Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 21, 2012 / Proposed Rules 9871 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by April 23, 

2012. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD rescinds AD 2009–07–01 (74 FR 

12086, March 23, 2009). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Rolls-Royce 

Deutschland Ltd & Co KG BR700–715A1–30, 

BR700–715B1–30, and BR700–715C1–30 

turbofan engines. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

February 10, 2012. 

Peter A. White, 

Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–3864 Filed 2–17–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–0143; Directorate 

Identifier 2011–NM–077–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker 

Services B.V. Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD) 

that applies to all Fokker Services B.V. 

Model F.28 Mark 0070 and 0100 

airplanes. The existing AD currently 

requires revising the airworthiness 

limitations section (ALS) of the 

instructions for continued airworthiness 

for certain airplanes, and the FAAapproved maintenance program for 

certain other airplanes, to incorporate 

new limitations for fuel tank systems. 

Since we issued that AD, Fokker 

Services B.V. has revised a Fokker 70/ 

100 maintenance review board (MRB) 

document with revised limitations, 

tasks, thresholds, and intervals. This 

proposed AD would revise the 

maintenance program to incorporate the 

limitations, tasks, thresholds, and 

intervals specified in that Fokker MRB 

document. We are proposing this AD to 

reduce the potential of ignition sources 

inside fuel tanks, which, in combination 

with flammable fuel vapors, could result 

in fuel tank explosions and consequent 

loss of the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by April 6, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments 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: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 

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

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Fokker 

Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., 

P.O. Box 231, 2150 AE Nieuw-Vennep, 

the Netherlands; telephone +31 (0)252– 

627–350; fax +31 (0)252–627–211; email 

technicalservices.fokkerservices@

stork.com; Internet http://www.my

fokkerfleet.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. 

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 

regulatory 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: Tom 

Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 227–1137; fax (425) 227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2012–0143; Directorate Identifier 

2011–NM–077–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD based on those comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to 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 

On July 9, 2004, we issued AD 2004– 

15–08, Amendment 39–13742 (69 FR 

44586, July 27, 2004). This AD required 

actions intended to address an unsafe 

condition on the products listed above. 

Since we issued AD 2004–15–08, 

Amendment 39–13742 (69 FR 44586, 

July 27, 2004): The European Aviation 

Safety Agency (EASA), which is the 

Technical Agent for the Member States 

of the European Community, has issued 

EASA Airworthiness Directive 2011– 

0157, dated August 25, 2011 (referred to 

after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an 

unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The MCAI states: 

Fokker Services have published issue 8 of 

report SE–623 dated 17 March 2011, which 

is part of the Airworthiness Limitations 

Section of the Instructions for Continued 

Airworthiness, referred to in Section 06, 

Appendix 1, of the Fokker 70/100 

Maintenance Review Board (MRB) document. 

The complete Airworthiness Limitations 

Section currently consists of: 

—Certification Maintenance Requirements 

(CMRs)—report SE–473, issue 8, 

—Airworthiness Limitation Items (ALIs) and 

Safe Life Items (SLIs)—report SE–623, 

issue 8, 

—Fuel ALIs and Critical Design 

Configuration Control Limitations 

(CDCCLs)—report SE–672, issue 2. 

The instructions contained in those reports 

have been identified as mandatory actions for 

continued airworthiness. 

For the reasons described above, this 

[EASA] AD retains the requirements of EASA 

AD 2011–0046, which is superseded, and 

requires the implementation of the 

inspections and limitations as specified in 

the Airworthiness Limitation Section of the 

Instructions for Continued Airworthiness, 

referred to in Section 06, Appendix 1 of the 

Fokker 70/100 MRB document, reports SE– 

473, SE–623 and SE–672 at the abovementioned issues. 

You may obtain further information by 

examining the MCAI in the AD docket. 

The FAA has examined the 

underlying safety issues involved in fuel 

tank explosions on several large 

transport airplanes, including the 

adequacy of existing regulations, the 

service history of airplanes subject to 

those regulations, and existing 

maintenance practices for fuel tank 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
9872 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 21, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

systems. As a result of those findings, 

we issued a regulation titled ‘‘Transport 

Airplane Fuel Tank System Design 

Review, Flammability Reduction and 

Maintenance and Inspection 

Requirements’’ (66 FR 23086, May 7, 

2001). In addition to new airworthiness 

standards for transport airplanes and 

new maintenance requirements, this 

rule included Special Federal Aviation 

Regulation No. 88 (‘‘SFAR 88,’’ 

Amendment 21–78, and subsequent 

Amendments 21–82 and 21–83). 

Among other actions, SFAR 88 (66 FR 

23086, May 7, 2001) requires certain 

type design (i.e., type certificate (TC) 

and supplemental type certificate (STC)) 

holders to substantiate that their fuel 

tank systems can prevent ignition 

sources in the fuel tanks. This 

requirement applies to type design 

holders for large turbine-powered 

transport airplanes and for subsequent 

modifications to those airplanes. It 

requires them to perform design reviews 

and to develop design changes and 

maintenance procedures if their designs 

do not meet the new fuel tank safety 

standards. As explained in the preamble 

to the rule, we intended to adopt 

airworthiness directives to mandate any 

changes found necessary to address 

unsafe conditions identified as a result 

of these reviews. 

In evaluating these design reviews, we 

have established four criteria intended 

to define the unsafe conditions 

associated with fuel tank systems that 

require corrective actions. The 

percentage of operating time during 

which fuel tanks are exposed to 

flammable conditions is one of these 

criteria. The other three criteria address 

the failure types under evaluation: 

single failures, single failures in 

combination with a latent condition(s), 

and in-service failure experience. For all 

four criteria, the evaluations included 

consideration of previous actions taken 

that may mitigate the need for further 

action. 

The Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) 

has issued a regulation that is similar to 

SFAR 88 (66 FR 23086, May 7, 2001). 

(The JAA is an associated body of the 

European Civil Aviation Conference 

(ECAC) representing the civil aviation 

regulatory authorities of a number of 

European States who have agreed to cooperate in developing and 

implementing common safety regulatory 

standards and procedures.) Under this 

regulation, the JAA stated that all 

members of the ECAC that hold type 

certificates for transport category 

airplanes are required to conduct a 

design review against explosion risks. 

We have determined that the actions 

identified in this AD are necessary to 

reduce the potential of ignition sources 

inside fuel tanks, which, in combination 

with flammable fuel vapors, could result 

in fuel tank explosions and consequent 

loss of the airplane. 

Relevant Service Information 

Fokker Services B.V. has issued the 

following documents: 

• Fokker Services B.V. Report SE– 

473, ‘‘Fokker 70/100 Certification 

Maintenance Requirements,’’ Issue 8, 

dated September 1, 2009. 

• Fokker Services B.V. Report SE– 

623, ‘‘Fokker 70/100 Airworthiness 

Limitation Items and Safe Life Limits,’’ 

Issue 8, dated December 20, 2010. 

• Fokker Services B.V. Report SE– 

672, ‘‘Fokker 70/100 Fuel Airworthiness 

Limitation Items (ALI) and Critical 

Design Configuration Control 

Limitations (CDCCL),’’ Issue 2, dated 

December 1, 2006. 

The actions described in this service 

information are intended to correct the 

unsafe condition identified in the 

MCAI. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of This Proposed AD 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of another 

country, and is approved for operation 

in the United States. Pursuant to our 

bilateral agreement with the State of 

Design Authority, we have been notified 

of the unsafe condition described in the 

MCAI and service information 

referenced above. We are proposing this 

AD because we evaluated all pertinent 

information and determined an unsafe 

condition exists and is likely to exist or 

develop on other products of the same 

type design. 

Costs of Compliance 

Based on the service information, we 

estimate that this proposed AD would 

affect about 4 products of U.S. registry. 

The actions that are required by AD 

2004–15–08, Amendment 39–13742 (69 

FR 44586, July 27, 2004) and retained in 

this proposed AD take about 1 workhour per product, at an average labor 

rate of $85 per work hour. Required 

parts cost about $0 per product. The 

actions that are required by AD 2008– 

06–20, Amendment 39–15432 (73 FR 

14661, March 19, 2008) and retained in 

this proposed AD take about 1 workhour per product, at an average labor 

rate of $85 per work hour. Required 

parts cost about $0 per product. Based 

on these figures, the estimated cost of 

the currently required actions is $170 

per product. 

We estimate that it would take about 

1 work-hour per product to comply with 

the new basic requirements of this 

proposed AD. The average labor rate is 

$85 per work-hour. Based on these 

figures, we estimate the cost of the 

proposed AD on U.S. operators to be 

$1,020, or $255 per product. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this proposed regulation: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

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

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 

3. Will not 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. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD and placed it in the 

AD docket. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 21, 2012 / Proposed Rules 9873 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing Amendment 39–13742 (69 FR 

44586, July 27, 2004) and adding the 

following new AD: 

Fokker Services B.V.: Docket No. FAA– 

2012–0143; Directorate Identifier 2011– 

NM–077–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by April 6, 

2012. 

(b) Affected ADs 

This AD supersedes AD 2004–15–08, 

Amendment 39–13742 (69 FR 44586, July 27, 

2004). This AD also affects AD 2008–06–20, 

Amendment 39–15432 (73 FR 14661, March 

19, 2008). 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to Fokker Services B.V. 

Model F.28 Mark 0070 and 0100 airplanes; 

certificated in any category; all serial 

numbers. 

Note 1: This AD requires revisions to 

certain operator maintenance documents to 

include new actions (e.g., inspections) and/ 

or Critical Design Configuration Control 

Limitations (CDCCLs). Compliance with 

these actions and/or CDCCLs is required by 

14 CFR 91.403(c). For airplanes that have 

been previously modified, altered, or 

repaired in the areas addressed by this AD, 

the operator may not be able to accomplish 

the actions described in the revisions. In this 

situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), 

the operator must request approval for an 

alternative method of compliance according 

to paragraph (m) of this AD. The request 

should include a description of changes to 

the required actions that will ensure the 

continued operational safety of the airplane. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 28: Fuel. 

(e) Reason 

This AD was prompted by a revised Fokker 

70/100 maintenance review board (MRB) 

document with revised limitations, tasks, 

thresholds, and intervals. We are issuing this 

AD to reduce the potential of ignition sources 

inside fuel tanks, which, in combination with 

flammable fuel vapors, could result in fuel 

tank explosions and consequent loss of the 

airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

You are responsible for having the actions 

required by this AD performed within the 

compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Restatement of Requirements of AD 2004– 

15–08, Amendment 39–13742 (69 FR 44586, 

July 27, 2004) 

(g) New Airworthiness Limitations Revision 

Within 6 months after August 31, 2004 (the 

effective date of AD 2004–15–08, 

Amendment 39–13742 (69 FR 44586, July 27, 

2004)), revise the Airworthiness Limitations 

section (ALS) of the Instructions for 

Continued Airworthiness by incorporating 

Fokker Services B.V. Report SE–623, ‘‘Fokker 

70/100 Airworthiness Limitations Items and 

Safe Life Items,’’ Issue 2, dated September 1, 

2001; and Fokker Services B.V. Report SE– 

473, ‘‘Fokker 70/100 Certification 

Maintenance Requirements,’’ Issue 5, dated 

July 16, 2001; into Section 6 of the Fokker 

70/100 MRB document. (These reports are 

already incorporated into Fokker 70/100 

MRB document, Revision 10, dated October 

1, 2001.) Once the actions required by this 

paragraph have been accomplished, the 

original issue of Fokker Services B.V. Report 

SE–623, ‘‘Fokker 70/100 Airworthiness 

Limitations Items and Safe Life Items,’’ dated 

June 1, 2000, may be removed from the ALS 

of the Instructions for Continued 

Airworthiness. Doing the actions in 

paragraph (j) of this AD terminates the 

requirements of paragraph (g) of this AD. 

(h) No Alternative Inspections or Intervals 

After the actions specified in paragraph (g) 

of this AD have been accomplished, no 

alternative inspections or inspection 

intervals may be approved for the structural 

elements specified in the documents listed in 

paragraph (g) of this AD, except as required 

by paragraph (j) of this AD. 

Note 2: Notwithstanding any other 

maintenance or operational requirements, 

components that have been identified as 

airworthy or installed on the affected 

airplanes before the revision of the ALS for 

certain airplanes, and the FAA-approved 

maintenance program for certain other 

airplanes, as required by paragraph (i) of this 

AD, do not need to be reworked in 

accordance with the CDCCLs. However, once 

the ALS for certain airplanes, and the FAAapproved maintenance program for certain 

other airplanes has been revised, future 

maintenance actions on these components 

must be done in accordance with the 

CDCCLs. 

New Requirements of This AD 

(i) Maintenance Program Revision 

Within 3 months after the effective date of 

this AD, revise the maintenance program to 

incorporate the airworthiness limitations 

specified in the Fokker maintenance review 

board (MRB) documents listed in paragraphs 

(i)(3), (i)(4), and (i)(5) of this AD. For all tasks 

and retirement lifes identified in the Fokker 

MRB documents listed in paragraphs (i)(3), 

(i)(4), and (i)(5) of this AD, the initial 

compliance times start from the later of the 

times specified in paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) 

of this AD, and the repetitive inspections 

must be accomplished thereafter at the 

interval specified in the Fokker MRB 

documents listed in paragraphs (i)(3), (i)(4), 

and (i)(5) of this AD. 

(1) Within 3 months after the effective date 

of this AD. 

(2) At the time specified in the documents 

listed in paragraphs (i)(3), (i)(4), and (i)(5) of 

this AD. 

(3) Fokker Services B.V. Report SE–473, 

‘‘Fokker 70/100 Certification Maintenance 

Requirements,’’ Issue 8, dated September 1, 

2009. 

(4) Fokker Services B.V. Report SE–623, 

‘‘Fokker 70/100 Airworthiness Limitation 

Items and Safe Life Limits,’’ Issue 8, dated 

December 20, 2010. 

(5) Fokker Services B.V. Report SE–672, 

‘‘Fokker 70/100 Fuel Airworthiness 

Limitation Items (ALI) and Critical Design 

Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL),’’ 

Issue 2, dated December 1, 2006. 

(j) No Alternative Actions, Intervals, and/or 

CDCCLs 

After accomplishing the revision required 

by paragraph (i) of this AD, no alternative 

actions (e.g., inspections), intervals, or 

CDCCLs may be used unless the actions, 

intervals, or CDCCLs are approved as an 

alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in 

accordance with the procedures specified in 

paragraph (m)(1) of this AD. 

(k) Terminating Action 

Accomplishing the actions in paragraph (i) 

of this AD terminates the requirements of 

paragraph (g) of this AD. 

(l) Method of Compliance With AD 2008–06– 

20, Amendment 39–15432 (73 FR 14661, 

March 19, 2008) 

Accomplishing the actions in paragraph (i) 

of this AD, terminates the requirements of 

paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2), (f)(3), (f)(4), and (f)(5) 

of AD 2008–06–20, Amendment 39–15432 

(73 FR 14661, March 19, 2008). 

(m) Other FAA AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, International 

Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 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 International Branch, send it to ATTN: 

Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, FAA 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; 

telephone (425) 227–1137; fax (425) 227– 

1149. Information may be emailed to: 

9-ANM-116-AMOC-REQUESTS@faa.gov. 

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. The AMOC 

approval letter must specifically reference 

this AD. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
9874 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 34 / Tuesday, February 21, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(n) Related Information 

Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness 

Directive 2011–0157, dated August 25, 2011, 

and the service information specified in 

paragraphs (n)(1), (n)(2), and (n)(3) of this 

AD, for related information. 

(1) Fokker Services B.V. Report SE–473, 

‘‘Fokker 70/100 Certification Maintenance 

Requirements,’’ Issue 8, dated September 1, 

2009. 

(2) Fokker Services B.V. Report SE–623, 

‘‘Fokker 70/100 Airworthiness Limitation 

Items and Safe Life Limits,’’ Issue 8, dated 

December 20, 2010. 

(3) Fokker Services B.V. Report SE–672, 

‘‘Fokker 70/100 Fuel Airworthiness 

Limitation Items (ALI) and Critical Design 

Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCL),’’ 

Issue 2, dated December 1, 2006. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 

1, 2012. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–3906 Filed 2–17–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–0057; Directorate 

Identifier 2012–NE–04–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Turbomeca 

S.A. Turboshaft Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for 

Turbomeca S.A. Arriel 2C1, 2C2, and 

2S2 turboshaft engines. This proposed 

AD was prompted by a report of a 

helicopter experiencing a digital engine 

control unit (DECU) malfunction during 

flight. We are proposing this AD to 

prevent loss of automatic control on one 

or both engines installed on the same 

helicopter, which could result in an 

uncommanded in-flight engine 

shutdown, forced autorotation landing, 

or accident. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by April 23, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and follow 

the instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 

5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Turbomeca, 

40220 Tarnos, France; phone: 33 05 59 

74 40 00; fax: 33 05 59 74 45 15. You 

may review copies of the referenced 

service information at the FAA, Engine 

& Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125. 

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 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Operations 

office (phone: 800–647–5527) is the 

same as the Mail address provided in 

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose 

Len, Aerospace Engineer, Engine 

Certification Office, FAA, Engine & 

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; 

phone: 781–238–7772; fax: 781–238– 

7199; email: rose.len@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2012–0057; Directorate Identifier 

2012–NE–04–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD based on those comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to 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 AD. 

Using the search function of the Web 

site, anyone can find and read the 

comments in any of our dockets, 

including, if provided, the name of the 

individual who sent the comment (or 

signed the comment on behalf of an 

association, business, labor union, etc.). 

You may review the DOT’s complete 

Privacy Act Statement in the Federal 

Register published on April 11, 2000 

(65 FR 19477–78). 

Discussion 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2011–0249, 

dated December 22, 2011 (referred to 

after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an 

unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The MCAI states: 

An incident has been reported of a 

helicopter which experienced a Digital 

Engine Control Unit (DECU) malfunction in 

flight from one of its Arriel 2C1 engines. The 

indicating system of the helicopter displayed 

a ‘‘FADEC FAIL’’ message, with a concurrent 

loss of automatic control of the engine. The 

mission was aborted and the helicopter 

returned to its base without any further 

incident. 

The subsequent technical investigations 

carried out by Turbomeca revealed that a 

Digital Engine Control Unit (DECU) assembly 

non-conformity was at the origin of this 

event. Further investigations performed with 

the supplier of the DECU led to the 

conclusion that only a limited number of 

DECU are potentially affected by the nonconformity. 

You may obtain further information 

by examining the MCAI in the AD 

docket. 

Relevant Service Information 

Turbomeca S.A. has issued Alert 

Mandatory Service Bulletin No. A292 73 

2845, Version A, dated December 19, 

2011. The actions described in this 

service information are intended to 

correct the unsafe condition identified 

in the MCAI. 

FAA’s Determination of This Proposed 

AD 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of France, and is 

approved for operation in the United 

States. Pursuant to our bilateral 

agreement with EASA, EASA has 

notified us of the unsafe condition 

described in the MCAI and service 

information referenced above. We are 

proposing this AD because we evaluated 

all information provided by EASA and 

determined the unsafe condition exists 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS