Airworthiness Directives; Turbomeca S.A. Arrius 2F Turboshaft Engines, 65430-65432 [E6-18839]

Download as PDF 65430 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 8, 2006 / Proposed Rules Authority: Sec. 15, 46 Stat. 537; 7 U.S.C. 499o. 2. In § 46.46, paragraph (f)(3) introductory text is revised and new paragraphs (f)(4) and (5) are added to read as follows: unlawful and in violation of Section 2 of the Act (7 U.S.C. 499b). Dated: November 3, 2006. Lloyd C. Day, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service. [FR Doc. E6–18826 Filed 11–7–06; 8:45 am] § 46.46 Statutory trust. cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS * * * * * (f) * * * (3) Licensees may choose an alternate method of preserving trust benefits from the requirements described in paragraphs (f)(1) and (2) of this section. Licensees may use their invoice or other billing statement as defined in paragraph (a)(5) of this section, whether in documentary or electronic form, to preserve trust benefits. Alternately, the licensee’s invoice or other billing statement, given to the buyer, must contain: * * * * * (4) If the invoice or other billing statement is in electronic form, the licensee has met its requirement of giving the buyer notice of intent to preserve trust benefits on the face of the invoice or other billing statement if the electronic invoice or other billing statement containing the statement set forth in paragraph (f)(3)(i) is sent to the buyer and the electronic transmission can be verified. The licensee will be deemed to have given notice to the buyer of its intent to preserve trust benefits if the licensee can verify that the electronic invoice or other billing statement was sent to a third party electronic transaction vendor designated by the buyer. The licensee will have met the requirement of giving the buyer written notice of intent to preserve trust benefits using electronic means if it can verify that the electronic data invoice or other billing statement was transmitted to the buyer, or its designated electronic transaction vendor, irrespective of whether or not the buyer or third party vendor downloads or accepts the trust statement. (5) If a buyer conducts its transactions in perishable agricultural commodities using an electronic system, the buyer or its third party electronic vendor must allow sufficient space for the seller to include the required trust statement of intent to preserve trust benefits in the buyer’s electronic invoices or other billing statement forms. A buyer or its designated third party electronic vendor must accept a seller’s notice of intent to preserve benefits under the trust using the required trust statement, whether in documentary or electronic form, as set forth in paragraphs (d) and (f) of this section. Any act or omission which is inconsistent with this responsibility is VerDate Aug<31>2005 13:35 Nov 07, 2006 Jkt 211001 BILLING CODE 3410–02–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2005–22039; Directorate Identifier 2005–NE–33–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Turbomeca S.A. Arrius 2F Turboshaft Engines Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). AGENCY: SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to revise an existing airworthiness directive (AD) for Turbomeca S.A. Arrius 2F turboshaft engines. That AD currently requires replacing certain O-rings on the check valve piston in the lubrication unit, at repetitive intervals. This proposed AD would require the same actions except reduce the applicability from all Turbomeca S.A. Arrius 2F turboshaft engines, to Turbomeca S.A. Arrius 2F turboshaft engines that have not incorporated modification Tf75. This proposed AD results from Turbomeca S.A. introducing a check valve piston design requiring no O-ring. We are proposing this AD to prevent an uncommanded in-flight shutdown of the engine, which could result in a forced autorotation landing and damage to the helicopter. DATES: We must receive any comments on this proposed AD by January 8, 2007. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to comment on this proposed AD. • DOT Docket Web site: Go to http:// dms.dot.gov and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590– 0001. PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 • Fax: (202) 493–2251. • Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Contact Turbomeca S.A., 40220 Tarnos, France; telephone 33 05 59 74 40 00, fax 33 05 59 74 45 15, for the service information identified in this AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Spinney, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803, telephone (781) 238–7175; fax (781) 238–7199. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments regarding this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed under ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 2005–22039; Directorate Identifier 2005–NE–33–AD’’ in the subject line of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD in light of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http:// dms.dot.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of the DMS Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78) or you may visit http:// dms.dot.gov. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the docket that contains the proposal, any comments received and any final disposition in person at the DMS Docket Office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office (telephone (800) 647– 5227) is located on the plaza level of the Department of Transportation Nassif Building at the street address stated in ADDRESSES. Comments will be available E:\FR\FM\08NOP1.SGM 08NOP1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 8, 2006 / Proposed Rules in the AD docket shortly after the DMS receives them. certificated for operation in the United States. Discussion FAA’s Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other products of this same type design. We are proposing this AD, which would require replacing certain O-rings on the check valve piston in the lubrication unit, at repetitive intervals on Arrius 2F turboshaft engines that have not incorporated modification Tf75. The proposed AD would require that you do these actions using the service information described previously. On August 17, 2005, we issued AD 2005–17–17, Amendment 39–14328 (70 FR 50164, August 26, 2005). That AD requires replacing certain O-rings on the check valve piston in the lubrication unit, at repetitive intervals. That AD resulted from an uncommanded inflight engine shutdown (IFSD) of an Arrius 2F engine, resulting in the forced landing of a Eurocopter EC120B helicopter. Investigation of the engine found that an interruption of engine lubrication due to excessive swelling of the check valve O-ring in the lubrication unit caused the IFSD. The amount of swelling of the O-ring depends on the class of oil used, standard (STD) or high-thermal stability (HTS), and the engine operating time. Actions Since AD 2005–17–17 Was Issued Since AD 2005–17–17 was issued, Turbomeca S.A. issued Service Bulletin (SB) No. 319 79 4075, dated February 27, 2006, that introduces modification Tf75. That modification replaces the check valve piston with a piston not requiring the O-ring. Arrius 2F engines with modification Tf75 incorporated, no longer need repetitive replacements of a check-valve piston O-ring, because there is no O-ring installed. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed and approved the technical contents of Turbomeca S.A. SB No. 319 79 4802, dated April 3, 2006, that describes procedures for replacing the O-ring on the check valve piston in the lubrication unit on Arrius 2F engines that have not incorporated modification Tf75. EASA classified this service bulletin as mandatory and issued AD No. 2006–0141, dated May 29, 2006, in order to ensure the airworthiness of these engines in Europe. cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS Bilateral Agreement Information This engine model is manufactured in France and is type certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of Section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. In keeping with this bilateral airworthiness agreement, EASA kept us informed of the situation described above. We have examined the findings of EASA, reviewed all available information, and determined that AD action is necessary for products of this type design that are VerDate Aug<31>2005 13:35 Nov 07, 2006 Jkt 211001 Costs of Compliance We estimate that this proposed AD would affect about 124 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per engine to perform the proposed actions, and that the average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Required parts would cost about $100 per engine. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators, for one O-ring replacement to be $22,320 for the fleet, or $180 per engine. 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 have 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 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 65431 responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the 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. Would 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. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration 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 39–14238 (70 FR 50164, August 26, 2005) and by adding a new airworthiness directive, to read as follows: Turbomeca S.A.: Docket No. FAA–2005– 22039; Directorate Identifier 2005–NE– 33–AD. Comments Due Date (a) The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must receive comments on this airworthiness directive (AD) action by January 8, 2007. Affected ADs (b) This AD revises AD 2005–17–17. Applicability (c) This AD applies to Turbomeca S.A. Arrius 2F turboshaft engines that have not incorporated modification Tf75. These engines are installed on, but not limited to, Eurocopter EC120B helicopters. Unsafe Condition (d) This AD results from Turbomeca S.A. introducing a check valve piston design requiring no O-ring. We are issuing this AD to prevent an uncommanded in-flight shutdown of the engine, which could result in a forced autorotation landing and damage to the helicopter. E:\FR\FM\08NOP1.SGM 08NOP1 65432 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 8, 2006 / Proposed Rules Compliance (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified unless the actions have already been done. O-Ring Replacement (f) Replace the O-ring on the check valve piston in the lubrication unit at the intervals specified in Table 1 of this AD. Use the ‘‘Instructions to be Incorporated,’’ 2.A. through 2.C. (2) of Turbomeca Alert Service Bulletin No. A319 79 4802, dated April 3, 2006, to replace the O-ring. TABLE 1.—COMPLIANCE TIMES FOR O-RING REPLACEMENT If the class of oil is . . .* Then replace the O-ring by the later of . . . Thereafter, replace the O-ring within . . . (1) HTS or unknown ............ 300 hours time-since-new (TSN) or 50 hours after the effective date of this AD. 450 hours TSN or 50 hours after the effective date of this AD. 300 hours time-since-last replacement (TSR). (2) STD ................................ Alternative Methods of Compliance (g) The Manager, Engine Certification Office, has the authority to approve alternative methods of compliance for this AD if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Related Information (h) European Aviation Safety Agency airworthiness directive No. 2006–0141, dated May 29, 2006, also addresses the subject of this AD. Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on November 1, 2006. Peter A. White, Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6–18839 Filed 11–7–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 27 CFR Part 9 [Notice No. 68] RIN 1513–AB26 Proposed Establishment of the Tulocay Viticultural Area (2006R–009P) Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Treasury. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS AGENCY: SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 11,200-acre Tulocay viticultural area in Napa County, California. The proposed viticultural area lies totally within the Napa Valley viticultural area and the larger, multi-county North Coast viticultural area. We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase. We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations. DATES: We must receive written comments on or before January 8, 2007. VerDate Aug<31>2005 13:35 Nov 07, 2006 Jkt 211001 500 hours TSR. You may send comments to any of the following addresses: • Director, Regulations and Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Attn: Notice No. 68, P.O. Box 14412, Washington, DC 20044– 4412. • 202–927–8525 (facsimile). • nprm@ttb.gov (e-mail). • http://www.ttb.gov/ regulations_laws/all_rulemaking.shtml. An online comment form is posted with this notice on our Web site. • http://www.regulations.gov (Federal e-rulemaking portal; follow instructions for submitting comments). You may view copies of this notice, the petition, the appropriate maps, and any comments we receive about this proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center, 1310 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20220. To make an appointment, call 202–927– 2400. You may also access copies of the notice and comments online at http:// www.ttb.gov/regulations_laws/all_ rulemaking.shtml. See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments, and for information on how to request a public hearing. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: N. A. Sutton, Regulations and Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, 925 Lakeville St., No. 158, Petaluma, CA 94952; phone 415– 271–1254. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ADDRESSES: Background on Viticultural Areas TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act (the FAA Act, 27 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) requires that alcohol beverage labels provide consumers with adequate information regarding product identity and prohibits the use of misleading information on those labels. The FAA Act also authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to issue regulations to carry out its provisions. The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Trade Bureau (TTB) administers these regulations. Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements. Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas. Definition Section 4.25(e)(1)(i) of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features, the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations. These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality, reputation, or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographical origin. The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase. Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area. Requirements Section 4.25(e)(2) of the TTB regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party may petition TTB to establish a grapegrowing region as a viticultural area. Section 9.3(b) of the TTB regulations requires the petition to include— • Evidence that the proposed viticultural area is locally and/or nationally known by the name specified in the petition; • Historical or current evidence that supports setting the boundary of the proposed viticultural area as the petition specifies; • Evidence relating to the geographical features, such as climate, soils, elevation, and physical features, E:\FR\FM\08NOP1.SGM 08NOP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 216 (Wednesday, November 8, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65430-65432]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-18839]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2005-22039; Directorate Identifier 2005-NE-33-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64


Airworthiness Directives; Turbomeca S.A. Arrius 2F Turboshaft 
Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to revise an existing airworthiness directive 
(AD) for Turbomeca S.A. Arrius 2F turboshaft engines. That AD currently 
requires replacing certain O-rings on the check valve piston in the 
lubrication unit, at repetitive intervals. This proposed AD would 
require the same actions except reduce the applicability from all 
Turbomeca S.A. Arrius 2F turboshaft engines, to Turbomeca S.A. Arrius 
2F turboshaft engines that have not incorporated modification Tf75. 
This proposed AD results from Turbomeca S.A. introducing a check valve 
piston design requiring no O-ring. We are proposing this AD to prevent 
an uncommanded in-flight shutdown of the engine, which could result in 
a forced autorotation landing and damage to the helicopter.

DATES: We must receive any comments on this proposed AD by January 8, 
2007.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to comment on this 
proposed AD.
     DOT Docket Web site: Go to http://dms.dot.gov and follow 
the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your 
comments electronically.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, 
Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Fax: (202) 493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the 
Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Contact Turbomeca S.A., 40220 Tarnos, France; telephone 33 05 59 74 
40 00, fax 33 05 59 74 45 15, for the service information identified in 
this AD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Spinney, Aerospace 
Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller 
Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803, 
telephone (781) 238-7175; fax (781) 238-7199.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or 
arguments regarding this proposal. Send your comments to an address 
listed under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2005-22039; 
Directorate Identifier 2005-NE-33-AD'' in the subject line of your 
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, 
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will 
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the 
proposed AD in light of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
dms.dot.gov, including any personal information you provide. We will 
also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA 
personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of the 
DMS Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our 
dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or 
signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, 
etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the 
Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you 
may visit http://dms.dot.gov.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the docket that contains the proposal, any comments 
received and any final disposition in person at the DMS Docket Office 
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays. The Docket Office (telephone (800) 647-5227) is located on 
the plaza level of the Department of Transportation Nassif Building at 
the street address stated in ADDRESSES. Comments will be available

[[Page 65431]]

in the AD docket shortly after the DMS receives them.

Discussion

    On August 17, 2005, we issued AD 2005-17-17, Amendment 39-14328 (70 
FR 50164, August 26, 2005). That AD requires replacing certain O-rings 
on the check valve piston in the lubrication unit, at repetitive 
intervals. That AD resulted from an uncommanded in-flight engine 
shutdown (IFSD) of an Arrius 2F engine, resulting in the forced landing 
of a Eurocopter EC120B helicopter. Investigation of the engine found 
that an interruption of engine lubrication due to excessive swelling of 
the check valve O-ring in the lubrication unit caused the IFSD. The 
amount of swelling of the O-ring depends on the class of oil used, 
standard (STD) or high-thermal stability (HTS), and the engine 
operating time.

Actions Since AD 2005-17-17 Was Issued

    Since AD 2005-17-17 was issued, Turbomeca S.A. issued Service 
Bulletin (SB) No. 319 79 4075, dated February 27, 2006, that introduces 
modification Tf75. That modification replaces the check valve piston 
with a piston not requiring the O-ring. Arrius 2F engines with 
modification Tf75 incorporated, no longer need repetitive replacements 
of a check-valve piston O-ring, because there is no O-ring installed.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed and approved the technical contents of Turbomeca 
S.A. SB No. 319 79 4802, dated April 3, 2006, that describes procedures 
for replacing the O-ring on the check valve piston in the lubrication 
unit on Arrius 2F engines that have not incorporated modification Tf75. 
EASA classified this service bulletin as mandatory and issued AD No. 
2006-0141, dated May 29, 2006, in order to ensure the airworthiness of 
these engines in Europe.

Bilateral Agreement Information

    This engine model is manufactured in France and is type 
certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of 
Section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and 
the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. In keeping with this 
bilateral airworthiness agreement, EASA kept us informed of the 
situation described above. We have examined the findings of EASA, 
reviewed all available information, and determined that AD action is 
necessary for products of this type design that are certificated for 
operation in the United States.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an 
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other products 
of this same type design. We are proposing this AD, which would require 
replacing certain O-rings on the check valve piston in the lubrication 
unit, at repetitive intervals on Arrius 2F turboshaft engines that have 
not incorporated modification Tf75. The proposed AD would require that 
you do these actions using the service information described 
previously.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect about 124 engines 
installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would 
take about 1 work-hour per engine to perform the proposed actions, and 
that the average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Required parts would 
cost about $100 per engine. Based on these figures, we estimate the 
cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators, for one O-ring replacement 
to be $22,320 for the fleet, or $180 per engine.

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 have 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 that the 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. Would 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. See the ADDRESSES section for a location 
to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration 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 removing Amendment 39-14238 (70 FR 
50164, August 26, 2005) and by adding a new airworthiness directive, to 
read as follows:

Turbomeca S.A.: Docket No. FAA-2005-22039; Directorate Identifier 
2005-NE-33-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must receive 
comments on this airworthiness directive (AD) action by January 8, 
2007.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD revises AD 2005-17-17.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Turbomeca S.A. Arrius 2F turboshaft 
engines that have not incorporated modification Tf75. These engines 
are installed on, but not limited to, Eurocopter EC120B helicopters.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from Turbomeca S.A. introducing a check 
valve piston design requiring no O-ring. We are issuing this AD to 
prevent an uncommanded in-flight shutdown of the engine, which could 
result in a forced autorotation landing and damage to the 
helicopter.

[[Page 65432]]

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this 
AD performed within the compliance times specified unless the 
actions have already been done.

O-Ring Replacement

    (f) Replace the O-ring on the check valve piston in the 
lubrication unit at the intervals specified in Table 1 of this AD. 
Use the ``Instructions to be Incorporated,'' 2.A. through 2.C. (2) 
of Turbomeca Alert Service Bulletin No. A319 79 4802, dated April 3, 
2006, to replace the O-ring.

            Table 1.--Compliance Times for O-ring Replacement
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Then replace the O-   Thereafter, replace
 If the class of oil is . .   ring by the later of   the O-ring within .
             .*                       . . .                  . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) HTS or unknown..........  300 hours time-since- 300 hours time-since-
                               new (TSN) or 50       last replacement
                               hours after the       (TSR).
                               effective date of
                               this AD.
(2) STD.....................  450 hours TSN or 50   500 hours TSR.
                               hours after the
                               effective date of
                               this AD.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (g) The Manager, Engine Certification Office, has the authority 
to approve alternative methods of compliance for this AD if 
requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

Related Information

    (h) European Aviation Safety Agency airworthiness directive No. 
2006-0141, dated May 29, 2006, also addresses the subject of this 
AD.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on November 1, 2006.
Peter A. White,
Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft 
Certification Service.
 [FR Doc. E6-18839 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P