Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Proposed Rules 67379 

marriage or commencing date of the 

domestic partnership. 

(c) Other qualified relative(s) of a 

workforce member may apply for 

coverage with full underwriting at any 

time following the marriage or 

commencing date of the domestic 

partnership. 

■ 6. In § 875.412, the introductory text 

is revised and paragraph (e) is added to 

read as follows: 

§ 875.412 When will my coverage 

terminate? 

Except as provided in paragraph (e) of 

this section, your coverage will 

terminate on the earliest of the 

following dates: 

* * * * * 

(e) Termination of a domestic 

partnership does not terminate 

insurance coverage as long as the Carrier 

continues to receive the required 

premium when due. 

[FR Doc. 2014–26779 Filed 11–12–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6325–63–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0756; Directorate 

Identifier 2014–NM–103–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; the Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for all the 

Boeing Company Model 707 airplanes, 

and Model 720 and 720B series 

airplanes. This proposed AD is intended 

to complete certain mandated programs 

intended to support the airplane 

reaching its limit of validity (LOV) of 

the engineering data that support the 

established structural maintenance 

program. This proposed AD would 

require repetitive inspections for 

cracking of the inboard and outboard 

midspar fittings of the nacelle struts and 

of the torque bulkhead, midspar chords, 

drag fitting, and front spar support, and 

doing applicable related investigative 

and corrective actions; replacing the 

midspar fittings; and doing other 

specified actions. We are proposing this 

AD to detect and correct cracking in the 

midspar fittings of the inboard and 

outboard nacelle struts, which could 

result in the loss of the structural 

integrity of the midspar fitting. This 

condition could cause an unsafe 

separation of the engine and consequent 

wing fire. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by December 29, 

2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://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: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data 

& Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, 

MC 2H–65, Seattle, WA 98124–2207; 

telephone 206–544–5000, extension 1; 

fax 206–766–5680; Internet https://

www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view 

this referenced service information at 

the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Renton, WA. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, 

call 425–227–1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2014– 

0756; or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Chandra Ramdoss, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los 

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office 

(ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 

Lakewood, CA 90712–4137; phone: 

562–627–5239; fax: 562–627–5210; 

email: chandraduth.ramdoss@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposal. Send your comments to 

an address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 

2014–0756; Directorate Identifier 2014– 

NM–103–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 because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http://

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 

As described in FAA Advisory 

Circular 120–104 (http://www.faa.gov/

documentLibrary/media/Advisory_

Circular/120-104.pdf), several programs 

have been developed to support 

initiatives that will ensure the 

continued airworthiness of aging 

airplane structure. The last element of 

those initiatives is the requirement to 

establish a limit of validity (LOV) of the 

engineering data that support the 

structural maintenance program under 

14 CFR 26.21. This proposed AD is the 

result of an assessment of the previously 

established programs by Boeing during 

the process of establishing the LOV for 

Model 707 airplanes and Model 720 and 

720B series airplanes. The actions 

specified in this proposed AD are 

necessary to complete certain programs 

to ensure the continued airworthiness of 

aging airplane structure and to support 

an airplane reaching its LOV. 

We received reports of cracked 

midspar fittings on the inboard and 

outboard nacelle struts. The airplanes 

had accumulated between 9,900 and 

63,000 total flight hours. Five of these 

airplanes had cracked midspar fittings 

that resulted in separation of the 

inboard strut and engine from the 

airplane inflight. In two of those events 

the inboard nacelle strut contacted the 

outboard engine, causing it to separate 

from the airplane. Operators have also 

reported cracking in the transition 

radius of the inboard and outboard 

midspar fittings of the nacelle struts of 

the numbers 1 and 4 engines. 

The reported cracks on the inboard 

and outboard midspar fittings of the 

nacelle struts of engines numbers 1, 2, 

3, and 4 were found to be vertical at the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
67380 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

lug hole or across the double horizontal 

tangs at the radius where the tangs 

merge with the lug. Analysis 

determined that the 4330 steel midspar 

fittings cracked as a result of stress 

corrosion and fatigue at the lug and 

fatigue at the tangs. 

Cracked midspar fittings, if not 

detected and corrected, could result in 

the loss of the structural integrity of the 

midspar fitting. This condition could 

cause an unsafe separation of the engine 

and consequent wing fire. 

Relevant Service Information 

We reviewed Boeing 707 Alert Service 

Bulletin A3183, Revision 6, dated 

February 7, 2014. For information on 

the procedures and compliance times, 

see this service information at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2014– 

0756. 

Related Rulemaking 

AD 93–11–02, Amendment 39–8594, 

Docket No. 92–NM–230–AD, which 

applies to The Boeing Company Model 

707 and 720 series airplanes, requires 

repetitive inspections for cracking of the 

midspar fittings on the inboard struts, 

related investigative and corrective 

actions if necessary, and replacement of 

the midspar fittings with new, improved 

fittings, which constitutes terminating 

action for the repetitive inspections. 

AD 2012–16–12, Amendment 39– 

17159 (77 FR 49708, August 17, 2012), 

which applies to The Boeing Company 

Model 707 airplanes, and Model 720 

and 720B series airplanes, requires a 

detailed inspection of the midspar 

fittings of the nacelle struts for engine 

numbers 2 and 3 to confirm that the 

correct part number is installed, and 

installing the correct part number if it is 

not installed. The correct part number is 

the new, improved midspar fitting 

required by AD 93–11–02, Amendment 

39–8594, Docket No. 92–NM–230–AD. 

AD 2012–16–12 also requires repetitive 

high frequency eddy current inspections 

(HFEC) of the midspar fittings of engine 

numbers 2 and 3 nacelle struts for 

cracks and repair if necessary. In 

addition, AD 2012–16–12 requires 

repetitive general visual inspections of 

the nacelle struts of engine numbers 1, 

2, 3, and 4 to verify that the nacelle strut 

has not drooped below its normal 

position, and repair if necessary. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this AD because we 

evaluated all the relevant information 

and determined the unsafe condition 

described previously is likely to exist or 

develop in other products of the same 

type design. 

Proposed AD Requirements 

This proposed AD would require 

accomplishing the inspections for 

cracking of the inboard and outboard 

midspar fittings of the nacelle struts and 

of the torque bulkhead, midspar chords, 

drag fitting, and front spar support, and 

doing applicable related investigative 

and corrective actions; replacing the 

midspar fittings; and doing other 

specified actions; as specified in parts 2 

through 6, inclusive, of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of the 

service information described 

previously, except as discussed under 

‘‘Differences Between this Proposed AD 

and the Service Information.’’ 

The phrase ‘‘related investigative 

actions’’ is used in this proposed AD. 

‘‘Related investigative actions’’ are 

follow-on actions that (1) are related to 

the primary actions, and (2) further 

investigate the nature of any condition 

found. Related investigative actions in 

an AD could include, for example, 

inspections. 

The phrase ‘‘corrective actions’’ is 

used in this proposed AD. ‘‘Corrective 

actions’’ are actions that correct or 

address any condition found. Corrective 

actions in an AD could include, for 

example, repairs. 

The phrase ‘‘other specified actions’’ 

is used in this proposed AD. Other 

specified actions in this proposed AD 

include installing new inboard and 

outboard midspar fittings, installing 

oversized fasteners in the two forward 

most fastener holes common to the 

inboard side of the nacelle strut 

overwing support fitting and the wing 

front spar upper chord, applying sealant 

to the midspar area, and applying 

corrosion inhibiting compound to the 

midspar fitting areas. 

We have determined that the actions 

specified in table 1 of paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing 707 Alert 

Service Bulletin A3183, Revision 6, 

dated February 7, 2014, should not be 

required in this AD, as noted in the 

service bulletin. 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin 

A3183, Revision 6, dated February 7, 

2014, specifies to contact the 

manufacturer for fitting installation 

instructions and instructions on how to 

repair certain conditions, but this 

proposed AD would require doing those 

corrective actions in one of the 

following ways: 

• In accordance with a method that 

we approve; or 

• Using data that meet the 

certification basis of the airplane, and 

that have been approved by the Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) whom 

we have authorized to make those 

findings. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 12 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

We estimate the following costs to 

comply with this proposed AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

Cost on U.S. 

operators 

Inspections ...................... 214 work-hours × $85 per hour = $18,190 per inspection cycle.$0 .......................... $18,190 ................. $218,280. 

