76068 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

structural damage significant enough to 

result in loss of control of the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Pivot Pin Replacement 

At the applicable time specified in 

paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 777–55A0018, dated 

July 27, 2011, except as required by 

paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, replace the pivot 

pins of the horizontal stabilizer with new or 

reworked pivot pins, including replacing the 

spacer with a new spacer or with one that has 

been determined to be without corrosion 

damage or other irregularities; in accordance 

with the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777–55A0018, 

dated July 27, 2011. 

(h) Repetitive Inspections 

At the applicable time specified in 

paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 777–55A0018, dated 

July 27, 2011: Do detailed inspections for 

cracks, corrosion damage, or other 

irregularity of the outer and inner pivot pins; 

and an ultrasonic inspection for cracking of 

the outer pivot pins; and do all applicable 

corrective actions; in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 777–55A0018, dated July 27, 

2011. Corrective actions must be done before 

further flight. Repeat the inspections at the 

applicable interval specified in paragraph 

1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 777–55A0018, dated July 27, 2011, 

except as provided by paragraph (i)(1) of this 

AD. 

Note 1: The Accomplishment Instructions 

of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777– 

55A0018, dated July 27, 2011, might refer to 

other procedures. When the words ‘‘refer to’’ 

are used and the operator has an accepted 

alternative procedure, the accepted 

alternative procedure can be used to comply 

with the AD. When the words ‘‘in accordance 

with’’ are included in the instruction, the 

procedure in the design approval holder 

document must be used to comply with the 

AD. 

(i) Exceptions 

The following exceptions to Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 777–55A0018, dated July 27, 

2011, apply to this AD. 

(1) Where the Repeat Interval column of 

tables 2 and 3 of paragraph 1.E., 

‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service 

Bulletin 777–55A0018, dated July 27, 2011, 

specify a compliance time, this AD requires 

compliance within the specified compliance 

time after the most recent inspection. 

(2) Where paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777–55A0018, 

dated July 27, 2011, specifies a compliance 

time ‘‘after the original issue date of this 

service bulletin,’’ this AD requires 

compliance within the specified compliance 

time ‘‘after the effective date of this AD.’’ 

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), 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 the 

Related Information section of this AD. 

Information may be emailed to: 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@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, Seattle 

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. 

(k) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact James Sutherland, Aerospace 

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, 

FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 

98057–3356; phone: (425) 917–6533; fax: 

(425) 917–6590; email: 

james.sutherland@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, Washington 98124–2207; telephone 

(206) 544–5000, extension 1; fax (206) 766– 

5680; email me.boecom@boeing.com; Internet 

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

review copies of the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

(425) 227–1221. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

November 23, 2011. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–31312 Filed 12–5–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–1285; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–SW–073–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter 

Deutschland GmbH 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 Deutschland GmbH Model 

BO–105A, BO–105C, BO–105LS A–1, 

BO–105LS A–3, and BO–105S 

helicopters. This proposed AD would 

require inspecting certain main rotor 

blades for debonding of the erosion 

protective shell. If the erosion protective 

shell is debonded, you would be 

required to replace the main rotor blade 

with an airworthy main rotor blade. 

This proposed AD is prompted by the 

results of an inspection on a BO–105 

helicopter where debonding was 

discovered on a main rotor blade 

erosion protective shell, and it was 

determined that the debonding was due 

to incorrect installation of the erosion 

protective shell. Subsequently, an 

incident occurred where a BO–105 

helicopter lost its main rotor blade 

erosion protective shell during flight. 

The actions specified by this proposed 

AD are intended to detect debonding of 

the main rotor blade erosion protective 

shell which could lead to an unbalanced 

main rotor, high vibrations, damage to 

the tail boom or tail rotor, and loss of 

control of the helicopter. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 6, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following 

addresses to submit comments on this 

proposed AD: 

• 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: 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. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 76069 

You may get the service information 

identified in this proposed AD from 

American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 

N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 

75052, telephone (972) 641–0000 or 

(800) 232–0323, fax (972) 641–3775, or 

at http://www.eurocopter.com/techpub. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim 

Grigg, Manager, FAA, Rotorcraft 

Directorate, Safety Management Group, 

2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 

76137, 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 caption 

ADDRESSES. Include the Docket No. 

‘‘FAA–2011–1285, Directorate Identifier 

2010–SW–073–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 with FAA 

personnel concerning this proposed 

rulemaking. Using the search function 

of the docket web site, you can find and 

read the comments to any of our 

dockets, including the name of the 

individual who sent or signed the 

comment. You may review the DOT’s 

complete Privacy Act Statement in the 

Federal Register published on April 11, 

2000 (65 FR 19477–78). 

