Airworthiness Directives; MD Helicopters, Inc. Model 600N Helicopters, 7063-7065 [05-2608]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 27 / Thursday, February 10, 2005 / Proposed Rules
to operate the helicopter to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be
accomplished, provided that no fracture or
crack or looseness was found during the
inspections required by this AD.
Note: The subject of this AD is addressed
in Ente Nazionale per l’Aviazione Civile
(Italy) AD No. 2004–099, dated March 29,
2004.
14 CFR Part 39
Submit comments in
triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 2004–SW–
16–AD, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room
663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137. You may
also send comments electronically to
the Rules Docket at the following
address: 9-asw-adcomments@faa.gov.
Comments may be inspected at the
Office of the Regional Counsel between
9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred
Guerin, Aviation Safety Engineers, FAA,
Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, Airframe Branch, 3960
Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, California
90712, telephone (562) 627–5232, fax
(562) 627–5210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[Docket No. 2004–SW–16–AD]
Comments Invited
RIN 2120–AA64
Interested persons are invited to
participate in the making of the
proposed rule by submitting such
written data, views, or arguments as
they may desire. Communications
should identify the Rules Docket
number and be submitted in triplicate to
the address specified above. All
communications received on or before
the closing date for comments will be
considered before taking action on the
proposed rule. The proposals contained
in this document may be changed in
light of the comments received.
Comments are specifically invited on
the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of
the proposed rule. All comments
submitted will be available, both before
and after the closing date for comments,
in the Rules Docket for examination by
interested persons. A report
summarizing each FAA-public contact
concerned with the substance of this
proposal will be filed in the Rules
Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their mailed
comments submitted in response to this
proposal must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made:
‘‘Comments to Docket No. 2004–SW–
16–AD.’’ The postcard will be date
stamped and returned to the
commenter.
Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on February
1, 2005.
David A. Downey,
Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 05–2591 Filed 2–9–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Airworthiness Directives; MD
Helicopters, Inc. Model 600N
Helicopters
Federal Aviation
Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document proposes
superseding an existing airworthiness
directive (AD) for the MD Helicopters,
Inc. (MDHI) Model 600N helicopters.
That AD currently requires certain
inspections of both upper tailboom
attachments, nutplates, and angles for a
crack or thread damage, and repairing or
replacing any cracked or damaged part.
Also, that AD requires replacing certain
tailboom attachment bolts, adding a
washer to each bolt, and modifying both
upper access covers. This action would
require installing six additional
inspection holes in the aft fuselage skin
panels and inspecting the upper and
lower tailboom attachment fittings, the
upper longerons, and the angles and
nutplates for cracks. Also, the AD would
provide a terminating action of
modifying the fuselage aft section to
strengthen the tailboom attachments
and longerons. This proposal is
prompted by an analysis that shows that
certain tailboom attachments and
longerons may develop cracks. The
actions specified by the proposed AD
are intended to prevent failure of a
tailboom attachment, loss of the
tailboom, and subsequent loss of control
of the helicopter.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before April 11, 2005.
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:17 Feb 09, 2005
Jkt 205001
ADDRESSES:
Discussion
On November 28, 2001, the FAA
issued Emergency AD 2001–24–51 for
MDHI Model 600N helicopters and
issued the final rule; request for
comments on April 2, 2002
(Amendment 39–12706 (67 FR 17934,
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
7063
April 12, 2002)). That AD requires
implementing the procedures described
in MD Helicopters, Inc. Service Bulletin
SB600N–03, dated November 2, 2001
(SB600N–03), for inspecting both upper
tailboom attachments, nutplates, and
angles for a crack or thread damage and
repairing or replacing damaged parts. In
addition, if one bolt is broken, the AD
requires replacing all four bolts. Also,
adding a washer to each bolt and
modifying both upper access covers as
well as a 25-hour time-in-service (TIS)
repetitive borescope inspection of the
tailboom attachments, nutplates, and
angles is required. That action was
prompted by the discovery of cracked
bolts and attachments on several
helicopters. The requirements of that
AD are intended to prevent failure of a
tailboom attachment, loss of the
tailboom, and subsequent loss of control
of the helicopter.
