Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter France Model EC 155B and EC155B1 Helicopters, 62447-62449 [E8-24986]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 21, 2008 / Proposed Rules
received did not indicate a consensus
concerning changes to the standards.
The one issue that merits further
review is amending grading limits for
soybean foreign material (FM). Based on
the lack of consensus and, at times,
conflicting information provided by
some commenters, GIPSA has
determined that we need to enhance our
understanding of the soybean
marketing/processing system and collect
additional data about the quality of
soybeans. GIPSA will use data from its
ongoing 5-year farm-gate assessment
before considering further rulemaking
related to FM grading limits. The
assessment will provide first-point-ofsale data related to soybean FM content
and composition across the United
States, providing an FM range that can
be used to formulate new FM grade
limits, if appropriate. Accordingly, we
will not proceed with rulemaking in this
matter.
Authority: (7 U.S.C. 87k).
Randall D. Jones,
Acting Administrator, Grain Inspection,
Packers and Stockyards Administration.
[FR Doc. E8–24944 Filed 10–20–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–KD–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2008–0947; Directorate
Identifier 2007–SW–46–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter
France Model EC 155B and EC155B1
Helicopters
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
rmajette on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for
Eurocopter France (Eurocopter) Model
EC 155B and EC155B1 helicopters that
would supersede an existing AD. The
airworthiness authority of France has
issued a mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) AD
that requires a 50 percent reduction in
the life of each affected main rotor blade
(blade). The MCAI also requires, for
each affected blade, initial and
repetitive inspections for correct
alignment of the tip cap, correct tenon
filler wedge (wedge) position, a crack in
the tenon, and erosion in a specified
zone in the end of the leading edge.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:03 Oct 20, 2008
Jkt 217001
Also, the MCAI requires measuring the
vertical clearance between each blade
assembly and a straight edge at the
blade-to-tip cap junction and replacing
any blade that has a cracked tenon. This
proposal contains those same
requirements as described in the MCAI
and requires replacing any blade with a
measured vertical clearance exceeding a
certain limit. A misalignment, crack, or
erosion in a blade could lead to failure
of the blade and subsequent loss of
control of the helicopter.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by November 20,
2008.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments by
any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://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.
You may get the service information
identified in this proposed AD from
American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701
Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75053–
4005, telephone (972) 641–3460, fax
(972) 641–3527, or at https://
www.eurocopter.com.
Examining the AD Docket: You may
examine the AD docket on the Internet
at https://www.regulations.gov, or in
person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
The AD docket contains this proposed
AD, the economic evaluation, any
comments received, and other
information. The street address for the
Docket Operations office (telephone
(800) 647–5527) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in
the AD docket shortly after receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim
Grigg, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA,
Rotorcraft Directorate, Safety
Management Group, Fort Worth, Texas
76193–0112, telephone (817) 222–5126,
fax (817) 222–5961.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
62447
ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No.
FAA–2008–0947; Directorate Identifier
2007–SW–46–AD’’ at the beginning of
your comments. We specifically invite
comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy
aspects of this proposed AD. We will
consider all comments received by the
closing date and may amend this
proposed AD based on those comments.
We will post all comments we
receive, without change, to https://
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
On June 1, 2004, we issued AD 2004–
12–06, Amendment 39–13665 (69 FR
32857, June 14, 2004). That AD was
issued based on MCAI AD F–2003–418
and required inspecting each blade for
a crack in the blade tip cap mounting
bracket (tenon), measuring the vertical
clearance between each blade assembly
and a straight edge at the blade-to-tip
cap junction, and replacing the blade if
a crack is found or if the measured
distance is not within certain
specifications.
The Direction Generale de L’Aviation
Civile (DGAC), which is the aviation
authority for France, has issued AD No.
F–2004–106, dated July 7, 2004 (referred
to after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct
an unsafe condition for the specified
French-certificated helicopters. The
MCAI states: ‘‘Airworthiness Directive
(AD) F–2003–418 was issued following
the discovery of a crack in the main
rotor blade tip cap attachment tenon.
AD F–2003–418 required operators to
make sure that there is no crack in the
affected zone, and to monitor the blade
in operation. Crack growth can lead to
the loss of the blade tip cap and make
it impossible to control the helicopter.’’
The DGAC canceled AD F–2003–418
on July 7, 2004, by issuing AD F–2003–
418R1 and AD F–2004–106 on the same
day. AD F–2004–106 covers the
requirements of AD F–2003–418;
reduces the service life of each blade
from 20,000 flying hours to 10,000
flying hours; renders certain checks and
corrective actions mandatory, and refers
to Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin
(ASB) No. 62A006, dated May 18, 2004,
which superseded Alert Telex No.
05A004, dated November 3, 2003.
You may obtain further information
by examining the MCAI and service
information in the AD docket.
Since we issued AD 2004–12–06, after
further investigations and tests and
based on MCAI AD F–2004–106, we
have determined that an additional
E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM
21OCP1
62448
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 21, 2008 / Proposed Rules
inspection for correct position of the
wedge of the tenon at the blade tip and
erosion in a specific zone at the end of
the leading edge of the blade and a
reduction in service life for certain
serial-numbered blades are necessary.
Relevant Service Information
Eurocopter has issued ASB No.
62A006, dated May 18, 2004. This ASB
forms the basis for issuing MCAI AD F–
2004–106 and supersedes Alert Telex
No. 05A004, which was the basis for
MCAI AD F–2003–418. The actions
described in the MCAI are intended to
correct the same unsafe condition as
that identified in the service
information.
FAA’s Evaluation and Unsafe Condition
Determination
This product has been approved by
the aviation authority of France, and is
approved for operation in the United
States. Pursuant to our bilateral
agreement with this State of Design, we
have been notified of the unsafe
condition described in the MCAI. We
are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information
provided by France and determined an
unsafe condition exists and is likely to
exist or develop on other products of
these same type designs. We have
determined an additional inspection for
correct position of the wedge of the
tenon at the blade tip and erosion in a
specific zone at the end of the leading
edge of the blade and a reduction in
service life for certain serial-numbered
blades are necessary.
rmajette on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
Differences Between This AD and the
MCAI
We have reviewed the MCAI and
related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. The
following are the differences between
the AD and the MCAI:
• We refer to the actions proposed by
this AD by using the word ‘‘inspect’’
rather than ‘‘check’’ to indicate that the
actions are done by a mechanic rather
than a pilot.
• The AD would not require you to
contact the manufacturer as specified in
the service information.
• We use the words ‘‘time-in-service’’
rather than ‘‘flight hours.’’
• We do not use the compliance date
of September 30, 2004 to remove
affected blades because that date has
passed.
These differences are highlighted in the
‘‘Differences Between This AD and the
MCAI’’ section of this proposed AD.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:03 Oct 20, 2008
Jkt 217001
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 6 helicopters of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it would
take about 1.5 work-hours to do the
initial inspection and about 0.5 work
hours to do the repetitive inspection.
The average labor rate is $80 per workhour. Required parts would cost about
$97,000 per blade. Based on these
figures, we estimate the cost of the
proposed AD on U.S. operators to be
$587,520 for the first year and $586,800
each subsequent year, assuming one
blade per helicopter will need to be
replaced each year and 20 repetitive
inspections will be needed per
helicopter each year.
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 an economic evaluation
of the estimated costs to comply with
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
this proposed AD and placed it in the
AD docket.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part
39 as follows:
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by
removing Amendment 39–13665 (69 FR
32857, June 14, 2004) and adding the
following new AD:
Eurocopter France: Docket No. FAA–2008–
0947; Directorate Identifier 2007–SW–
46–AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments by
November 20, 2008.
