorporated into the NPRM:
     Those airplanes that did not have the guide pins inspected 
within 9,600 hours TIS should be inspected within 100 hours TIS;
     Those airplanes with more than 1,200 hours TIS since the 
last inspection and that have not had the pins replaced since that 
inspection should have the inspection done again within 100 hours TIS;
     All airplanes should be inspected at intervals not to 
exceed 1,200 hours TIS, unless the pins are replaced; and
     Replacement of the pins would allow 9,600 hours TIS before 
a follow-on inspection.

Relevant Service Information

    RUAG Aerospace Defence Technology has issued Dornier 228 Alert 
Service Bulletin ASB-228-279, dated December 19, 2008. The actions 
described in this service information are intended to correct the 
unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another 
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant 
to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they 
have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and 
service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because 
we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe condition exists 
and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type 
design.
    Certain changes described above expand the scope of the earlier 
NPRM.

[[Page 18478]]

As a result, we have determined that it is necessary to extend the 
comment period to provide additional opportunity for the public to 
comment on the proposed AD.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service 
Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in 
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it 
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the 
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these 
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information 
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those 
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are 
highlighted in a NOTE within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this AD will 
affect 17 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would 
take about 20 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 $10 per product.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on 
U.S. operators to be $27,370, or $1,610 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.


Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

DORNIER LUFTFAHRT GmbH: Docket No. FAA-2009-0261; Directorate 
Identifier 2009-CE-017-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by May 26, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Models Dornier 228-100, Dornier 228-101, 
Dornier 228-200, Dornier 228-201, Dornier 228-202, and Dornier 228-
212 airplanes, all serial numbers, certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 76: Engine 
Controls.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) 
states:
    Excessive wear on a guide pin of a power lever has been detected 
during inspections. The total loss of the pin could cause loss of 
the flight idle stop and lead to inadvertent activation of the beta 
mode in flight. The inadvertent activation of beta mode in flight 
can result in loss of control of the airplane.
    For the reasons described above, this new EASA Airworthiness 
Directive (AD) introduces a repetitive detailed inspection of the 
guide pins of the power and condition levers and requires the 
replacement of the pins that exceed the allowable wear-limits.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Do the following actions per the instructions in RUAG 
Aerospace Defence Technology Dornier 228 Alert Service Bulletin ASB-
228-279, dated December 19, 2008:
    (1) Initial Inspection: Unless already done within the last 
1,200 hours TIS as of the effective date of this AD, inspect upon 
accumulating 9,600 hours on the guide pins of the power and 
condition levers or within the next 100 hours TIS after the 
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.
    (2) Repetitive Inspections: Inspect within 1,200 hours since the 
last inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD and 
thereafter at intervals not to exceed 1,200 hours TIS.
    (3) Replacement: Replace the guide pins as follows:
    (i) Before further flight, after any inspection required in 
paragraphs (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this AD, where any guide pin exceeds 
the acceptable wear-limits as defined in the service bulletin; and
    (ii) Prior to any required inspection, you may install new power 
and condition levers guide pins instead of doing the inspections 
required in this AD. You must then inspect or install new pins upon 
accumulating 9,600 hours TIS and follow the repetitive inspection 
intervals of this AD if replacement is not made.

    Note 1:  If the hours TIS of the throttle box assembly is 
unknown, you may use the hours TIS of the airplane to determine the 
compliance time for the inspection.

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, 
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.

[[Page 18479]]

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 EASA AD No.: 2009-0031, dated February 18, 
2009; and RUAG Aerospace Defence Technology Dornier 228 Alert 
Service Bulletin ASB-228-279, dated December 19, 2008, for related 
information.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April 16, 2009.
Kim Smith,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E9-9327 Filed 4-22-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P