Examining the Docket 

You may examine the docket that 

contains the proposed AD, any 

comments, and other information in 

person at the Docket Operations office 

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

The Docket Operations office (telephone 

(800) 647–5527) is located in Room 

W12–140 on the ground floor of the 

West Building at the street address 

stated in the ADDRESSES section. 

Comments will be available in the AD 

docket shortly after receipt. 

Discussion 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued Emergency AD 

No. 2010–0216–E, dated October 21, 

2010 (corrected October 29, 2010), to 

correct an unsafe condition for 

Eurocopter Deutschland Model BO– 

105A, BO–105C, BO–105D, BO–105LS 

A–1, BO–105LS A–3, and BO–105S 

helicopters, all variants (except CB–5 

and DBS–5, which are military models.) 

EASA advises that during an inspection 

on a BO–105 helicopter, debonding was 

found on the erosion protective shell of 

a main rotor blade, and it was 

determined that the debonding was 

caused by incorrect installation of the 

erosion protective shell. In addition, 

EASA states that an incident occurred 

where a second BO–105 helicopter lost 

its erosion protective shell during flight. 

EASA advises that this condition, if not 

detected, could result in loss of the 

main rotor blade erosion protective shell 

during flight, leading to an unbalanced 

main rotor and high vibrations, which 

could result in damage to the tail boom 

or tail rotor, loss of tail rotor control, 

and loss of control of the helicopter. 

Related Service Information 

Eurocopter Deutschland has issued 

Emergency Alert Service Bulletin No. 

BO105–10–124, dated July 14, 2010, for 

the Model BO105 helicopter, with a 

main rotor blade, part number (P/N) 

105–15103, 105–15141, 105– 

15141V001, 105–15143, 105–15150, 

105–15150V001, 105–15152, 105– 

81013, 105–87214, 1120–15101, or 

1120–15103, where the main rotor blade 

erosion protective shell was replaced 

between September 2006 and March 

2010. Eurocopter Deutschland also 

issued Emergency Alert Service Bulletin 

BO105LS–10–12 for the Model 

BO105LS A–3 helicopter, dated July 14, 

2010, with a main rotor blade, part P/ 

N 105–15141, where the main rotor 

blade erosion protective shell was 

replaced between September 2006 and 

March 2010. Both Emergency Alert 

Service Bulletins specified a one-time 

inspection of the main rotor blades 

within the next 50 flight hours to 

determine if debonding of the main 

rotor blade erosion protective shell has 

occurred. Both Service Bulletins 

exclude helicopters from this inspection 

if each main rotor blade was inspected 

at the last 600 flight hour inspection and 

no debonding was detected during the 

inspection. 

In response to the incident where the 

helicopter lost its main rotor blade 

erosion protective shell during flight, 

Eurocopter Deutschland has issued 

Emergency Alert Service Bulletin No. 

BO105–10–124, Revision 1, dated 

October 18, 2010, and Emergency Alert 

Service Bulletin BO105LS–10–12, 

Revision 1, dated October 20, 2010. 

These Service Bulletins specify the 

same inspection requirements as the 

original Service Bulletins, but revise the 

inspection compliance time from 50 

flight hours to 10 flight hours. EASA 

classified these Service Bulletins as 

mandatory, and issued EASA 

Emergency AD No. 2010–0216–E, dated 

October 21, 2010 (corrected October 29, 

2010) to ensure the continued 

airworthiness of these helicopters. 

FAA’s Evaluation and Unsafe Condition 

Determination 

These products have been approved 

by the aviation authority of Germany 

and are approved for operation in the 

United States. Pursuant to our bilateral 

agreement with Germany, EASA, their 

technical representative, has notified us 

of the unsafe condition described in 

their AD. We are proposing this AD 

because we evaluated all information 

provided by EASA and determined the 

unsafe condition exists and is likely to 

exist or develop on other products of 

these same type designs. This proposed 

AD would require a one-time inspection 

of each main rotor blade for debonding 

of the main rotor blade erosion 

protective shell within 50 hours time-inservice (TIS), for helicopters with a 

main rotor blade, P/N 105–15103, 105– 

15141, 105–15141V001, 105–15143, 

105–15150, 105–15150V001, 105– 

15152, 105–81013, 105–87214, 1120– 

15101, or 1120–15103, where the main 

rotor blade erosion protective shell was 

replaced between September 2006 and 

March 2010. If debonding is detected 

during the inspection, before further 

flight, you would be required to replace 

the main rotor blade with an airworthy 

main rotor blade. 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the EASA AD 

The differences between this 

proposed AD and the EASA AD are: 

• This proposed AD uses the term 

‘‘hours time-in-service’’ to describe 

compliance times, and the EASA AD 

uses ‘‘flight hours.’’ 

• The EASA AD allows compliance 

within ‘‘10 flight hours, or 4 flight 

cycles, or 4 weeks, whichever occurs 

first,’’ and this proposed AD would 

require compliance within 50 hours TIS. 

• The EASA AD allows you to replace 

the main rotor blade erosion protective 

shell if debonding is detected, and this 

proposed AD would require you to 

replace the main rotor blade with an 

airworthy main rotor blade if debonding 

is detected. 

• The EASA AD is applicable to the 

Model BO–105D helicopter, and this 

proposed AD does not include this 

model because it does not have a typecertificate in the U.S. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
76070 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

would affect 97 helicopters of U.S. 

registry. We estimate that it would take 

about 1.0 work-hour per helicopter to do 

the inspection, at an average labor rate 

of $85 per work hour. Based on these 

figures, we estimate the cost of the 

proposed AD on U.S. operators to be 

$8,245, or $85 per product. If debonding 

is found, we estimate that it would take 

about 2 work-hours to replace the main 

rotor blade, and required parts would 

cost $114,182, for a cost of $114,352. We 

have no way of determining how many 

operators would incur these costs. 

Regulatory Findings 

We have determined that this 

proposed AD would not have federalism 

implications under Executive Order 

13132. Additionally, this proposed AD 

would not have a substantial direct 

effect on the States, on the relationship 

between the national Government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that the proposed regulation: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 

3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in 

Alaska to the extent that a regulatory 

distinction is required; 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. See the AD docket to 

examine the economic evaluation. 

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. 

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. Section 39.13 is amended by 

adding a new airworthiness directive 

(AD) to read as follows: 

Eurocopter Deutschland GMBH: Docket No. 

FAA–2011–1285; Directorate Identifier 

2010–SW–073–AD. 

Applicability: Model BO–105A, BO–105C, 

BO–105LS A–1, BO–105LS A–3, and BO– 

105S helicopters, all serial numbers, with a 

main rotor blade, part number (P/N) 105– 

15103, 105–15141, 105–15141V001, 105– 

15143, 105–15150, 105–15150V001, 105– 

15152, 105–81013, 105–87214, 1120–15101, 

or 1120–15103; where the main rotor blade 

erosion protective shell was replaced 

between September 2006 and March 2010; 

certificated in any category. 

Compliance: Required within 50 hours 

time-in-service (TIS) after the effective date 

of this AD, unless accomplished previously. 

To detect debonding of the main rotor 

blade erosion protective shell, which could 

lead to an unbalanced main rotor, high 

vibration, damage to the tail boom or tail 

rotor, and loss of control of the helicopter, 

accomplish the following: 

(a) Inspect the main rotor blade for 

debonding of the erosion protective shell. If 

debonding is detected during the inspection, 

before further flight, replace the main rotor 

blade with an airworthy main rotor blade. 

Note 1: Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH 

Emergency Alert Service Bulletin No. 

BO105–10–124, Revision 1, dated October 

18, 2010, and No. BO105LS–10–12, Revision 

1, dated October 20, 2010, which are not 

incorporated by reference, contain additional 

information about the subject of this AD. 

(b) To request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 

39.19. Contact the Manager, Regulations and 

Policy Group, FAA, ATTN: Jim Grigg, 

Manager, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, 

Texas 76137; telephone: (817) 222–5122; fax: 

(817) 222–5126, for information about 

previously approved alternative methods of 

compliance. 

(c) The Joint Aircraft System/Component 

Code is 6210: Main Rotor Blades. 

Note 2: The subject of this AD is addressed 

in European Aviation Safety Agency AD 

2010–0216–E, dated October 21, 2010 

(corrected October 29, 2010). 

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on November 

29, 2011. 

Lance T. Gant, 

Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–31254 Filed 12–5–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–1193; Airspace 

Docket No. 11–ANM–14] 

Proposed Modification of Area 

Navigation Route T–288; WY 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This action proposes to 

modify low altitude area navigation 

(RNAV) route T–288 by extending the 

route westward from the Rapid City, SD, 

VORTAC to the Gillette, WY, VOR/ 

DME. The proposed extension would 

enhance efficiency and safety of the 

National Airspace System (NAS) by 

supplementing the existing VOR Federal 

airway structure in that area. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before January 20, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this 

proposal to the Docket Management 

Facility, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001; telephone: 

(202) 366–9826. You must identify FAA 

Docket No. FAA–2011–1193 and 

Airspace Docket No. 11–ANM–14 at the 

beginning of your comments. You may 

also submit comments through the 

Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

Gallant, Airspace, Regulations and ATC 

Procedures Group, Office of Airspace 

Services, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone: (202) 267–8783. 

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. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1