Replacement of midspar 

fitting.

18 work-hours × $85 per hour = $1,530 .................. Up to $7,867 ......... Up to $9,397 ......... Up to $112,764. 

Mid-interval inspections .. 107 work-hours × $85 per hour = $9,095 per inspection cycle.$0 .......................... $9,095 ................... $109,140. 

We estimate the following costs to do 

any additional inspections that would 

be required based on the results of the 

proposed inspections. We have no way 

of determining the number of aircraft 

that might need these inspections: 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Proposed Rules 67381 

ON-CONDITION COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

Inspections ....................................... Up to 21 work-hours × $85 per hour = $1,785 ......................................... $0 $1,785 

We have received no definitive data 

that would enable us to provide cost 

estimates for the on-condition corrective 

actions specified in this AD. 

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, 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. 

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 adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2014–0756; Directorate Identifier 2014–NM– 

103–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by December 

29, 2014. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to all The Boeing 

Company Model 707–100 long body, –200, 

–100B long body, and –100B short body 

series airplanes; Model 707–300, –300B, 

–300C, and –400 series airplanes; and Model 

720 and 720B series airplanes; certificated in 

any category. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 54, Nacelles/Pylons. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by certain 

mandated programs intended to support the 

airplane reaching its limit of validity (LOV) 

of the engineering data that support the 

established structural maintenance program. 

We are issuing this AD to detect and correct 

cracking in the midspar fittings of the 

inboard and outboard nacelle struts, which 

could result in the loss of the structural 

integrity of the midspar fitting. This 

condition could cause an unsafe separation 

of the engine and consequent engine fire. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Inspections of Nacelle Struts and 

Surrounding Structure and Replacement of 

Inboard and Outboard Midspar Fittings 

At the applicable time specified in table 2 

or table 3 of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ 

of Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin A3183, 

Revision 6, dated February 7, 2014, except as 

required by paragraph (i)(1) of this AD: Do 

the inspections required by paragraphs (g)(1), 

(g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD in accordance 

with part 2 or part 3, as applicable, of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin A3183, Revision 6, dated 

February 7, 2014, except as required by 

paragraph (i)(2) of this AD. Before further 

flight, do all applicable related investigative 

and corrective actions, replace the inboard 

and outboard midspar fittings with new 

parts, and do other specified actions 

(including installing new bushings and 

oversize fasteners) in accordance with part 2 

or part 3, as applicable, of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin A3183, Revision 6, dated 

February 7, 2014, except as required by 

paragraph (i)(2) of this AD. Repeat the 

inspections required by paragraphs (g)(1), 

(g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD thereafter at the 

applicable intervals specified in table 2 or 

table 3 of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin A3183, 

Revision 6, dated February 7, 2014, except as 

required by paragraph (i)(1) of this AD. 

(1) A detailed inspection and a high 

frequency eddy current inspection (HFEC) for 

cracks in the inboard and outboard midspar 

fittings of the nacelle struts. 

(2) Open hole HFEC inspections for cracks 

in the torque bulkhead, midspar chords, drag 

fitting, and front spar support. 

(3) A surface HFEC inspection of the front 

spar support for cracks. 

(h) Mid-Interval Inspections and 

Replacement of Nacelle Strut Midspar 

Fittings 

At the applicable time specified in table 4 

or 5 of paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

Boeing 707 Alert Service Bulletin A3183, 

Revision 6, dated February 7, 2014: Do the 

inspections required by paragraphs (h)(1), 

(h)(2), and (h)(3) of this AD, in accordance 

with part 4 or part 5, as applicable, of the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin A3183, Revision 6, dated 

February 7, 2014, except as required by 

paragraph (i)(2) of this AD. Do all applicable 

related investigative, corrective, and other 

specified actions (including installing new 

bushings and oversize fasteners) before 

further flight. Repeat the inspections required 

by paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), and (h)(3) of this 

AD thereafter at the applicable intervals 

specified in table 4 or 5 of paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing 707 Alert Service 

Bulletin A3183, Revision 6, dated February 7, 

2014. The threshold for the repetitive 

inspections required by paragraphs (h)(1), 

(h)(2), and (h)(3) of this AD is 1,500 flight 

cycles or 48 months, whichever occurs first, 

since the most recent midspar fitting 

replacement. 

(1) A detailed inspection and a surface 

HFEC inspection for cracks in the inboard 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
67382 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 219 / Thursday, November 13, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

and outboard midspar fittings of the nacelle 

struts. 

(2) An open hole HFEC inspection for 

cracks in the drag fitting and front spar 

support. 

(3) A surface HFEC inspection for cracks in 

the front spar support. 

(i) Exceptions to Service Information 

Specifications 

(1) Where Boeing 707 Alert Service 

Bulletin A3183, Revision 6, dated February 7, 

2014, specifies a compliance time ‘‘after the 

Revision 6 date of this service bulletin,’’ this 

AD requires compliance within the specified 

compliance time after the effective date of 

this AD. 

(2) Where Boeing 707 Alert Service 

Bulletin A3183, Revision 6, dated February 7, 

2014, specifies to contact Boeing for 

appropriate action: Do corrective actions 

before further flight using a method approved 

in accordance with the procedures specified 

in paragraph (k) of this AD. 

(j) Special Flight Permit 

Special flight permits, as described in 

Section 21.197 and Section 21.199 of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 

and 21.199), are not allowed. 

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft 

Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your 

request to your principal inspector or local 

Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the manager of the ACO, send it to the 

attention of the person identified in 

paragraph (l)(1) of this AD. Information may 

be emailed to: 9–ANM–LAACO–AMOCRequests@faa.gov. 

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 

of the local flight standards district office/

certificate holding district office. 

(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair 

required by this AD if it is approved by the 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) that has 

been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles 

ACO, to make those findings. For a repair 

method to be approved, the repair must meet 

the certification basis of the airplane and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

(l) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Chandra Ramdoss, Aerospace 

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, 

FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification 

Office (ACO), 3960 Paramount Boulevard, 

Lakewood, CA 90712–4137; phone: 562–627– 

5239; fax: 562–627–5210; email: 

chandraduth.ramdoss@faa.gov. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 

Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, 

Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone 206– 

544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766–5680; 

Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You 

may view this referenced service information 

at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

November 5, 2014. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–26837 Filed 11–12–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0903; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–SW–043–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus 

Helicopters Deutschland GmbH 

(Previously Eurocopter Deutschland 

GmbH) (Airbus Helicopters) 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for Airbus 

Helicopters Model EC135P1, EC135P2, 

EC135P2+, EC135T1, EC135T2, and 

EC135T2+ helicopters. This proposed 

AD would require reducing the life limit 

of certain parts and removing each part 

that has reached its life limit. The 

proposed actions are intended to reduce 

the life limits of certain critical parts to 

prevent failure of a part and subsequent 

loss of control of the helicopter. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by January 12, 2015. 

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 

European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA) 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: Matt 

Fuller, Senior Aviation Safety Engineer, 

Safety Management Group, Rotorcraft 

Directorate, FAA, 2601 Meacham Blvd., 

Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone 

(817) 222–5110; email matthew.fuller@

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 

EASA, which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Union, issued EASA AD No. 2013–0178, 

dated August 7, 2013, to correct an 

unsafe condition for the Eurocopter 

Deutschland GmbH (ECD) (now Airbus 

Helicopters) Model EC135P1, EC135P2, 

EC135P2+, EC135T1, EC135T2, 

EC135T2+, EC635T1, EC635P2+, and 

EC635T2+ helicopters. EASA advises 

that ECD has revised the airworthiness 

limitations for the EC135 and EC635 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS