Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules 40053 

Seattle, WA 98124–2207; phone: 206–544– 

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

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, WA. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

425–227–1221. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 14, 

2013. 

Jeffrey E. Duven, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–15948 Filed 7–2–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0554; Directorate 

Identifier 2012–SW–009–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 

(Eurocopter) Model EC135 P1, EC135 

P2, EC135 P2+, EC135 T1, EC135 T2, 

and EC135 T2+ helicopters. This 

proposed AD would require analyzing 

the main gearbox (MGB) oil for 

indications of metal chips or pieces, 

reviewing the MGB log or equivalent 

record, and inspecting certain teeth in 

the MGB after two chip indications. 

This proposed AD is prompted by a 

partial tooth rupture found in an MGB 

that was returned to the manufacturer 

for repairs. The proposed actions are 

intended to detect wear in the MGB that 

could lead to a gear tooth rupture, 

failure of the MGB, loss of power to the 

main rotor, and subsequent loss of 

control of the helicopter. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by September 3, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to 

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

online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Send comments to the U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to the 

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

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in person at the 

Docket Operations Office between 9 

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

Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD 

docket contains this proposed AD, the 

economic evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Operations 

Office (telephone 800–647–5527) is in 

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact 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. You may 

review a copy of the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Office of the 

Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 

2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort 

Worth, Texas 76137. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Chinh Vuong, Aerospace Engineer, 

Safety Management Group, Rotorcraft 

Directorate, FAA, 2601 Meacham Blvd., 

Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone (817) 

222–5110; email Chinh.Vuong@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 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Union, has issued EASA AD No. 2009– 

0106R1, dated November 3, 2011, to 

correct an unsafe condition for the 

Eurocopter Model 635 military 

helicopter and Model EC135 P1, EC135 

P2, EC135 P2+, EC135 T1, EC135 T2, 

and EC135 T2+ helicopters. EASA 

advises that an MGB was returned to the 

manufacturer for repair after ‘‘several 

chip indications.’’ According to EASA, 

a partial tooth rupture was detected 

after disassembly of the gearbox and 

removal of a drive pinion. EASA states 

the tooth rupture was determined to 

have been caused by wear. 

EASA AD No. 2009–0106R1 revises 

EASA Emergency AD 2009–0106–E, 

dated April 30, 2009, which superseded 

Emergency AD 2008–0116–E dated June 

17, 2008. The most recent EASA AD 

includes requirements and timetables 

for oil sampling and analysis; checking 

the gearbox log card for chip 

indications; and corrective measures for 

chip indications. It also states that a 

prescribed modification to the MGB 

would be terminating action for the AD. 

FAA’s Determination 

These helicopters 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, its 

technical representative, has notified us 

of the unsafe condition described in its 

AD. We are proposing this AD because 

we evaluated all known relevant 

information and determined that an 

unsafe condition is likely to exist or 

develop on other products of these same 

type designs. 

Related Service Information 

Eurocopter issued Alert Service 

Bulletin (ASB) EC135–63A–012 on 

August 8, 2007, which was followed by 

five revisions, the most recent of which 

was issued September 6, 2011. The 

ASBs prescribe procedures to monitor 

and detect wear in time to prevent MGB 

tooth ruptures in main transmissions for 

EC135 and EC635 model helicopters. 

Revision 5 of the ASB prescribes 

procedures for taking and analyzing 

scheduled oil samples, identifying and 

addressing chip indications, and 

inspecting certain teeth in gearboxes. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
40054 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

Proposed AD Requirements 

Within 100 hours time-in-service 

(TIS), and thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 100 hours or 12 months, 

whichever occurs first, this proposed 

AD would require taking an oil sample. 

The oil sample would need to be 

analyzed within 25 hours TIS. 

If the analysis indicates Stage II as 

defined by the ASB, within 25 hours 

TIS, this proposed AD would require 

removing and inspecting the oil filter 

element for a chip. If the analysis 

indicates Stage III as defined by the 

ASB, this proposed AD would require 

removing and inspecting the oil filter 

element for a chip within 10 hours TIS. 

If there are no chips, we propose 

cleaning the oil filter element and chip 

detector, inspecting the drive stage 

toothing, performing a ground run, and 

inspecting for leaking oil. If there is a 

chip, this proposed AD would require 

replacing the MGB with an airworthy 

MGB before further flight. 

Before the MGB has accumulated 300 

hours TIS, this proposed AD would 

require determining whether two or 

more chip indications have occurred. If 

two or more chip indications have 

occurred, this proposed AD would 

require inspecting the drive stage 

toothing, performing a ground run, and 

inspecting for leaking oil. At any time 

if there is a chip indication, we would 

require removing and inspecting the 

chip detector for deposits (fine particles 

or metallic fuzz) or a chip, and 

removing and inspecting the oil filter 

element for a chip. 

If there are no chips and a minimal 

amount of particles or metallic fuzz, this 

proposed AD would require cleaning 

the chip detector and the oil filter 

element and entering the chip 

indication on the MGB log card before 

further flight. If there are no chips and 

some particles or metallic fuzz, this 

proposed AD would require cleaning 

the chip detector and the oil filter 

element and entering the chip 

indication on the MGB log card before 

further flight. The proposed AD also 

would require inspecting the drive stage 

toothing, performing a ground run, and 

within 10 hours TIS inspecting for 

leaking oil. The proposed AD would 

then require performing a ground run 

for 15 minutes at the flight-idle power 

setting, and then re-inspecting the chip 

detector for a chip, particles and 

metallic fuzz. If there is a chip, this 

proposed AD would require replacing 

the MGB with an airworthy MGB. 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the EASA AD 

The EASA AD applies to military 

EC635 helicopters. This AD does not 

apply to EC635 helicopters because they 

are not type certificated in the United 

States. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

would affect 242 helicopters of U.S. 

Registry and that labor costs would 

average $85 per work-hour. Based on 

these estimates, we expect the following 

the costs: 

• Taking oil samples would take 1 

work-hour. Assuming 2 samples per 

aircraft per year, we estimate a total cost 

of $170. No parts would be needed, so 

the total cost for the U.S. fleet would be 

$41,140. 

• A laboratory analysis of 2 oil 

samples would cost $200 per helicopter 

for labor and equipment, for a total fleet 

cost of $48,400. 

• Inspecting the oil filter element for 

a chip would require about a half-hour 

of labor for a cost per helicopter of about 

$43. No parts would be needed. 

• Inspecting certain teeth in the 

gearbox, performing a ground run, and 

inspecting for leaking oil would take 8 

work-hours for a labor cost of $680. 

Parts would cost $196, for a total cost 

per helicopter of $876. 

• If the oil sample analysis indicates 

metal chips, recording the results on the 

aircraft log card would take a half-hour 

for a labor cost of about $43 per 

helicopter. 

• Examining the log card for any 

previously recorded chip indications 

would be minimal. 

• Inspecting the chip detector for 

deposits would require about 5 minutes 

of labor for a labor cost of about $7. 

• Replacing the MGB with an 

airworthy MGB would require 8 workhours for a labor cost of $680. Parts 

would cost $145,000 for total cost per 

helicopter of $145,680. 

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, I certify 

this proposed regulation: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

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

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 

3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in 

Alaska to the extent that it justifies 

making a regulatory distinction; and 

4. Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

We prepared an economic evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD and placed it in the 

AD docket. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by Reference, 

Safety. 

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): 

Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH (Eurocopter): 

Docket No. FAA–2013–0554; Directorate 

Identifier 2012–SW–009–AD. 

(a) Applicability 

This AD applies to Model EC135 P1, EC135 

P2, EC135 P2+, EC135 T1, EC135 T2, and 

EC135 T2+ helicopters with a main gearbox 

(MGB), part number (P/N) 4649 010 003, 

4649 010 005, 4649 010 006, 4649 010 006X, 

4649 010 008, 4649 010 008X, 4649 001 007, 

4649 010 010, or 4649 010 013 installed, 

certificated in any category. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules 40055 

(b) Unsafe Condition 

This AD defines the unsafe condition as a 

tooth rupture in the MGB. This condition 

could result in failure of the MGB, loss of 

power to the main rotor, and subsequent loss 

of control of the helicopter. 

(c) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by September 

3, 2013. 

(d) Compliance 

You are responsible for performing each 

action required by this AD within the 

specified compliance time unless it has 

already been accomplished prior to that time. 

(e) Required Actions 

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

and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 

hours or 12 months, whichever occurs first, 

take an oil sample in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions, Part 1, of 

Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin EC 135– 

63A–012, Revision 5, dated September 6, 

2011 (ASB EC135–63A–012). 

(2) Within 25 hours TIS after taking the oil 

sample in paragraph (e)(1), analyze the oil 

sample in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions, Part 2.A. 

through Part 2.C. of ASB EC135–63A–012, 

except that you are not required to contact 

Eurocopter. 

(i) If the analysis indicates Stage II as 

specified by the Accomplishment 

Instructions, Part 2.B., of ASB EC135–63A– 

012, within 25 hours TIS, remove and inspect 

the oil filter element for a chip, defined as 

any solid piece of metal but not metallic fuzz 

or fine particles. 

(A) If there are no chips, clean the oil filter 

element and chip detector, inspect the drive 

stage toothing, perform a ground run, and 

inspect for leaking oil in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions, Part 4.A 

through 4.G, of ASB EC135–63A–012. 

Change the oil. 

(B) If there is a chip, replace the MGB with 

an airworthy MGB before further flight. 

(ii) If the analysis indicates Stage III as 

specified by the Accomplishment 

Instructions, Part 2.B., of ASB EC135–63A– 

012 and if the water content is between 0.1 

and 0.5 percent, within 10 hours TIS, remove 

and inspect the oil filter element for a chip. 

(A) If there are no chips, clean the oil filer 

element and chip detector, inspect the drive 

stage toothing, perform a ground run, and 

inspect for leaking oil in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions, Part 4.A 

through 4.G, of ASB EC135–65A–012. 

Change the oil. 

(B) If there is a chip, replace the MGB with 

an airworthy MGB before further flight. 

(3) Before the MGB has accumulated 300 

hours TIS, determine whether two or more 

chip indications have occurred. If two or 

more chip indications have occurred, inspect 

the drive stage toothing, perform a ground 

run, and inspect for leaking oil in accordance 

with the Accomplishment Instructions, Part 

4.A through 4.G, of ASB EC135–65A–012. 

(4) Any time there is a chip indication, 

remove and inspect the chip detector for 

deposits (fine particles or metallic fuzz) or 

chips, and remove and inspect the oil filter 

element for a chip. 

(i) If there are no chips and a minimal 

amount of particles or metallic fuzz, 

corresponding to Figure 5, Stage A of ASB 

EC135–65A–012, clean the chip detector and 

the oil filter element and enter the chip 

indication on the MGB log card before further 

flight. 

(ii) If there are no chips and some particles 

or metallic fuzz, corresponding to Figure 5, 

Stage B of ASB EC135–65A–012, clean the 

chip detector and the oil filter element and 

enter the chip indication on the MGB log 

card before further flight, and within 10 

hours TIS inspect the drive stage toothing, 

perform a ground run, and inspect for leaking 

oil in accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions, Part 4.A through 4.G, of ASB 

EC135–65A–012. Perform a ground run for 15 

minutes at the flight-idle power setting, and 

then re-inspect the chip detector for a chip, 

particles, and metallic fuzz. 

(iii) If there is a chip, replace the MGB with 

an airworthy MGB. 

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOC) 

(1) The Manager, Safety Management 

Group, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this 

AD. Send your proposal to: Chinh Vuong, 

Aerospace Engineer, Safety Management 

Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA, 2601 

Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; 

telephone (817) 222–5110; email 

Chinh.Vuong@faa.gov. 

(2) For operations conducted under a 14 

CFR part 119 operating certificate or under 

14 CR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you 

notify your principal inspector, or lacking a 

principal inspector, the manager of the local 

flight standards district office or certificate 

holding district office before operating any 

aircraft complying with this AD through an 

AMOC. 

(g) Additional Information 

The subject of this AD is addressed in the 

European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 

No. 2009–0106R1, dated November 3, 2011. 

You may view the EASA AD at http:// 

www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FAA– 

2013–0554. 

(h) Subject 

Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) 

Code: 6320, Main Rotor Gearbox. 

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on June 18, 

2013. 

Kim Smith, 

Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–15958 Filed 7–2–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–0886; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–SW–067–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Agusta 

S.p.A. Helicopters 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (SNPRM); 

reopening of comment period. 

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

that proposed to issue an airworthiness 

directive (AD) for Agusta S.p.A. 

(Agusta) Model AB139 and AW139 

helicopters with a certain wire strike 

protection system (WSPS) top cable 

cutter assembly installed. The existing 

NPRM proposes to require reworking or 

replacing the top cable cutter assembly 

to increase clearance between the WSPS 

and the main rotor (M/R) blades. The 

NPRM was prompted by a report of inflight contact between the top cablecutter assembly and two M/R blades. 

This action revises the proposals in the 

NPRM by requiring that the reworked or 

replaced part be marked with ‘‘BT 139– 

126 Rev./’’ or ‘‘FAA’’ at the end of the 

part number to reflect the field 

modification. Since these actions 

impose an additional burden over that 

proposed in the NPRM, we are 

reopening the comment period to allow 

the public the chance to comment on 

these proposed changes. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this SNPRM by September 3, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to 

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

online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Send comments to the U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to the 

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

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in person at the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS