31860 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 28, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

(c) The hinge moment factor K for 

ground gusts must be taken from the 

following table: 

Surface K Position of controls 

(a) Aileron ...................................................................................................... 0.75 Control Column locked or lashed in mid-position. 

(b) Aileron ...................................................................................................... *±0.50 Ailerons at full throw. 

(c) Elevator .................................................................................................... *±0.75 Elevator full down. 

(d) Elevator .................................................................................................... *±0.75 Elevator full up. 

(e) Rudder ...................................................................................................... 0.75 Rudder in neutral. 

(f) Rudder ....................................................................................................... 0.75 Rudder at full throw. 

* A positive value of K indicates a moment tending to depress the surface, while a negative value of K indicates a moment tending to raise the 

surface. 

(d) The computed hinge moment of 

paragraph (b) of this section must be 

used to determine the limit loads due to 

ground gust conditions for the control 

surface. A 1.25 factor on the computed 

hinge moments must be used in 

calculating limit control system loads. 

(e) Where control system flexibility is 

such that the rate of load application in 

the ground gust conditions might 

produce transient stresses appreciably 

higher than those corresponding to 

static loads, in the absence of a rational 

analysis, an additional factor of 1.6 must 

be applied to the control system loads 

of paragraph (d) of this section to obtain 

limit loads. If a rational analysis is used, 

the additional factor must not be less 

than 1.2. 

(f) For the condition of the control 

locks engaged, the control surfaces, the 

control system locks, and the parts of 

the control systems (if any) between the 

surfaces and the locks must be designed 

to the resultant limit loads. Where 

control locks are not provided, then the 

control surfaces, the control system 

stops nearest the surfaces, and the parts 

of the control systems (if any) between 

the surfaces and the stops must be 

designed to the resultant limit loads. If 

the control system design is such as to 

allow any part of the control system to 

impact with the stops due to flexibility, 

then the resultant impact loads must be 

taken into account in deriving the limit 

loads due to ground gust. 

(g) For the condition of taxiing with 

the control locks disengaged, the 

following apply: 

(1) The control surfaces, the control 

system stops nearest the surfaces, and 

the parts of the control systems (if any) 

between the surfaces and the stops must 

be designed to the resultant limit loads. 

(2) The parts of the control systems 

between the stops nearest the surfaces 

and the flight deck controls must be 

designed to the resultant limit loads, 

except that the parts of the control 

system where loads are eventually 

reacted by the pilot need not exceed: 

(i) The loads corresponding to the 

maximum pilot loads in § 25.397(c) for 

each pilot alone; or 

(ii) 0.75 times these maximum loads 

for each pilot when the pilot forces are 

applied in the same direction. 

■ 13. Revise § 25.1517 to read as 

follows: 

§ 25.1517 Rough air speed, VRA. 

(a) A rough air speed, VRA, for use as 

the recommended turbulence 

penetration airspeed, and a rough air 

Mach number, MRA, for use as the 

recommended turbulence penetration 

Mach number, must be established. 

VRA/MRA must be sufficiently less than 

VMO/MMO to ensure that likely speed 

variation during rough air encounters 

will not cause the overspeed warning to 

operate too frequently. 

(b) At altitudes where VMO is not 

limited by Mach number, in the absence 

of a rational investigation substantiating 

the use of other values, VRA must be less 

than VMO–35 KTAS. 

(c) At altitudes where VMO is limited 

by Mach number, MRA may be chosen 

to provide an optimum margin between 

low and high speed buffet boundaries. 

■ 14. Remove and reserve appendix G to 

part 25. 

Issued under authority provided by 49 

U.S.C. 106(f), 44701(a), and 44703 in 

Washington, DC, on May 6, 2013. 

Dorenda D. Baker, 

Director, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–12445 Filed 5–24–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–0288; Directorate 

Identifier 2006–SW–25–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bell 

Helicopter Textron, Inc., Helicopters 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (SNPRM); 

reopening of comment period. 

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier 

proposed airworthiness directive (AD) 

for Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (Bell), 

Model 214B and B–1 helicopters, which 

proposed to require inspecting certain 

pylon support spindle assemblies 

(spindles) for any corrosion, or a nick, 

scratch, dent, or crack, and repairing or 

replacing any unairworthy spindle 

before further flight. This SNPRM 

proposes to revise those requirements 

by updating the cost of compliance, 

revising the recording requirements, 

adding a requirement to reduce the 

retirement life of an installed spindle, 

and adding Bell Model 214ST to the 

applicability. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by July 29, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Send comments to the U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to the 

‘‘Mail’’ address between 9 a.m. and 5 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 28, 2013 / Proposed Rules 31861 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in person at the 

Docket 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 service information identified in 

this AD, contact Bell Helicopter 

Textron, Inc., P.O. Box 482, Fort Worth, 

Texas 76101; telephone (817) 280–3391; 

fax (817) 280–6466; or at http:// 

www.bellcustomer.com/files/. You may 

review the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Office of the 

Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 

2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort 

Worth, Texas 76137. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Martin Crane, Aviation Safety Engineer, 

Rotorcraft Certification Office, 

Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA, 2601 

Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 

76137; telephone (817) 222–5056; email 

7-AVS-ASW-170@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to participate in this 

rulemaking by submitting written 

comments, data, or views. We also 

invite comments relating to the 

economic, environmental, energy, or 

federalism impacts that might result 

from adopting the proposals in this 

document. The most helpful comments 

reference a specific portion of the 

proposal, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. To ensure the docket 

does not contain duplicate comments, 

commenters should send only one copy 

of written comments, or if comments are 

filed electronically, commenters should 

submit only one time. 

We will file in the docket all 

comments that we receive, as well as a 

report summarizing each substantive 

public contact with FAA personnel 

concerning this proposed rulemaking. 

Before acting on this proposal, we will 

consider all comments we receive on or 

before the closing date for comments. 

We will consider comments filed after 

the comment period has closed if it is 

possible to do so without incurring 

expense or delay. We may change this 

proposal in light of the comments we 

receive. 

Discussion 

On March 3, 2008, we issued a 

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal 

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to 

include an AD that would apply to Bell 

Model 214B and B–1 helicopters with a 

spindle, part number (P/N) 214–030– 

606–005, installed. This proposal was 

published in the Federal Register as a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

on March 13, 2008 (73 FR 13513). The 

NPRM proposed to require creating a 

component history card or equivalent 

for each spindle, inspecting certain 

spindles for any corrosion, or a nick, 

scratch, dent, or crack, and repairing or 

replacing any unairworthy spindle 

before further flight. That NPRM was 

prompted by three in-flight failures of 

the spindle which resulted in forced 

landings and one serious injury. The 

proposed actions were intended to 

detect damage in the radii or cracking of 

a spindle, and to prevent failure of a 

spindle and subsequent loss of control 

of the helicopter. The proposed actions 

were also intended to be interim actions 

until a retirement life for the affected 

spindles could be developed and new 

replacement spindles became available. 

Actions Since Previous NPRM Was 

Issued 

Since we issued the previous NPRM 

(73 FR 13513, March 13, 2008), Bell 

conducted further evaluation of the 

cracked spindles and determined it 

necessary to establish a retirement life 

for the spindles because the speed at 

which a crack can propagate is such that 

a more frequent inspection interval 

would not be practical. As a result, Bell 

released Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) 

No. 214–08–70, dated November 11, 

2008, now at Revision C, dated April 14, 

2009, to establish the retirement life for 

the spindles on Model 214B and 214B– 

1 helicopters. Due to design similarities, 

Bell conducted further evaluation of the 

spindles on Model 214ST helicopters 

and published ASB No. 214ST–08–86, 

dated November 11, 2008, now at 

Revision B, dated April 14, 2009, to 

revise the retirement life for those 

spindles. The first actual reported crack 

in a Model 214ST spindle, P/N 214– 

030–606–103, prompted Bell to release 

Information Letter 214ST–12–23, dated 

January 30, 2012. 