Other Affected ADs
(b) This proposed AD would supersede AD
2004–12–06, Amendment 39–13665, Docket
No. 2004–SW–05–AD.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Model EC 155B and
B1 helicopters, with main rotor blade (blade),
part number (P/N) 365A11–0080–00,
installed, certificated in any category.
Reason
(d) Based upon further review,
investigation, and fatigue tests, the Direction
Generale de L’Aviation Civile (DGAC),
France, has cancelled its AD F–2003–418,
which formed the basis for our AD 2004–12–
06, which was prompted by the discovery of
cracks in a blade tip cap attachment tenon.
In these further reviews prompted by the
findings related to the tip cap area after a tip
cap was removed because of abnormal tilt in
the flapping direction, in addition to a crack
in the tenon, some blades were found to have
incorrect tenon filler wedge (wedge)
positioning and erosion in the zone of the
tenon leading edge. All these findings
constitute unsafe conditions that could result
in failure of the blade and subsequent loss of
control of the helicopter.
Actions and Compliance
(e) Required as indicated, unless already
done, do the following:
(1) Before further flight, reduce the blade
service life from 20,000 to 10,000 hours timein-service (TIS).
(2) For a blade with a Serial Number (S/
N) 808 or less:
(i) Before the first flight of each day and
on or before reaching each 10 hour TIS
E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM
21OCP1
rmajette on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 21, 2008 / Proposed Rules
interval during the day, inspect for correct
alignment of the blade tip cap junction in the
flapping direction as shown in Figure 3 and
by following the Accomplishment
Instructions, paragraph 2.B.4., Eurocopter
France Alert Service Bulletin 62A006, dated
May 18, 2004 (ASB), except this AD does not
require you to contact the manufacturer.
(A) During the initial alignment inspection,
mark the position of the ruler and record the
initial clearance value of ‘‘DO’’ by following
the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph
2.B.3.a)3. through 2.B.3.a)6. of the ASB. The
initial clearance distance between the lower
edge of the 24 inch (500mm) straight edge
ruler and the upper surface of the blade
assembly at the blade-to-tip cap junction is
called ‘‘DO.’’
(B) If the measured clearance as
determined by paragraph 2.B.4. of the ASB is
equal to or greater than ‘‘DO’’ + 2mm, replace
the blade with an airworthy blade before
further flight.
(ii) Within the next 3 months, remove and
inspect each blade for the correct wedge
position, a crack in the tenon, correct
alignment of the blade tip cap, and erosion
in the leading edge in Zone 1 by following
the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph
2.B, of the ASB except this AD does not
require you to contact the manufacturer.
(A) If the wedge is incorrect
(dissymmetrical position) as shown in Figure
2 of the ASB, using a 10x or higher
magnifying glass and a light, inspect the
imbedded portion of the tenon as shown in
Figure 5 of the ASB for a crack by following
the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph
2.B.3., of the ASB.
(1) If a crack is found in the tenon, before
further flight, replace the blade with an
airworthy blade.
(2) If no crack is found in the tenon,
inspect the end of the leading edge of the
blade for erosion in Zone 1 as shown in
Figure 7 of the ASB.
(B) If the wedge position is correct
(symmetrical position) as shown in Figure 1
of the ASB, inspect the end of the leading
edge of the blade for erosion in Zone 1 as
shown in Figure 7 of the ASB.
(C) Thereafter, on or before 660 hours TIS
and at intervals not to exceed 660 hours TIS,
remove the blade and the blade tip cap, scrap
the 35 attachment screws, and inspect the
end of the leading edge of the blade for
erosion in Zone 1 as shown in Figure 7 of the
ASB.
(3) For a blade with a S/N of 809 or greater:
(i) For a blade that has less than 660 hours
TIS, on or before 660 hours TIS and
thereafter, at intervals not to exceed 660
hours TIS, remove the blade and the blade tip
cap, scrap the 35 attachment screws, and
inspect the end of the leading edge of the
blade for erosion in Zone 1 as shown in
Figure 7 of the ASB.
(ii) For a blade that has 660 or more hours
TIS, on or before 100 hours TIS and
thereafter, at intervals not to exceed 660
hours TIS, remove the blade and the blade tip
cap, scrap the 35 attachment screws, and
inspect the end of the leading edge of the
blade for erosion in Zone 1 as shown in
Figure 7 of the ASB.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:03 Oct 20, 2008
Jkt 217001
(4) If any inspection of the end of the
leading edge of a blade in Zone 1, as shown
in Figure 7 of the ASB, results in:
(i) Erosion in Zone 1—clean and caulk the
eroded zone by following the
Accomplishments Instructions, paragraph
2.B.6., of the ASB, and reinstall the blade tip
cap and caulk the gap in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph
2.B.7, of the ASB.
(ii) No Erosion in Zone 1—reinstall the
blade tip cap and caulk the gap in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions,
paragraph 2.B.7., of the ASB.
Differences Between This AD and the MCAI
(f) We have identified the following
differences:
(1) We refer to the actions required by this
AD by using the word ‘‘inspect’’ rather than
‘‘check’’ to indicate that the actions are done
by a mechanic rather than a pilot.
(2) We do not require you to contact the
manufacturer as specified in the service
information.
(3) We use the words ‘‘hours time-inservice’’ rather than ‘‘flight hours.’’
(4) We did not use the compliance date of
September 30, 2004 to remove affected blades
because that date has passed.
Other Information
(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs): The Manager, Safety Management
Group, FAA, ATTN: Jim Grigg, Aviation
Safety Engineer, Fort Worth, Texas 76193–
0112, telephone (817) 222–5126, fax (817)
222–5961, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested, using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
Related Information
(h) MCAI Airworthiness Directive AD No.
F–2004–106, Revision A, dated July 7, 2004,
contains related information.
Air Transport Association of America (ATA)
Tracking Code
(i) ATA Code 6210: Rotor(s).
Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on October 1,
2008.
Mark R. Schilling,
Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E8–24986 Filed 10–20–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
REVIEW COMMISSION
29 CFR Part 2700
Procedural Rules
Federal Mine Safety and Health
Review Commission.
ACTION: Advanced notice of proposed
rulemaking; extension of comment
period.
AGENCY:
on September 2, 2008, an advanced
notice of proposed rulemaking seeking
suggestions for improving its procedures
for processing requests for relief from
default. The notice provided that the
comment period would end on
November 3, 2008. A request was made
that the comment period be extended to
November 17, and the Commission has
agreed to do so.
Comments must be submitted on
or before November 17, 2008.
DATES:
Comments and questions
may be mailed to Michael A. McCord,
General Counsel, Office of the General
Counsel, Federal Mine Safety and
Health Review Commission, 601 New
Jersey Avenue, NW., Suite 9500,
Washington, DC 20001, or sent via
facsimile to 202–434–9944.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael A. McCord, General Counsel,
Office of the General Counsel, 601 New
Jersey Avenue, NW., Suite 9500,
Washington, DC 20001; telephone 202–
434–9935; fax 202–434–9944.
On
September 2, 2008, the Commission
published an advanced notice of
proposed rulemaking seeking
suggestions for improving its procedures
for processing requests for relief from
default and reducing the number of
cases in which a party seeks relief
before the Commission after default. 73
FR 51256. The notice provided that the
comment period would end on
November 3, 2008. The Commission
received a request that the comment
period be extended to November 17.
The Commission has agreed to extend
the comment period in order to increase
the opportunity of the interested public
to provide any comments or suggestions
on the Commission’s procedures for
processing requests for relief from
default. Comments on the proposed
rules must be submitted on or before
November 17, 2008.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: October 15, 2008.
Michael F. Duffy,
Chairman, Federal Mine Safety and Health
Review Commission.
[FR Doc. E8–24994 Filed 10–20–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6735–01–P
SUMMARY: The Federal Mine Safety and
Health Review Commission (the
‘‘Commission’’) previously published,
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
62449
E:\FR\FM\21OCP1.SGM
21OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 204 (Tuesday, October 21, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 62447-62449]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-24986]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2008-0947; Directorate Identifier 2007-SW-46-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter France Model EC 155B and
EC155B1 Helicopters
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Eurocopter France (Eurocopter) Model EC 155B and EC155B1 helicopters
that would supersede an existing AD. The airworthiness authority of
France has issued a mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI) AD that requires a 50 percent reduction in the life of each
affected main rotor blade (blade). The MCAI also requires, for each
affected blade, initial and repetitive inspections for correct
alignment of the tip cap, correct tenon filler wedge (wedge) position,
a crack in the tenon, and erosion in a specified zone in the end of the
leading edge. Also, the MCAI requires measuring the vertical clearance
between each blade assembly and a straight edge at the blade-to-tip cap
junction and replacing any blade that has a cracked tenon. This
proposal contains those same requirements as described in the MCAI and
requires replacing any blade with a measured vertical clearance
exceeding a certain limit. A misalignment, crack, or erosion in a blade
could lead to failure of the blade and subsequent loss of control of
the helicopter.
DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 20,
2008.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://
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.
You may get the service information identified in this proposed AD
from American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 Forum Drive, Grand Prairie,
TX 75053-4005, telephone (972) 641-3460, fax (972) 641-3527, or at
https://www.eurocopter.com.
Examining the AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov, or in person at the Docket
Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the
economic evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Operations office (telephone (800) 647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Grigg, Aviation Safety Engineer,
FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Safety Management Group, Fort Worth, Texas
76193-0112, telephone (817) 222-5126, fax (817) 222-5961.
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-2008-0947;
Directorate Identifier 2007-SW-46-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
We will post all comments we receive, without change, to https://
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
On June 1, 2004, we issued AD 2004-12-06, Amendment 39-13665 (69 FR
32857, June 14, 2004). That AD was issued based on MCAI AD F-2003-418
and required inspecting each blade for a crack in the blade tip cap
mounting bracket (tenon), measuring the vertical clearance between each
blade assembly and a straight edge at the blade-to-tip cap junction,
and replacing the blade if a crack is found or if the measured distance
is not within certain specifications.
The Direction Generale de L'Aviation Civile (DGAC), which is the
aviation authority for France, has issued AD No. F-2004-106, dated July
7, 2004 (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe
condition for the specified French-certificated helicopters. The MCAI
states: ``Airworthiness Directive (AD) F-2003-418 was issued following
the discovery of a crack in the main rotor blade tip cap attachment
tenon. AD F-2003-418 required operators to make sure that there is no
crack in the affected zone, and to monitor the blade in operation.
Crack growth can lead to the loss of the blade tip cap and make it
impossible to control the helicopter.''
The DGAC canceled AD F-2003-418 on July 7, 2004, by issuing AD F-
2003-418R1 and AD F-2004-106 on the same day. AD F-2004-106 covers the
requirements of AD F-2003-418; reduces the service life of each blade
from 20,000 flying hours to 10,000 flying hours; renders certain checks
and corrective actions mandatory, and refers to Eurocopter Alert
Service Bulletin (ASB) No. 62A006, dated May 18, 2004, which superseded
Alert Telex No. 05A004, dated November 3, 2003.
You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI and
service information in the AD docket.
Since we issued AD 2004-12-06, after further investigations and
tests and based on MCAI AD F-2004-106, we have determined that an
additional
[[Page 62448]]
inspection for correct position of the wedge of the tenon at the blade
tip and erosion in a specific zone at the end of the leading edge of
the blade and a reduction in service life for certain serial-numbered
blades are necessary.
Relevant Service Information
Eurocopter has issued ASB No. 62A006, dated May 18, 2004. This ASB
forms the basis for issuing MCAI AD F-2004-106 and supersedes Alert
Telex No. 05A004, which was the basis for MCAI AD F-2003-418. The
actions described in the MCAI are intended to correct the same unsafe
condition as that identified in the service information.
FAA's Evaluation and Unsafe Condition Determination
This product has been approved by the aviation authority of France,
and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our
bilateral agreement with this State of Design, we have been notified of
the unsafe condition described in the MCAI. We are proposing this AD
because we evaluated all pertinent information provided by France and
determined an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop
on other products of these same type designs. We have determined an
additional inspection for correct position of the wedge of the tenon at
the blade tip and erosion in a specific zone at the end of the leading
edge of the blade and a reduction in service life for certain serial-
numbered blades are necessary.
Differences Between This AD and the MCAI
We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. The following are the differences
between the AD and the MCAI:
We refer to the actions proposed by this AD by using the
word ``inspect'' rather than ``check'' to indicate that the actions are
done by a mechanic rather than a pilot.
The AD would not require you to contact the manufacturer
as specified in the service information.
We use the words ``time-in-service'' rather than ``flight
hours.''
We do not use the compliance date of September 30, 2004 to
remove affected blades because that date has passed.
These differences are highlighted in the ``Differences Between This AD
and the MCAI'' section of this proposed AD.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD would affect about 6 helicopters
of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 1.5 work-
hours to do the initial inspection and about 0.5 work hours to do the
repetitive inspection. The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour.
Required parts would cost about $97,000 per blade. Based on these
figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to
be $587,520 for the first year and $586,800 each subsequent year,
assuming one blade per helicopter will need to be replaced each year
and 20 repetitive inspections will be needed per helicopter each year.
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 an economic 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 removing Amendment 39-13665 (69 FR
32857, June 14, 2004) and adding the following new AD:
Eurocopter France: Docket No. FAA-2008-0947; Directorate Identifier
2007-SW-46-AD.
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments by November 20, 2008.
Other Affected ADs
(b) This proposed AD would supersede AD 2004-12-06, Amendment
39-13665, Docket No. 2004-SW-05-AD.
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Model EC 155B and B1 helicopters, with
main rotor blade (blade), part number (P/N) 365A11-0080-00,
installed, certificated in any category.
Reason
(d) Based upon further review, investigation, and fatigue tests,
the Direction Generale de L'Aviation Civile (DGAC), France, has
cancelled its AD F-2003-418, which formed the basis for our AD 2004-
12-06, which was prompted by the discovery of cracks in a blade tip
cap attachment tenon. In these further reviews prompted by the
findings related to the tip cap area after a tip cap was removed
because of abnormal tilt in the flapping direction, in addition to a
crack in the tenon, some blades were found to have incorrect tenon
filler wedge (wedge) positioning and erosion in the zone of the
tenon leading edge. All these findings constitute unsafe conditions
that could result in failure of the blade and subsequent loss of
control of the helicopter.
Actions and Compliance
(e) Required as indicated, unless already done, do the
following:
(1) Before further flight, reduce the blade service life from
20,000 to 10,000 hours time-in-service (TIS).
(2) For a blade with a Serial Number (S/N) 808 or less:
(i) Before the first flight of each day and on or before
reaching each 10 hour TIS
[[Page 62449]]
interval during the day, inspect for correct alignment of the blade
tip cap junction in the flapping direction as shown in Figure 3 and
by following the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph 2.B.4.,
Eurocopter France Alert Service Bulletin 62A006, dated May 18, 2004
(ASB), except this AD does not require you to contact the
manufacturer.
(A) During the initial alignment inspection, mark the position
of the ruler and record the initial clearance value of ``DO'' by
following the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph 2.B.3.a)3.
through 2.B.3.a)6. of the ASB. The initial clearance distance
between the lower edge of the 24 inch (500mm) straight edge ruler
and the upper surface of the blade assembly at the blade-to-tip cap
junction is called ``DO.''
(B) If the measured clearance as determined by paragraph 2.B.4.
of the ASB is equal to or greater than ``DO'' + 2mm, replace the
blade with an airworthy blade before further flight.
(ii) Within the next 3 months, remove and inspect each blade for
the correct wedge position, a crack in the tenon, correct alignment
of the blade tip cap, and erosion in the leading edge in Zone 1 by
following the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph 2.B, of the ASB
except this AD does not require you to contact the manufacturer.
(A) If the wedge is incorrect (dissymmetrical position) as shown
in Figure 2 of the ASB, using a 10x or higher magnifying glass and a
light, inspect the imbedded portion of the tenon as shown in Figure
5 of the ASB for a crack by following the Accomplishment
Instructions, paragraph 2.B.3., of the ASB.
(1) If a crack is found in the tenon, before further flight,
replace the blade with an airworthy blade.
(2) If no crack is found in the tenon, inspect the end of the
leading edge of the blade for erosion in Zone 1 as shown in Figure 7
of the ASB.
(B) If the wedge position is correct (symmetrical position) as
shown in Figure 1 of the ASB, inspect the end of the leading edge of
the blade for erosion in Zone 1 as shown in Figure 7 of the ASB.
(C) Thereafter, on or before 660 hours TIS and at intervals not
to exceed 660 hours TIS, remove the blade and the blade tip cap,
scrap the 35 attachment screws, and inspect the end of the leading
edge of the blade for erosion in Zone 1 as shown in Figure 7 of the
ASB.
(3) For a blade with a S/N of 809 or greater:
(i) For a blade that has less than 660 hours TIS, on or before
660 hours TIS and thereafter, at intervals not to exceed 660 hours
TIS, remove the blade and the blade tip cap, scrap the 35 attachment
screws, and inspect the end of the leading edge of the blade for
erosion in Zone 1 as shown in Figure 7 of the ASB.
(ii) For a blade that has 660 or more hours TIS, on or before
100 hours TIS and thereafter, at intervals not to exceed 660 hours
TIS, remove the blade and the blade tip cap, scrap the 35 attachment
screws, and inspect the end of the leading edge of the blade for
erosion in Zone 1 as shown in Figure 7 of the ASB.
(4) If any inspection of the end of the leading edge of a blade
in Zone 1, as shown in Figure 7 of the ASB, results in:
(i) Erosion in Zone 1--clean and caulk the eroded zone by
following the Accomplishments Instructions, paragraph 2.B.6., of the
ASB, and reinstall the blade tip cap and caulk the gap in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph 2.B.7, of the ASB.
(ii) No Erosion in Zone 1--reinstall the blade tip cap and caulk
the gap in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions,
paragraph 2.B.7., of the ASB.
Differences Between This AD and the MCAI
(f) We have identified the following differences:
(1) We refer to the actions required by this AD by using the
word ``inspect'' rather than ``check'' to indicate that the actions
are done by a mechanic rather than a pilot.
(2) We do not require you to contact the manufacturer as
specified in the service information.
(3) We use the words ``hours time-in-service'' rather than
``flight hours.''
(4) We did not use the compliance date of September 30, 2004 to
remove affected blades because that date has passed.
Other Information
(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Safety Management Group, FAA, ATTN: Jim Grigg, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Fort Worth, Texas 76193-0112, telephone (817) 222-5126,
fax (817) 222-5961, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD,
if requested, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
Related Information
(h) MCAI Airworthiness Directive AD No. F-2004-106, Revision A,
dated July 7, 2004, contains related information.
Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Tracking Code
(i) ATA Code 6210: Rotor(s).
Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on October 1, 2008.
Mark R. Schilling,
Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E8-24986 Filed 10-20-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P