Since issuing that AD, the FAA has
reviewed an analysis by the
manufacturer and has determined that
the tailboom fittings, part number (P/N)
500N3422–BSC (BSC is interchangeable
with basic) and –3, and the upper
longerons, P/N 500N3120–3 and –4, will
develop cracks due to the same design
error as the current AD. Also, the FAA
has reviewed MDHI Service Bulletin
SB600N–039, dated December 9, 2003,
which provides information pertaining
to adding six inspection holes in the
fuselage and certain inspections of the
tailboom attachment fittings and upper
longerons for cracks. Also, MDHI has
issued Technical Bulletin TB 600N–007,
dated January 12, 2004, which provides
information pertaining to modifying the
fuselage aft section to strengthen
tailboom attachment fittings and
longerons.
This previously described unsafe
condition is likely to exist or develop on
other helicopters of the same type
design. Therefore, the proposed AD
would supersede AD 2001–24–51 to
require the following:
• Before further flight, drill an
inspection hole at fuselage station L167
and R167 (L indicates Left and R
indicates Right) on each side of the
fuselage.
• Within 25 hours time-in-service
(TIS):
• Drill two additional inspection
holes on each side of the fuselage at
L166, R166, L153, and R153.
• Visually inspect the lower
attachment fittings and the upper
longerons through inspection holes at
L166, R166, L153 and R153,
respectively.
• Thereafter, at specified intervals,
remove the plug buttons from the
inspection holes at L167, R167, L166,
E:\FR\FM\10FEP1.SGM
10FEP1
7064
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 27 / Thursday, February 10, 2005 / Proposed Rules
and R166. Using a bright light, inspect
the attachment fittings, angles, and
nutplates for a crack. Through
inspection holes L153 and R153, using
a bright light and mirror or borescope,
visually inspect the bottom surface of
each longeron for a crack.
• Before further flight, replace any
cracked attachment fitting, angle,
nutplate, longeron, and any nutplate
with thread damage with an appropriate
airworthy part.
This action proposes to require that
operators modify the aft fuselage to
strengthen the tailboom attachments
and longeron within 4 years, which
would constitute terminating action for
the requirements of the AD.
The FAA estimates that this proposed
AD would affect 39 helicopters of U.S.
registry. The proposed actions would
take about 322 work hours to modify
and inspect the fuselage aft section per
helicopter at an average labor rate of $65
per work hour. Required parts would
cost approximately $14,960 per
helicopter. Based on these figures, we
estimate the total cost impact of the
proposed AD on U.S. operators to be
$1,399,710.
Regulatory Findings
The regulations proposed herein
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. Therefore,
it is determined that this proposal
would not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify that 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) if
promulgated, 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. A copy of the draft
economic evaluation prepared for this
action is contained in the Rules Docket.
A copy of it may be obtained by
contacting the Rules Docket at the
location provided under the caption
ADDRESSES.
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
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:17 Feb 09, 2005
Jkt 205001
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.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the
authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend part
39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations
(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. Section 39.13 is amended by
removing Amendment 39–12706 (67 FR
17934) and by adding a new
airworthiness directive (AD), to read as
follows:
MD Helicopters, Inc.: Docket No. 2004–SW–
16–AD. Supersedes AD 2001–24–51,
Amendment 39–12706, Docket No.
2001–SW–57–AD.
Applicability: Model 600N, serial numbers
with a prefix of ‘‘RN’’ 003 through 066 and
068, that have not been modified by
following the Accomplishment Instructions
of MDHI Technical Bulletin TB600N–007,
dated January 12, 2004, certificated in any
category.
Compliance: Required as indicated.
To prevent failure of a tailboom
attachment, loss of the tailboom, and
subsequent loss of control of the helicopter,
accomplish the following:
(a) Before further flight, unless
accomplished previously, drill an inspection
hole at fuselage station L167 and R167 (L
indicates Left and R indicates Right) on each
side of the fuselage by following the
Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph
2.B.(6) of MD Helicopters, Inc. (MDHI)
Service Bulletin SB600N–036, dated
November 2, 2001.
(b) Within 25 hours time-in-service (TIS),
unless accomplished previously:
(1) Drill two additional inspection holes
(L166 and L153 on the left side and R166 and
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
R153 on the right side) on each side of the
fuselage as shown for the left side of the
fuselage in Figure 1 of MDHI SB600N–039,
dated December 9, 2003 (SB–039), by
following the Accomplishment Instruction
paragraphs of SB–039 as follows:
(i) Paragraphs 2.A.(1)(a), (b), and (d) for
inspection holes at L166 and R166;
(ii) Paragraphs 2.A.(2)(a), (b), and (d) for
inspection holes at L153 and R153; and
(2) Visually inspect for a crack by
following the Accomplishment Instruction
paragraphs of SB–039 at the following
locations, except you are not required to
contact MDHI.
(i) The lower left and right attachment
fittings through inspection holes at L166 and
R166, paragraph 2.A.(1)(c).
(ii) The upper left and right longerons
through inspection holes at L153 and R153,
paragraph 2.A.(2)(c).
Note: The reference in Figure 1 of SB–039
to inspection hole at L167 mistakenly states
that it was ‘‘Added by SB900–036.’’
Inspection holes at L167 and R167 were
originally specified by SB600N–036.
(c) Thereafter, at the specified intervals,
remove the plug buttons from the inspection
holes, and using a bright light, inspect the
upper left and upper right attachment
fittings, angles, and nutplates for a crack by
following the Accomplishment Instruction
paragraphs of SB–039, as follows, except you
are not required to contact MDHI.
(1) At intervals not to exceed 25 hours TIS,
for inspection holes at L167 and R167,
inspect the upper left and upper right
attachment fittings, angles, and nutplates by
following paragraphs 2.B.(2) through 2.B.(4).
(2) At intervals not to exceed 100 hours
TIS, for inspection holes at L166 and R166,
inspect the lower left and lower right
attachment fittings, angles, and nutplates by
following paragraphs 2.B.(2) through 2.B.(4).
(3) At intervals not to exceed 1200 hours
TIS, for inspection holes L153 and R153
using a mirror or borescope, inspect the
bottom surface of each longeron by following
paragraphs 2.C.(2) and 2.C.(3).
(d) Before further flight, replace any
cracked attachment fitting, angle, nutplate,
longeron, and any nutplate with thread
damage with an appropriate airworthy part.
(e) On or before 4 years from the effective
date of this AD, modify the aft fuselage to
strengthen the tailboom attachments and the
longerons by following the Accomplishment
Instructions of MDHI Technical Bulletin
TB600N–007, dated January 12, 2004 (TB–
007). Modifying the aft fuselage by following
TB–007 constitutes terminating action for the
requirements of this AD.
(f) To request a different method of
compliance or a different compliance time
for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR
39.19. Contact the Los Angeles Aircraft
Certification Office (LAACO), FAA, for
information about previously approved
alternative methods of compliance.
E:\FR\FM\10FEP1.SGM
10FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 27 / Thursday, February 10, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on February
2, 2005.
David A. Downey,
Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 05–2608 Filed 2–9–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[COTP San Juan 05–007]
RIN 1625–AA87
Security Zone: HOVENSA Refinery, St.
Croix, United States Virgin Islands
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
establish a permanent security zone in
the vicinity of the HOVENSA refinery
facility on St. Croix, U. S. Virgin
Islands. The security zone is needed for
national security reasons to protect the
public and the HOVENSA facility from
potential subversive acts. The proposed
rule would exclude entry into the
proposed permanent security zone by
all vessels without permission of the
U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the Port
San Juan or a scheduled arrival in
accordance with the Notice of Arrival
requirements of 33 CFR part 160,
subpart C.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Coast Guard on or before
March 28, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may mail comments
and related material to Sector San Juan,
5 Calle La Puntilla, San Juan, PR 00901.
Sector San Juan Waterways
Management will maintain the public
docket for this rulemaking. Comments
and material received from the public,
as well as documents indicated in this
preamble as being available in the
docket, will become part of this docket
and will be available for inspection or
copying at Resident Inspections Office
in St. Croix, United States Virgin Island
between 7 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lieutenant Junior Grade Katiuska Pabon
of Sector San Juan Waterways
Management at 787–289–0739.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:17 Feb 09, 2005
Jkt 205001
comments and related material. If you
do so, please include your name and
address, identify the docket number for
this rulemaking (COTP San Juan–05–
007), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and give the reason for each
comment. Please submit all comments
and related material in an unbound
format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches,
suitable for copying. If you would like
to know that your submission reached
us, please enclose a stamped, selfaddressed postcard or envelope. We will
consider all comments and material
received during the comment period.
We may change this proposed rule in
view of them.
Public Meeting
We do not now plan to hold a public
meeting. But you may submit a request
for a meeting by writing to SECTOR San
Juan at the address under ADDRESSES
explaining why one would be
beneficial. If we determine that one
would aid this rulemaking, we will hold
one at a time and place announced by
a later notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
The Coast Guard has published
similar temporary security zones in the
Federal Register at 67 FR 2332, January
17, 2002; 67 FR 57952, September 13,
2002; 68 FR 22296, April 28, 2003; 68
FR 41081, July 10, 2003; 69 FR 6150,
February 10, 2004; 69 FR 29232, May
21, 2004; and 70 FR 2950, January 19,
2005. Given the highly volatile nature of
the substances stored at the HOVENSA
facility, the Coast Guard recognizes that
it could be a potential terrorist target
and there is a continuing risk that
subversive activity could be launched
by vessels or persons in close proximity
to the facility. This activity could be
directed against tank vessels and the
waterfront facility. This security zone is
necessary to decrease the risk that
subversive activity could be launched
against the HOVENSA facility. The
Captain of the Port San Juan is reducing
risk by prohibiting all vessels without a
scheduled arrival in accordance with
the Notice of Arrival requirements of 33
CFR part 160, subpart C from entering
within approximately 2 miles of the
HOVENSA facility unless specifically
authorized by the Captain of the Port
San Juan.
Discussion of Proposed Rule
The proposed permanent security
zone around the HOVENSA facility
would be encompassed by a line
connecting the following coordinates:
17°41′31″ North, 64°45′09″ West;
17°39′36″ North, 64°44′12″ West;
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
7065
17°40′00″ North, 64°43′36″ West; and
17°41′48″ North, 64°44′25″ West, and
back to the point of origin. The security
zone includes the waters extending
approximately 2 miles seaward from the
HOVENSA facility, Limetree Bay
Channel and Limetree Bay. All
coordinates are based upon North
American Datum 1983 (NAD 1983). All
vessels without a scheduled arrival in
accordance with the Notice of Arrival
requirements of 33 CFR part 160,
subpart C are excluded from the zone
unless specifically authorized by the
Captain of the Port San Juan.
Regulatory Evaluation
This proposed rule is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866,
Regulatory Planning and Review, and
does not require an assessment of
potential costs and benefits under
section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office
of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order. It is not
‘‘significant’’ under the regulatory
policies and procedures of the
Department of Homeland Security
(DHS).
We expect the economic impact of
this proposed rule to be so minimal that
a full Regulatory Evaluation under the
regulatory policies and procedures of
DHS is unnecessary. The burden
imposed on the public by this rule is
minimal and mariners may obtain
permission to enter the zone from the
Coast Guard Captain of the Port San
Juan or by scheduling vessel arrival in
accordance with the Notice of Arrival
requirements of 33 CFR part 160,
subpart C.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered
whether this proposed rule would have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises
small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations that are independently
owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and
governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
The factual basis for this certification
is as follows:
(1) Owners of small charter fishing or
diving operations that operate near the
HOVENSA facility may be affected by
the existence of this security zone.
E:\FR\FM\10FEP1.SGM
10FEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 27 (Thursday, February 10, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7063-7065]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-2608]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 2004-SW-16-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; MD Helicopters, Inc. Model 600N
Helicopters
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document proposes superseding an existing airworthiness
directive (AD) for the MD Helicopters, Inc. (MDHI) Model 600N
helicopters. That AD currently requires certain inspections of both
upper tailboom attachments, nutplates, and angles for a crack or thread
damage, and repairing or replacing any cracked or damaged part. Also,
that AD requires replacing certain tailboom attachment bolts, adding a
washer to each bolt, and modifying both upper access covers. This
action would require installing six additional inspection holes in the
aft fuselage skin panels and inspecting the upper and lower tailboom
attachment fittings, the upper longerons, and the angles and nutplates
for cracks. Also, the AD would provide a terminating action of
modifying the fuselage aft section to strengthen the tailboom
attachments and longerons. This proposal is prompted by an analysis
that shows that certain tailboom attachments and longerons may develop
cracks. The actions specified by the proposed AD are intended to
prevent failure of a tailboom attachment, loss of the tailboom, and
subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 11, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 2004-SW-16-AD, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room
663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137. You may also send comments electronically
to the Rules Docket at the following address: 9-asw-adcomments@faa.gov.
Comments may be inspected at the Office of the Regional Counsel between
9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred Guerin, Aviation Safety
Engineers, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, Airframe
Branch, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, California 90712, telephone
(562) 627-5232, fax (562) 627-5210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the
proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as
they may desire. Communications should identify the Rules Docket number
and be submitted in triplicate to the address specified above. All
communications received on or before the closing date for comments will
be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposals
contained in this document may be changed in light of the comments
received.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All
comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing
date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested
persons. A report summarizing each FAA-public contact concerned with
the substance of this proposal will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their mailed
comments submitted in response to this proposal must submit a self-
addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made:
``Comments to Docket No. 2004-SW-16-AD.'' The postcard will be date
stamped and returned to the commenter.
Discussion
On November 28, 2001, the FAA issued Emergency AD 2001-24-51 for
MDHI Model 600N helicopters and issued the final rule; request for
comments on April 2, 2002 (Amendment 39-12706 (67 FR 17934, April 12,
2002)). That AD requires implementing the procedures described in MD
Helicopters, Inc. Service Bulletin SB600N-03, dated November 2, 2001
(SB600N-03), for inspecting both upper tailboom attachments, nutplates,
and angles for a crack or thread damage and repairing or replacing
damaged parts. In addition, if one bolt is broken, the AD requires
replacing all four bolts. Also, adding a washer to each bolt and
modifying both upper access covers as well as a 25-hour time-in-service
(TIS) repetitive borescope inspection of the tailboom attachments,
nutplates, and angles is required. That action was prompted by the
discovery of cracked bolts and attachments on several helicopters. The
requirements of that AD are intended to prevent failure of a tailboom
attachment, loss of the tailboom, and subsequent loss of control of the
helicopter.
Since issuing that AD, the FAA has reviewed an analysis by the
manufacturer and has determined that the tailboom fittings, part number
(P/N) 500N3422-BSC (BSC is interchangeable with basic) and -3, and the
upper longerons, P/N 500N3120-3 and -4, will develop cracks due to the
same design error as the current AD. Also, the FAA has reviewed MDHI
Service Bulletin SB600N-039, dated December 9, 2003, which provides
information pertaining to adding six inspection holes in the fuselage
and certain inspections of the tailboom attachment fittings and upper
longerons for cracks. Also, MDHI has issued Technical Bulletin TB 600N-
007, dated January 12, 2004, which provides information pertaining to
modifying the fuselage aft section to strengthen tailboom attachment
fittings and longerons.
This previously described unsafe condition is likely to exist or
develop on other helicopters of the same type design. Therefore, the
proposed AD would supersede AD 2001-24-51 to require the following:
Before further flight, drill an inspection hole at
fuselage station L167 and R167 (L indicates Left and R indicates Right)
on each side of the fuselage.
Within 25 hours time-in-service (TIS):
Drill two additional inspection holes on each side of the
fuselage at L166, R166, L153, and R153.
Visually inspect the lower attachment fittings and the
upper longerons through inspection holes at L166, R166, L153 and R153,
respectively.
Thereafter, at specified intervals, remove the plug
buttons from the inspection holes at L167, R167, L166,
[[Page 7064]]
and R166. Using a bright light, inspect the attachment fittings,
angles, and nutplates for a crack. Through inspection holes L153 and
R153, using a bright light and mirror or borescope, visually inspect
the bottom surface of each longeron for a crack.
Before further flight, replace any cracked attachment
fitting, angle, nutplate, longeron, and any nutplate with thread damage
with an appropriate airworthy part.
This action proposes to require that operators modify the aft
fuselage to strengthen the tailboom attachments and longeron within 4
years, which would constitute terminating action for the requirements
of the AD.
The FAA estimates that this proposed AD would affect 39 helicopters
of U.S. registry. The proposed actions would take about 322 work hours
to modify and inspect the fuselage aft section per helicopter at an
average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Required parts would cost
approximately $14,960 per helicopter. Based on these figures, we
estimate the total cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to
be $1,399,710.
Regulatory Findings
The regulations proposed herein 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. Therefore, it
is determined that this proposal would not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that 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) if promulgated, 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. A copy of the draft
economic evaluation prepared for this action is contained in the Rules
Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by contacting the Rules Docket at
the location provided under the caption ADDRESSES.
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.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend
part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (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. Section 39.13 is amended by removing Amendment 39-12706 (67 FR
17934) and by adding a new airworthiness directive (AD), to read as
follows:
MD Helicopters, Inc.: Docket No. 2004-SW-16-AD. Supersedes AD 2001-
24-51, Amendment 39-12706, Docket No. 2001-SW-57-AD.
Applicability: Model 600N, serial numbers with a prefix of
``RN'' 003 through 066 and 068, that have not been modified by
following the Accomplishment Instructions of MDHI Technical Bulletin
TB600N-007, dated January 12, 2004, certificated in any category.
Compliance: Required as indicated.
To prevent failure of a tailboom attachment, loss of the
tailboom, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter,
accomplish the following:
(a) Before further flight, unless accomplished previously, drill
an inspection hole at fuselage station L167 and R167 (L indicates
Left and R indicates Right) on each side of the fuselage by
following the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph 2.B.(6) of MD
Helicopters, Inc. (MDHI) Service Bulletin SB600N-036, dated November
2, 2001.
(b) Within 25 hours time-in-service (TIS), unless accomplished
previously:
(1) Drill two additional inspection holes (L166 and L153 on the
left side and R166 and R153 on the right side) on each side of the
fuselage as shown for the left side of the fuselage in Figure 1 of
MDHI SB600N-039, dated December 9, 2003 (SB-039), by following the
Accomplishment Instruction paragraphs of SB-039 as follows:
(i) Paragraphs 2.A.(1)(a), (b), and (d) for inspection holes at
L166 and R166;
(ii) Paragraphs 2.A.(2)(a), (b), and (d) for inspection holes at
L153 and R153; and
(2) Visually inspect for a crack by following the Accomplishment
Instruction paragraphs of SB-039 at the following locations, except
you are not required to contact MDHI.
(i) The lower left and right attachment fittings through
inspection holes at L166 and R166, paragraph 2.A.(1)(c).
(ii) The upper left and right longerons through inspection holes
at L153 and R153, paragraph 2.A.(2)(c).
Note: The reference in Figure 1 of SB-039 to inspection hole at
L167 mistakenly states that it was ``Added by SB900-036.''
Inspection holes at L167 and R167 were originally specified by
SB600N-036.
(c) Thereafter, at the specified intervals, remove the plug
buttons from the inspection holes, and using a bright light, inspect
the upper left and upper right attachment fittings, angles, and
nutplates for a crack by following the Accomplishment Instruction
paragraphs of SB-039, as follows, except you are not required to
contact MDHI.
(1) At intervals not to exceed 25 hours TIS, for inspection
holes at L167 and R167, inspect the upper left and upper right
attachment fittings, angles, and nutplates by following paragraphs
2.B.(2) through 2.B.(4).
(2) At intervals not to exceed 100 hours TIS, for inspection
holes at L166 and R166, inspect the lower left and lower right
attachment fittings, angles, and nutplates by following paragraphs
2.B.(2) through 2.B.(4).
(3) At intervals not to exceed 1200 hours TIS, for inspection
holes L153 and R153 using a mirror or borescope, inspect the bottom
surface of each longeron by following paragraphs 2.C.(2) and
2.C.(3).
(d) Before further flight, replace any cracked attachment
fitting, angle, nutplate, longeron, and any nutplate with thread
damage with an appropriate airworthy part.
(e) On or before 4 years from the effective date of this AD,
modify the aft fuselage to strengthen the tailboom attachments and
the longerons by following the Accomplishment Instructions of MDHI
Technical Bulletin TB600N-007, dated January 12, 2004 (TB-007).
Modifying the aft fuselage by following TB-007 constitutes
terminating action for the requirements of this AD.
(f) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Contact the Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office (LAACO), FAA,
for information about previously approved alternative methods of
compliance.
[[Page 7065]]
Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on February 2, 2005.
David A. Downey,
Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 05-2608 Filed 2-9-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P