This SNPRM proposes the following 

changes: 

• Adding Model 214ST helicopters to 

the applicability; 

• Removing certain previously 

proposed recording requirements; 

• Removing the previously proposed 

visual and magnetic particle inspection 

requirements and subsequent 

replacement and repair requirements; 

• Establishing a retirement life of 

1,250 hours TIS or total accumulated 

retirement index number (RIN) of 

20,000, whichever occurs first, for any 

spindle, part number (P/N) 214–030– 

606–005, that is installed on a Model 

214B or Model 214B–1 helicopter; 

• Reducing the retirement life to 

2,500 hours TIS or total accumulated 

RIN of 50,000, whichever occurs first, 

for any spindle, P/N 214–030–606–103, 

that is installed on a Model 214ST 

helicopter; 

• Establishing a method of 

determining the total accumulated RIN; 

and 

• Replacing any spindle which has 

reached its airworthiness retirement life. 

This SNPRM also updates the cost of 

compliance information of this AD by 

correcting the estimated number of 

work-hours to replace both spindles 

from 15 work-hours to 24 work-hours, 

by updating the estimated labor cost per 

work-hour from $80 to $85 per workhour, and by updating the cost of 

required parts to current replacement 

part costs. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

comment on the previous NPRM (73 FR 

13513, March 13, 2008). The following 

presents the comments received on the 

previous NPRM and the FAA’s response 

to each comment. 

Request 

Bell stated that results from analysis 

and review of the pylon spindle 

assembly, P/N 214–030–606–005, 

identified the requirement to assign an 

airworthiness retirement life to that 

assembly. They also stated that alert 

service bulletins would detail the 

retirement life of the spindle. We agree 

and have revised this SNPRM 

accordingly. 

Bell commented that the previous 

NPRM (73 FR 13513, March 13, 2008) 

did not address conversion of torque 

events to RIN. We agree and have 

revised this SNPRM accordingly. 

Bell also stated that the previous 

NPRM mis-identified the visual 

inspection requirements of using a 

magnifying glass on each outer radius of 

the spindle; that this visual inspection 

requirement is for the main rotor hub 

spindle, not the transmission spindle. 

They also stated that once cracks start, 

they progress very rapidly and visual 

inspection at a frequency designed to 

discover cracking would not be 

manageable. We agree. With 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
31862 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 28, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

establishment of a maximum 

airworthiness life limit for the spindle 

and after further review, we determined 

that deleting the previously proposed 

visual inspections will not impact the 

overall level of safety. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this SNPRM 

because we evaluated all the relevant 

information and determined the unsafe 

condition described previously is likely 

to exist or develop in other helicopters 

of these same type designs. Certain 

changes described above expand the 

scope of the original NPRM (73 FR 

13513, March 13, 2008). As a result, we 

have determined that it is necessary to 

reopen the comment period to provide 

additional opportunity for the public to 

comment. 

Related Service Information 

We have reviewed Bell ASB No. 214– 

08–70, Revision C, dated April 14, 2009 

(214–08–70), which establishes a 

maximum airworthiness limit of 1,250 

hours TIS or a total accumulated RIN of 

20,000, whichever occurs first, for any 

spindle, P/N 214–030–606–005, that is 

installed on a Model 214B or Model 

214B–1 helicopter. ASB 214–08–70 was 

prompted by three reported incidents of 

a cracked spindle, P/N 214–030–606– 

005. We have also reviewed Bell ASB 

No. 214ST–08–86, Revision B, dated 

April 14, 2009 (214ST–08–86), which 

reduces the maximum airworthiness life 

limit from 5,000 hours TIS to 2,500 

hours TIS or a total accumulated RIN of 

50,000, whichever occurs first, for any 

spindle, P/N 214–030–606–103, that is 

installed on a Model 214ST helicopter. 

ASB 214ST–08–86 was published after 

further evaluation of spindle, P/N 214– 

030–606–103, which was prompted by 

design similarities to spindle, P/N 214– 

030–606–005. The ASBs also specify 

determining the accumulated RIN by 

calculating a RIN factor of 1 for each lift 

or takeoff performed during normal 

operation and of 2 for each lift or takeoff 

performed during logging operation. 

When actual lift events are unknown or 

cannot be determined, both ASBs 

specify calculating RIN at 30 lift events 

per flight hour; ASB No. 214–08–70 

further specifies calculating flight hours 

at a rate of 900 hours per year. Both 

ASBs specify replacing any spindle that 

has reached its maximum airworthiness 

limit. 

Additionally, we reviewed Bell 

Information Letter 214ST–12–23, dated 

January 30, 2012, which was issued to 

advise owners and operators of the first 

actual reported crack in a Model 214ST 

spindle, P/N 214–030–606–103. 

Proposed Requirements of the SNPRM 

This proposed AD would require, 

within 50 hours TIS: 

• Creating a component history card 

or equivalent record for each affected 

spindle; 

• Determining total hours TIS, if not 

already recorded; 

• Determining total accumulated RIN; 

• Recording the RIN and hours TIS on 

the spindle’s component history card or 

equivalent record; 

• Establishing a new retirement life 

for spindle, P/N 214–030–606–005, of 

1,250 hours TIS or a total accumulated 

RIN of 20,000, whichever occurs first, 

for Models 214B and 214B–1, and 

reducing the retirement life for spindle, 

P/N 214–030–606–103, from 5,000 

hours TIS to 2,500 hours TIS or an 

accumulated RIN of 50,000, whichever 

occurs first, for Model 214ST; and 

• Replacing any spindle which has 

reached its airworthiness retirement life. 

Differences Between this SNPRM and 

the Service Information 

The service information specifies, as 

part of determining the life of a 

currently installed spindle, 

accumulating a RIN factor of 2 for each 

lift or takeoff performed during a 

logging operation. This SNPRM would 

instead require using a RIN factor of 2 

for any external load lift or takeoff in 

which the helicopter achieves a vertical 

altitude difference of greater than 200 

feet indicated altitude between the pickup and drop-off point. We have 

determined that other external load lift 

operations with the specified vertical 

altitude difference or greater would 

experience the same double torque cycle 

as in logging operations, and that a RIN 

factor of 2 would need to be used for 

those type of operations as well. Also, 

the service information for Models 214B 

and 214B–1 specify an initial 

compliance time of 150 flight hours. We 

are retaining the initial compliance time 

of 50 hours TIS from the previous 

NPRM in this SNPRM. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

would affect 12 Model 214B/B–1 and 24 

Model 214ST helicopters of U.S. 

registry. We estimate that operators may 

incur the following costs in order to 

comply with this AD. It would take 

about 1 work-hour for the record 

keeping requirements of this proposed 

AD, and about 24 work-hours to replace 

both spindles. Labor costs are estimated 

at $85 per work-hour and the cost of 

parts would be about $39,806 for both 

spindles for a Model 214B or 214B–1, 

and $40,802 for both spindles for a 

Model 214ST. Based on these estimates, 

for record keeping and the replacement 

of a pair of spindles, the total per 

helicopter cost would be $41,931 for a 

Model 214B or 214B–1 and $42,927 for 

a Model 214ST. The total cost of 

recordkeeping would be about $3,060. 

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); 

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska to the extent that it justifies 

making a regulatory distinction; and 

(4) 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. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 102 / Tuesday, May 28, 2013 / Proposed Rules 31863 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., Helicopters: 

Docket No. FAA–2008–0288; Directorate 

Identifier 2006–SW–25–AD. 

(a) Applicability 

This AD applies to Bell Helicopter Textron, 

Inc. (Bell), Model 214B, 214B–1, and 214ST 

helicopters, with pylon support spindle 

assembly (spindle), part number (P/N) 214– 

030–606–005 or –103, installed, certificated 

in any category. 

(b) Unsafe Condition 

This AD defines the unsafe condition as 

fatigue cracking of a spindle. This condition 

could result in failure of the spindle and 

subsequent loss of control of the helicopter. 

(c) Compliance 

You are responsible for performing each 

action required by this AD within the 

specified compliance time unless it has 

already been accomplished prior to that time. 

(d) Required Actions 

(1) Within 50 hours time-in-service (TIS): 

(i) Create a component history card or 

equivalent record for each spindle, P/N 214– 

030–606–005 and 214–030–606–103, 

recording the spindle’s P/N and serial 

number (S/N). 

(ii) Review the helicopter records to 

determine the hours TIS of each spindle, if 

the hours TIS are not already recorded for 

your model helicopter. For each month for 

which the hours TIS is unknown, record 75 

hours TIS. 

(iii) Determine the total accumulated 

retirement index number (RIN) for each 

spindle. For the purpose of this AD, count 1 

RIN for each takeoff and 2 RIN for each 

external load lift in which the helicopter 

achieves a vertical altitude difference of 

greater than 200 feet indicated altitude 

between the pick-up and drop-off point. For 

any time period for which the accumulated 

RIN cannot be determined while the spindle 

was installed on a helicopter, multiply the 

hours TIS by 30 to calculate the spindle’s 

accumulated RIN. 

(iv) Record the hours TIS and total 

accumulated RIN for each spindle on the 

component history card or equivalent record. 

(2) Revise the Airworthiness Limitations 

section of the applicable maintenance 

manual or Instructions for Continued 

Airworthiness as follows: 

(i) By establishing a new retirement life for 

the spindle, P/N 214–030–606–005, of 1,250 

hours TIS or a total accumulated RIN of 

20,000, whichever occurs first. 

(ii) By reducing the retirement life for the 

spindle, P/N 214–030–606–103, from 5,000 

hours TIS to 2,500 hours TIS or a total 

accumulated RIN of 50,000, whichever 

occurs first. 

(3) Replace any spindle, P/N 214–030– 

606–005, that has been in service for 1,250 

or more hours TIS, or a total accumulated 

RIN of 20,000 or more, whichever occurs 

first. 

(4) Replace any spindle, P/N 214–030– 

606–103, that has been in service for 2,500 

or more hours TIS, or a total accumulated 

RIN of 50,000 or more, whichever occurs 

first. 

(5) Continue to count and record the 

accumulated RIN count and hours TIS for 

each spindle on its component history card 

or equivalent record. 

(e) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Rotorcraft Certification 

Office, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this 

AD. Send your proposal to: Martin Crane, 

Aviation Safety Engineer, Rotorcraft 

Certification Office, Rotorcraft Directorate, 

FAA, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, 

Texas 76137; telephone (817) 222–5056; 

email 7-AVS-ASW-170@faa.gov. 

(2) For operations conducted under a 14 

CFR part 119 operating certificate or under 

14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that 

you notify your principal inspector, or 

lacking a principal inspector, the manager of 

the local flight standards district office or 

certificate holding district office before 

operating any aircraft complying with this 

AD through an AMOC. 

(f) Subject 

Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) 

Code: 6330, Transmission Mount. 

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on May 17, 

2013. 

Kim Smith, 

Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–12522 Filed 5–24–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0454; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–SW–081–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Sikorsky 

Aircraft Corporation-Manufactured 

(Sikorsky) Model Helicopters (type 

certificate currently held by Erickson 

Air-Crane Incorporated) 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD) for 

Sikorsky Aircraft Corporationmanufactured Model S–64E helicopters 

(type certificate currently held by 

Erickson Air-Crane Incorporated 

(Erickson)). That AD currently requires 

inspecting and reworking the main 

gearbox (MGB) assembly second stage 

lower planetary plate (plate). This 

action would establish or reduce the life 

limits for certain flight-critical 

components, remove from service 

various parts, require repetitive 

inspections and other corrective actions, 

and require replacing any cracked part 

discovered during an inspection. This 

proposal is prompted by further analysis 

performed by the current type certificate 

holder and the service history of certain 

parts. The actions specified in the 

proposed AD are intended to prevent a 

crack in a flight critical component, 

failure of a critical part, and subsequent 

loss of control of the helicopter. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by July 29, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Send comments to the U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to the 

‘‘Mail’’ address between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in person at the 

Docket 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 service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Erickson AirCrane Incorporated, ATTN: Chris 

Erickson/Compliance Officer, 3100 

Willow Springs Rd, PO Box 3247, 

Central Point, OR 97502, telephone 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS