Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 9, 2000 / Proposed Rules 26783

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

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

removing Amendment 39–11258 and by

adding a new airworthiness directive to

read as follows:

Schweizer Aircraft Corporation: Docket No.

99-SW–57–AD. Supersedes AD 99–17–

10, Amendment 39–11258, Docket No.

99–SW–31–AD.

Applicability: Model 269A, 269A–1, 269B,

269C, 269C–1, 269D and TH–55A

helicopters, with a tail rotor swashplate shaft

(shaft), part number (P/N) 269A6049–3, or a

tail rotor pitch control assembly (pitch

control), P/N 269A6050–5, with a serial

number (S/N) with an ‘‘S’’ prefix and number

1047 through 1061, installed, certificated in

any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in

the area subject to the requirements of this

AD. For helicopters that have been modified,

altered, or repaired so that the performance

of the requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (c) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent failure of the shaft, loss of the

tail rotor, and subsequent loss of control of

the helicopter, accomplish the following:

(a) Within 10 hours time-in-service (TIS);

(1) Determine whether the factory-installed

shaft, part number (P/N) 269A6049–3, has

been replaced with a shaft shipped from the

factory between September 1 and December

1, 1998, inclusive, or if a pitch control, P/N

269A6050–5, with a S/N with an ‘‘S’’ prefix

and numbers 1047 through 1061 is installed.

(2) If the factory ship date for a

replacement shaft cannot be positively

determined, if the shipping date was between

September 1 and December 1, 1998,

inclusive, or if the pitch control S/N has an

‘‘S’’ prefix and number 1047 through 1061,

(i) Before further flight and thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 10 hours TIS,

accomplish ‘‘Procedure, Part I,’’ of Schweizer

Service Bulletins B–271.1 for Models 269A,

269A–1, 269B, 269C and TH–55A

helicopters; C1B–009.1 for the Model 269C–

1, or DB–007.1 for the Model 269D, all dated

October 14, 1999 (SB), as applicable.

(ii) At the next scheduled 100-hour or

annual inspection, whichever occurs first,

accomplish Part II, paragraphs a. through d.,

of the applicable SB. Shafts not meeting the

requirements of paragraph d. of the

applicable SB must be replaced with an

airworthy shaft prior to further flight.

(b) Before installing a replacement shaft,

determine the date the shaft was shipped

from the factory. If the date was between

September 1 and December 1, 1998,

inclusive, or cannot be determined,

accomplish the inspections required by Part

II, paragraph d., of the applicable SB prior to

installation. Replace any unairworthy shaft

with an airworthy shaft.

(c) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager, New York

Aircraft Certification Office. Operators shall

submit their requests through an FAA

Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may

concur or comment and then send it to the

Manager, New York Aircraft Certification

Office.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the New York Aircraft

Certification Office.

(d) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the helicopter

to a location where the requirements of this

AD can be accomplished.

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on April 28,

2000.

Eric Bries,

Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–11523 Filed 5–8–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–SW–42–AD]

Airworthiness Directives; Bell

Helicopter Textron Canada (BHTC)

Model 430 Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This document proposes the

supersedure of an existing airworthiness

directive (AD) applicable to BHTC

Model 430 helicopters. That AD

requires inspecting all four main rotor

adapter assemblies for evidence of

flapping and lead-lag contact. That AD

also requires installing a never-exceedvelocity (VNE) placard with markings

on the airspeed indicator glass and

instrument case and a revision to the

rotorcraft flight manual (RFM) to reflect

the airspeed revision. This action would

provide mandatory terminating action

for requirements of that AD by replacing

the fluidlastic damper blade sets with

improved sets that incorporate a

pressure indicator to detect loss of

damper fluid. This proposal is

prompted by the need for a positive

means of detecting loss of damper fluid

that could result in main rotor tip path

plane separation. The actions specified

by the proposed AD are intended to

prevent increased vibrations, damage to

the main rotor system, and subsequent

loss of control of the helicopter.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before July 10, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Office of the

Regional Counsel, Southwest Region,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 99–SW–42–

AD, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663,

Fort Worth, Texas 76137. You may also

send comments electronically to the

Rules Docket at the following address:

9–asw–adcomments@faa.gov.

Comments may be inspected at this

location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sharon Miles, Aviation Safety Engineer,

Rotorcraft Directorate, Rotorcraft

Standards Staff, 2601 Meacham Blvd.,

Fort Worth, Texas 76137, telephone

(817) 222–5122, fax (817) 222–5961.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

participate in the making of the

proposed rule by submitting such

written data, views, or arguments as

they may desire. Communications

should identify the Rules Docket

number and be submitted in triplicate to

the address specified above. All

communications received on or before

the closing date for comments, specified

above, will be considered before taking

action on the proposed rule. The

proposals contained in this notice may

be changed in light of the comments

received.

Comments are specifically invited on

the overall regulatory, economic,

environmental, and energy aspects of

the proposed rule. All comments

submitted will be available, both before

and after the closing date for comments,

in the Rules Docket for examination by

interested persons. A report

summarizing each FAA-public contact

concerned with the substance of this

proposal will be filed in the Rules

Docket.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their mailed

comments submitted in response to this

notice must submit a self-addressed,

stamped postcard on which the

following statement is made:

‘‘Comments to Docket No. 99–SW–42–

AD.’’ The postcard will be date stamped

and returned to the commenter.

26784 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 9, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

NPRM by submitting a request to the

FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel,

Southwest Region, Attention: Rules

Docket No. 99–SW–42–AD, 2601

Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth,

Texas 76137.

Discussion

On September 26, 1997, the FAA

issued AD No. 97–15–16, Amendment

39–10152 (62 FR 52653, October 9,

1997). That AD requires inspecting the

BHTC Model 430 helicopter main rotor

adapter assemblies for evidence of

flapping and lead-lag contact. That AD

also requires installing a VNE placard,

with markings to reflect the airspeed

restriction, and inserting revisions to the

RFM to reflect the airspeed revisions.

That action was prompted by a report of

a main rotor tip path plane separation,

which occurred during a ferry flight at

airspeed of more than 140 knots

indicated airspeed. The requirements of

that AD are intended to prevent tip path

plane separation, increased vibrations,

damage to the main rotor system, and

subsequent loss of control of the

helicopter.

Transport Canada, the airworthiness

authority for Canada, notified the FAA

that an unsafe condition may exist on

BHTC Model 430 helicopters. Transport

Canada advises that a main rotor tip

path plane separation on a Model 430

helicopter was caused by the limited

damping characteristics of the

elastomeric lead-lag dampers.

Since the issuance of AD 97–15–16,

BHTC has issued Alert Service Bulletin

(ASB) 430–97–4, dated December 14,

1997, and ASB 430–98–8, dated

December 31, 1998, that provide for

replacing the fluidlastic damper blade

sets with improved sets, part number (P/

N) 430–310–104–105. The improved

fluidlastic damper blade sets

incorporate a pressure indicator to

provide a positive means of leak

detection, thereby replacing the

requirements of ASB 430–97–2, dated

July 11, 1997, and ASB 430–97–4, dated

December 19, 1997.

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other BHTC Model 430

helicopters of the same type design, the

proposed AD would maintain the same

requirements as AD 97–15–16 until an

improved fluidlastic damper blade set,

P/N 430–310–104–105, is installed that

incorporates a pressure indicator to

detect loss of damper fluid.

The FAA estimates that 7 helicopters

of U.S. registry would be affected by this

proposed AD, that it would take

approximately 11 work hours per

helicopter to accomplish the proposed

actions, and that the average labor rate

is $60 per work hour. The required parts

would cost approximately $122,945 per

set of 4. Based on these figures, the total

cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $865,235 to

replace the damper blade sets in the

entire fleet.

The regulations proposed herein

would not have a substantial direct

effect on the States, on the relationship

between the national Government and

the States, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities among the

various levels of government. Therefore,

it is determined that this proposal

would not have federalism implications

under Executive Order 13132.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this proposed regulation (1)

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if

promulgated, will not have a significant

economic impact, positive or negative,

on a substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft

regulatory evaluation prepared for this

action is contained in the Rules Docket.

A copy of it may be obtained by

contacting the Rules Docket at the

location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

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

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

removing Amendment 39–10152 (62 FR

52653, October 9, 1997), and by adding

a new airworthiness directive (AD), to

read as follows:

Bell Helicopter Textron Canada: Docket No.

99–SW–42–AD. Supersedes AD 97–15–

16, Amendment 39–10152, Docket 97–

SW–24–AD.

Applicability: Model 430 helicopters,

certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in

the area subject to the requirements of this

AD. For helicopters that have been modified,

altered, or repaired so that the performance

of the requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (d) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent tip path plane separation,

increased vibrations, damage to the main

rotor system, and subsequent loss of control

of the helicopter, accomplish the following:

(a) Before further flight:

(1) Inspect all four main rotor adapter

assemblies for flapping contact between the

adapter liners and the upper stop assembly

plugs. Refer to Figures 1, 2, and 3 of the

Accomplishment Instructions of Bell

Helicopter Textron Canada (BHTC) Alert

Service Bulletin (ASB) No. 430–97–2, dated

July 11, 1997. Flapping contact is indicated

by the scrubbing (or smudging) of the adapter

liner surface, characteristic of relative motion

between the surfaces of the adapter lines and

upper stop assembly plugs.

(2) Inspect all four main rotor adapter

assemblies for lead-lag contact between the

adapter pads and the yoke assembly. Refer to

Figures 1 and 2 of the Accomplishment

Instructions of BHTC ASB No. 430–97–2,

dated July 11, 1997. Lead-lag contact is

indicated by a permanent indentation or split

in the surface of the adapter pads.

(3) If the inspections in paragraphs (a)(1) or

(a)(2) of this AD reveal that there has been

contact, inspect and replace the main rotor

yoke and stop assemblies in accordance with

Part I, No. 3 of the Accomplishment

Instructions of BHTC ASB No. 430–97–2,

dated July 11, 1997, except return of any

damaged upper stops to the manufacturer is

not required.

(4) For helicopters with skid landing gear

or retractable landing gear, remove the

existing never-exceed-velocity (VNE) placard

from the overhead console and install VNE

placard, P/N 430–075–208–107, or P/N 430–

075–208–109, as applicable, in accordance

with Part II, of the Accomplishment

Instructions of BHTC ASB No. 430–97–2,

dated July 11, 1997.

(5) Install on each airspeed indicator a red

arc between 120 knots and 150 knots to

indicate that airspeeds above 120 knots

indicated airspeed are prohibited. Install a

slippage mark on each airspeed indicator

glass and instrument case.

(6) Insert the temporary revisions, BHT–

430–FM–1 and BHT–430–FMS–1, as

appropriate, both dated July 7, 1997, into the

rotorcraft flight manual.

(b) Within 100 hours time-in-service, (1)

Remove the fluidlastic damper blade set, P/

N 430–310–100–101 or 430–310–107–101 in

accordance with the Accomplishment

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 9, 2000 / Proposed Rules 26785

Instructions of ASB 430–97–4, dated

December 19, 1997, Part 1, steps 1 through

5, and install damper blade set, P/N 430–

310–104–105, in accordance with the

Accomplishment Instructions, Part I, of

BHTC ASB 430–98–8, dated December 31,

1998.

(2) Return pilot and copilot airspeed

indicators to their original configuration by

removing the markings specified by

paragraph (a)(5) of this AD.

(3) Remove the temporary revisions, BHT

430-FM–1 or BHT–430-FMS–1, as

appropriate, both dated July 7, 1997. Insert

the temporary revisions, BHT–430-FM–1, or

BHT–430-FMS–1, as appropriate, both dated

December 11, 1998, into the rotorcraft flight

manual.

(c) If paragraph (b)(1) was previously

accomplished by installation of fluidlastic

damper blade set, P/N 430–310–104–103,

remove fluidlastic damper blade set, P/N

430–310–104–103, and install fluidlastic

damper blade set, P/N 430–310–104–105, in

accordance with the Accomplishment

Instructions of BHTC ASB 430–98–8, dated

December 31, 1998.

(d) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager, Regulations

Group, FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA.

Operators shall submit their requests through

an FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector,

who may concur or comment and then send

it to the Manager, Regulations Group.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Regulations Group.

(e) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the helicopter

to a location where the requirements of this

AD can be accomplished.

Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in Transport Canada (Canada) AD No. CF–

97–23R1, dated March 30, 1999.

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on April 28,

2000.

Eric Bries,

Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 00–11522 Filed 5–8–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 00–ASO–17]

Proposed Amendment of Class E

Airspace; Fort Payne, AL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: This action proposes to

amend Class E airspace at Fort Payne,

AL. A Global Positioning System (GPS)

Standard Instrument Approach

Procedure (SIAP), helicopter point in

space approach, has been developed for

Dekalb Medical Center, Fort Payne, AL.

As a result, controlled airspace

extending upward from 700 feet Above

Ground Level (AGL) is needed to

accommodate the SIAP. This action

proposes to amend the Class E airspace

for Fort Payne, AL, to the southwest, in

order to include the point in space

approach serving Dekalb Medical

Center.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before June 8, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on the

proposal in triplicate to: Federal

Aviation Administration, Docket No.

00–ASO–17, Manager, Airspace Branch,

ASO–520, P.O. Box 20636, Atlanta,

Georgia 30320.

The official docket may be examined

in the Office of the Regional Counsel for

Southern Region, Room 550, 1701

Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia

30337, telephone (404) 305–5627.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Nancy B. Shelton, Manager, Airspace

Branch, Air Traffic Division, Federal

Aviation Administration, P.O. Box

20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320;

telephone (404) 305–5627.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested parties are invited to

participate in this proposed rulemaking

by submitting such written data, views

or arguments as they may desire.

Comments that provide the factual basis

supporting the views and suggestions

presented are particularly helpful in

developing reasoned regulatory

decisions on the proposal. Comments

are specifically invited on the overall

regulatory, aeronautical, economic,

environmental, and energy-related

aspects of the proposal.

Communications should identify the

airspace docket number and be

submitted in triplicate to the address

listed above. Commenters wishing the

FAA to acknowledge receipt of their

comments on this action must submit

with those comments a self-addressed,

stamped postcard on which the

following statement is made:

‘‘Comments to Airspace Docket No. 00–

ASO–17.’’ The postcard will be date/

time stamped and returned to the

commenter. All communications

received before the specified closing

date for comments will be considered

before taking action on the proposed

rule. The proposal contained in this

action may be changed in light of the

comments received. All comments

submitted will be available for

examination in the Office of the

Regional Counsel for Southern Region,

Room 550, 1701 Columbia Avenue,

College Park, Georgia 30337, both before

and after the closing date for comments.

A report summarizing each substantive

public contact with FAA personnel

concerned with this rulemaking will be

filed in the docket.

Availability of NPRMs

Any person may obtain a copy of this

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)

by submitting a request to the Federal

Aviation Administration, Manager,

Airspace Branch, ASO–520, Air Traffic

Division, P.O. Box 20636, Atlanta,

Georgia 30320. Communications must

identify the docket number of this

NPRM. Persons interested in being

placed on a mailing list for future

NPRMs should request a copy of

Advisory Circular No. 11–2A which

describes the application procedure.

The Proposal

The FAA is considering an

amendment to part 71 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR Part 71) to

amend Class E airspace at Fort Payne,

AL. A GPS SIAP, helicopter point in

space approach, has been developed for

Dekalb Medical Center, Fort Payne, AL.

Additional controlled airspace

extending upward from 700 feet AGL is

needed to accommodate the SIAP. Class

E airspace designations for airspace

areas extending upward from 700 feet or

more above the surface are published in

Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9G,

dated September 1, 1999, and effective

September 16, 1999, which is

incorporated by reference in 14 CFR

171.1 The Class E airspace designation

listed in this document would be

published subsequently in the Order.

The FAA has determined that this

proposed regulation only involves an

established body of technical

regulations for which frequent and

routine amendments are necessary to

keep them operationally current. It,

therefore, (1) is not a ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ under Executive

Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant

rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies

and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February

26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant

preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation

as the anticipated impact is so minimal.

Since this is a routine matter that will

only affect air traffic procedures and air

navigation, it is certified that this rule,

when promulgated, will not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities