42406 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

of the subcontract for goods and services 

provided for the contract and for which 

the Federal agency has paid the prime 

contractor, and considering that 

information when rating the contractor 

for past performance purposes. 

(6) Evaluating whether the prime 

contractor has a history of unjustified 

untimely or reduced payments to 

subcontractors, and if so, recording the 

identity of the prime contractor in the 

Federal Awardee Performance and 

Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), 

or any successor database. 

(7) In his or her discretion, requiring 

the prime contractor (other than a prime 

contractor with a commercial plan) to 

update its subcontracting plan when an 

option is exercised. 

(8) Requiring the prime contractor 

(other than a contractor with a 

commercial plan) to submit a 

subcontracting plan if the value of a 

modification causes the value of the 

contract to exceed the subcontracting 

plan threshold and to the extent that 

subcontracting opportunities exist. 

(9) In his or her discretion, requiring 

a subcontracting plan if a prime 

contractor’s size status changes from 

small to other than small as a result of 

a size recertification. 

(10) Where a subcontracting plan is 

amended in connection with an option, 

or added as a result of a recertification 

or modification, the changes to any 

existing plan are for prospective 

subcontracting opportunities and do not 

apply retroactively. However, since 

achievements must be reported on the 

ISR (or the SF–294, if applicable) on a 

cumulative basis from the inception of 

the contract, the contractor’s 

achievements prior to the modification 

or option will be factored into its overall 

achievement on the contract from 

inception. 

(e) * * * 

(3) Instructing large prime contractors 

on identifying small business concerns 

by means of SAM (or any successor 

system), SUB-Net, Business 

Matchmaking events, and other 

resources and tools; 

* * * * * 

(f) Compliance reviews. (1) A prime 

contractor’s performance under its 

subcontracting plan is evaluated by 

means of on-site compliance reviews 

and follow-up reviews. A compliance 

review is a surveillance review that 

determines a contractor’s achievements 

in meeting the goals and other elements 

in its subcontracting plan for both open 

contracts and contracts completed 

during the previous twelve months. A 

follow-up review is done after a 

compliance review, generally within six 

to eight months, to determine if the 

contractor has implemented SBA’s 

recommendations. 

(2) All compliance reviews begin with 

a validation of the prime contractor’s 

most recent ISR (or SF–294, if 

applicable) or SSR. A compliance 

review includes: 

(i) An evaluation of whether the 

prime contractor assigned the proper 

NAICS code and corresponding size 

standard to a subcontract, and a review 

of whether small business 

subcontractors qualify for the size or 

socioeconomic status claimed; 

(ii) Validation of the prime 

contractor’s methodology for completing 

its subcontracting reports; and 

(iii) Consideration of whether the 

prime contractor is monitoring its other 

than small subcontractors with regard to 

their subcontracting plans, determining 

achievement of their proposed 

subcontracting goals, and reviewing 

their subcontractors’ ISRs (or SF–294s, 

if applicable). 

* * * * * 

(g) Subcontracting consideration in 

source selection. (1) A contracting 

officer may include an evaluation factor 

in a solicitation which evaluates: 

(i) An offeror’s proposed approach to 

small business subcontracting 

participation in the subject 

procurement; 

(ii) The extent to which the offeror 

has met its small business 

subcontracting plan goals on previous 

covered contracts; and/or 

(iii) The extent to which the offeror 

timely paid its small business 

subcontractors under covered contracts. 

(2) A contracting officer may include 

an evaluation factor in a solicitation 

which evaluates an offeror’s 

commitment to pay small business 

subcontractors within a specific number 

of days after receipt of payment from the 

Government for goods and services 

previously rendered by the small 

business subcontractor. 

(i) The contracting officer will 

comparatively evaluate the proposed 

timelines. 

(ii) Such a commitment shall become 

a material part of the contract. 

(iii) The contracting officer must 

consider the contractor’s compliance 

with the commitment in evaluating 

performance, including for purposes of 

contract continuation (such as 

exercising options). 

(3) A small business concern 

submitting an offer shall receive the 

maximum score, credit or rating under 

an evaluation factor described in 

paragraph (g) of this section without 

having to submit any information in 

connection with this factor. 

(4) A contracting officer shall include 

a significant evaluation factor for the 

criteria described in paragraphs (g)(2)(i) 

and (g)(2)(ii) of this section in a bundled 

contract or order as defined in § 125.2. 

(5) Paragraph (g) of this section may 

apply to solicitations for orders against 

multiple award contracts, (including a 

Federal Supply Schedule or Multiple 

Award Schedule contract, a 

Government-wide acquisition contract 

(GWAC), or a multi-agency contract 

(MAC)), blanket purchase agreements or 

basic ordering agreements. 

(h) Multiple award contracts. (1) 

Except where a prime contractor has a 

commercial plan, the contracting officer 

shall require a subcontracting plan for 

each multiple award indefinite delivery, 

indefinite quantity contract (including 

Multiple Award Schedule), where the 

estimated value of the contract exceeds 

the subcontracting plan thresholds in 

paragraph (a) of this section and the 

contract has subcontracting 

opportunities. 

(2) Contractors shall submit small 

business subcontracting reports for 

individual orders to the contracting 

agency on an annual basis. 

(3) The agency funding the order shall 

receive credit towards its small business 

subcontracting goals. More than one 

agency may not receive credit towards 

its subcontracting goals for a particular 

subcontract. 

(4) The agency funding the order may 

in its discretion establish small business 

subcontracting goals for individual 

orders, blanket purchase agreements or 

basic ordering agreements. 

Dated: June 25, 2013. 

Karen G. Mills, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2013–16967 Filed 7–15–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0522; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–SW–018–AD; Amendment 

39–17487; AD 2013–10–51] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter 

France Helicopters 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule; request for 

comments. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 42407 

SUMMARY: We are publishing a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for 

Eurocopter France Model AS350B, 

AS350BA, AS350B1, AS350B2, 

AS350B3, AS350C, AS350D, AS350D1, 

AS355E, AS355F, AS355F1, AS355F2, 

AS355N, and AS355NP helicopters. 

This AD requires, before further flight, 

determining whether a single hydraulic 

main or tail rotor servo-control is 

installed on your helicopter. If a certain 

servo-control is installed, before the 

further flight, this AD requires replacing 

that servo-control. This AD was 

prompted by the discovery of excessive 

axial play detected on bearings installed 

on certain single hydraulic main and 

tail rotor servo-controls (servo-control). 

The excessive play could cause the 

distributor slide valve to jam in its 

sleeve. This condition could result in 

jamming the hydraulic flight controls, 

necessitating that the pilot cut off 

hydraulic power. This action would 

increase the pilot’s workload, resulting 

in possible loss of helicopter control. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective to all 

persons July 31, 2013, except those 

persons to whom it was made 

immediately effective by Emergency AD 

No. 2013–10–51, issued on May 9, 2013, 

which contains the requirements of this 

AD. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain documents listed in this AD 

as of July 31, 2013. 

We must receive comments on this 

AD by September 16, 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 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 service information identified in 

this 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 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: 

Michael Hemann, Transportaton Safety 

Analyst, Safety Management Group, 

Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA, 2601 

Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 

76137; telephone (817) 222–5110; email 

michael.hemann@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

This AD is a final rule that involves 

requirements affecting flight safety, and 

we did not provide you with notice and 

an opportunity to provide your 

comments prior to it becoming effective. 

However, 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 resulted from 

adopting this AD. The most helpful 

comments reference a specific portion of 

the AD, 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 them 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 

rulemaking during the comment period. 

We will consider all the comments we 

receive and may conduct additional 

rulemaking based on those comments. 

Discussion 

On May 9, 2013, we issued 

Emergency AD 2013–10–51 (Emergency 

AD), which requires, before further 

flight, determining whether a certain 

servo-control is installed on your 

helicopter. If a certain servo-control is 

installed, before the further flight, the 

Emergency AD requires replacing that 

servo-control with an airworthy servocontrol. The Emergency AD was 

prompted by AD No. 2013–0095–E, 

dated April 16, 2013, issued by EASA, 

which is the Technical Agent for the 

Member States of the European Union, 

to correct an unsafe condition for the 

helicopters listed in the first paragraph 

of this section. EASA advises that for 

helicopters with single hydraulic main 

and tail servo-controls, this condition, if 

not detected and corrected, could lead 

to a friction point in the flight controls 

and increase the pilot workload. The 

pilot would consequently need to cut off 

the hydraulic power and follow the 

procedures specified in the applicable 

Section 3 of the Rotorcraft Flight 

Manual. 

Many of the non-compliant servocontrols were installed by the 

manufacturer under certain part and 

serial numbers. Others were repaired or 

overhauled from September 27, 2012, 

through January 30, 2013, by UTC 

Aerospace Systems in Monroe, North 

Carolina. Since we issued the 

Emergency AD, we have discovered that 

the servo-control’s component history 

card or equivalent record may list 

‘‘Goodrich Corporation’’ as the repair 

and overhaul facility, instead of ‘‘UTC 

Aerospace Systems,’’ as United 

Technologies Corporation formed UTC 

Aerospace Systems in 2012 after 

acquiring Goodrich Corporation. We 

have added this information to the 

Required Actions section of this AD. 

Also, the language in the Alternative 

Methods of Compliance section of the 

Emergency AD did not include the 

proper introductory sentence, so we 

have added that sentence in this AD. 

These changes do not change the scope 

or increase the burden from those in the 

Emergency AD. 

FAA’s Determination 

These helicopters have been approved 

by the aviation authority of France and 

are approved for operation in the United 

States. Pursuant to our bilateral 

agreement with France, EASA, its 

technical representative, has notified us 

of the unsafe condition described in the 

EASA AD. We are issuing 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 helicopters of 

these same type designs. 

Related Service Information 

Eurocopter has issued one Emergency 

Alert Service Bulletin (EASB) with four 

numbers, all dated April 15, 2013. EASB 

No. 67.00.60 is for Eurocopter Models 

AS350B, AS350BA, AS350BB, 

AS350B1, AS350B2, AS350B3, AS350D, 

and military helicopter Model AS350L1; 

EASB 67.00.36 is for military helicopter 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

42408 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

Models AS550A2, AS550C2, AS550C3, 

and AS550U2; EASB 67.00.41 is for 

Models AS355E, AS355F, AS355F1, 

AS355F2, AS355N, and AS355NP; and 

EASB 67.00.27 is for military helicopter 

Models AS555AF, AS555AN, AS555SN, 

AS555UF, and AS555UN. Models 

AS350C and AS350D1 are also type 

certificated in the United States but 

were not listed in the EASB. Model 

AS350BB is not type certificated in the 

United States. The EASB states that 

during acceptance tests of a servocontrol, the supplier noticed that the 

servo-control input lever bearing’s play 

value exceeded the specified value. This 

condition leads to excessive 

misalignment between the lever and the 

distributor slide, the EASB reports. This 

condition could create a ‘‘friction point’’ 

on the flight controls. To eliminate the 

risk of this friction point appearing on 

the flight controls, Eurocopter specifies 

that all servo-controls with a noncompliant input lever bearing be 

replaced and returned to the 

manufacturer. 

AD Requirements 

This AD requires, before further flight, 

inspecting the servo-control’s 

component history card or equivalent 

record to determine if it has a certain 

part number (P/N) and serial number (S/ 

N) or if the servo-control was repaired 

or overhauled from September 27, 2012, 

through January 30, 2013, by UTC 

Aerospace Systems or Goodrich 

Corporation in Monroe, North Carolina. 

If either condition exists, this AD 

requires inspecting the servo-control’s 

identification plate to determine if it has 

the letter ‘‘B.’’ If it has the letter ‘‘B,’’ no 

further action is required. 

If the identification plate has no letter 

‘‘B,’’ this AD requires inspecting all 

sides of the external race of the servocontrol’s bearing to determine if it has 

any visible marking. If there is a 

marking, before further flight, this AD 

requires replacing the servo-control 

with an airworthy servo-control. 

If there is no marking, this AD 

requires inspecting the bearing’s sealing 

flange to determine if it is marked with 

‘‘RWG Germany 60–5593.’’ If it is 

marked with ‘‘RWG Germany 60–5593,’’ 

no further action is required. 

If the sealing flange has not been 

marked with ‘‘RWG Germany 60–5593,’’ 

before further flight, this AD requires 

replacing the servo-control with an 

airworthy servo-control. 

Differences Between This AD and the 

EASA AD 

We require, before further flight, 

inspecting the servo-control’s 

component history card or equivalent 

record to determine if it has a certain P/ 

N and S/N; or if it was repaired or 

overhauled from September 27, 2012, 

through January 30, 2013, by UTC 

Aerospace Systems or Goodrich 

Corporation in Monroe, North Carolina. 

EASA requires within 10 flight hours or 

10 days, whichever occurs first, 

verifying whether a certain bearing is 

fitted in the servo-control. 

We require, before further flight, 

replacing a non-airworthy servo-control 

with an airworthy servo-control. EASA 

requires replacing a non-airworthy 

servo-control with an airworthy servocontrol within 50 flight hours or 120 

days, whichever comes first, after 

checking the servo-control for ‘‘freetravel.’’ If a ‘‘friction point’’ is detected, 

EASA requires replacing the servocontrol with an airworthy servo-control 

before further flight. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this AD affects 937 

helicopters of U.S. Registry and that 

labor costs average $85 a work-hour. 

Based on these estimates, we expect the 

following costs: 

Inspecting the single hydraulic main 

and tail servo-control’s component 

history card or equivalent record 

requires minimal labor costs and no 

parts. The per-helicopter and fleet costs 

are minimal. 

Determining whether the 

identification plate is marked with a 

‘‘B’’ requires 1 work-hour and no parts. 

Labor costs total $85 per helicopter. 

Inspecting the servo-control’s bearing 

to determine if it is non-conforming 

requires 3 work-hours and no parts. 

Labor costs total $255 per helicopter. 

Replacing the servo-control with an 

airworthy servo-control requires 3 or 5 

work hours, depending on what servocontrol is being replaced. Parts cost 

$10,461 or $10,561, also depending on 

the servo-control being replaced. Labor 

costs are $255 or $425 for total perhelicopter cost of $10,716 or $10,986. 

FAA’s Justification and Determination 

of the Effective Date 

Providing an opportunity for public 

comments prior to adopting these AD 

requirements would delay 

implementing the safety actions needed 

to correct this known unsafe condition. 

Therefore, we find that the risk to the 

flying public justifies waiving notice 

and comment prior to the adoption of 

this rule because the previously 

described unsafe condition can 

adversely affect the controllability of the 

helicopter and the required corrective 

actions must be accomplished before 

further flight. 

Since it was found that immediate 

corrective action was required, notice 

and opportunity for prior public 

comment before issuing this AD were 

impracticable and contrary to the public 

interest and good cause existed for 

making Emergency AD 2013–10–51 

effective immediately on May 9, 2013 to 

all known U.S. owners and operators of 

the specified Eurocopter France model 

helicopters. These conditions still exist 

and the Emergency AD is hereby 

published, with minor changes, in the 

Federal Register as an amendment to 

section 39.13 of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (14 CFR 39.13) to make it 

effective to all persons. 

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 AD will not 

have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. This AD will 

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 

that this AD: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

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

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 

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. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 42409 

We prepared an economic evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this 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. 

Adoption of the Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA amends 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): 

2013–10–51 Eurocopter France: 

Amendment 39–17487; Docket No. 

FAA–2013–0522; Directorate Identifier 

2013–SW–018–AD. 

(a) Applicability 

This AD applies to Eurocopter France 

(Eurocopter) Model AS350B, AS350BA, 

AS350B1, AS350B2, AS350B3, AS350C, 

AS350D, AS350D1, AS355E, AS355F, 

AS355F1, AS355F2, AS355N, and AS355NP 

helicopters, certificated in any category. 

(b) Unsafe Condition 

This AD defines the unsafe condition as 

excessive play that could cause the 

distributor slide valve to jam in its sleeve. 

This condition could result in jamming of the 

hydraulic flight controls, necessitating that 

the pilot cut off hydraulic power. This action 

would increase the pilot’s workload, 

resulting in possible loss of helicopter 

control. 

(c) Effective Date 

This AD becomes effective July 31, 2013 to 

all persons except those persons to whom it 

was made immediately effective by 

Emergency AD No. 2013–10–51, issued on 

May 9, 2013, which contains the 

requirements of this AD. 

(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) Before further flight, inspect the single 

hydraulic main and tail servo-control’s 

(servo-control) component history card or 

equivalent record to determine if it has a part 

number (P/N) and serial number (S/N) listed 

in the Appendix, paragraph 4.A, of 

Eurocopter Emergency Alert Service Bulletin 

No. 67.00.60 (EASB No. 67.00.60) or No. 

67.00.41 (EASB No. 67.00.41), both dated 

April 15, 2013, as appropriate for your model 

helicopter; or was repaired or overhauled 

from September 27, 2012, through January 

30, 2013, by UTC Aerospace Systems or 

Goodrich Corporation in Monroe, North 

Carolina. 

(2) If the servo-control does have a P/N and 

S/N listed in paragraph 4.A of EASB No. 

67.00.60 or EASB No. 67.00.41, as 

appropriate for your model helicopter, or if 

the servo-control was repaired or installed 

from September 27, 2012, through January 

30, 2013, by UTC Aerospace Systems or 

Goodrich Corporation in Monroe, North 

Carolina, inspect the servo-control to 

determine whether the identification plate is 

marked with a ‘‘B’’ as shown in the 

Appendix, paragraph 4.B, of EASB No. 

67.00.60 or EASB No. 67.00.41, as 

appropriate for your model helicopter. If it is 

marked with a ‘‘B,’’ no further action is 

required. 

(3) If the identification plate is not marked 

with a ‘‘B,’’ inspect all sides of the external 

race of the servo-control’s bearing to 

determine if it has any marking shown as (b) 

in Detail A of Figure 1 of EASB No. 67.00.60 

or EASB No. 67.00.41, as appropriate for your 

model helicopter. If there is any marking, 

before further flight, replace the servo-control 

with an airworthy servo-control. 

(4) If there is no marking on the sides of 

the external race, inspect each bearing 

sealing flange to determine if it is marked 

with ‘‘RWG Germany 60–5593’’ as shown as 

(d) in Detail C of Figure 2 of EASB No. 

67.00.60 or EASB No. 67.00.41, as 

appropriate for your model helicopter. If 

there is ‘‘RWG Germany 60–5593’’ marking at 

least partially visible on a flange of the 

bearing, no further action is required. 

(5) If there is no ‘‘RWG Germany 60–5593’’ 

marking at least partially visible on a flange 

of the bearing, before further flight, replace 

the servo-control with an airworthy servocontrol. 

(f) Special Flight Permits 

Special flight permits may be permitted 

only for taking a helicopter to a repair station 

to meet the requirements of this AD. 

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Safety Management 

Group, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this 

AD. Send your proposal to: Michael Hemann, 

Transportation Safety Analyst, Safety 

Management Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, 

FAA, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, 

Texas 76137; telephone (817) 222–5110; 

email michael.hemann@faa.gov. 

(2) For operations conducted under a 14 

CFR part 119 operating certificate or under 

14 CFR 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. 

(h) Additional Information 

The subject of this AD is addressed in the 

European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 

No. 2013–0095–E, dated April 16, 2013. You 

may view the EASA AD at http:// 

www.regulations.gov by searching for and 

locating it in Docket No. FAA–2013–0522. 

(i) Subject 

Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) 

Code: 6730, Rotorcraft Servo System. 

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference of 

the service information listed in this 

paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. 

(2) You must use this service information 

as applicable to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) Eurocopter EASB No. 67.00.60, dated 

April 15, 2013. 

(ii) Eurocopter EASB No. 67.00.41, dated 

April 15, 2013. 

Note 1 to paragraph (j)(2): Eurocopter 

EASB No. 67.00.60, dated April 15, 2013, and 

Eurocopter EASB No. 67.00.41, dated April 

15, 2013, are co-published as one document 

along with Eurocopter EASB No. 67.00.36, 

dated April 15, 2013, and Eurocopter EASB 

No. 67.00.27, dated April 15, 2013, which are 

not incorporated by reference in this AD. 

(3) For Eurocopter service information 

identified in this 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. 

(4) You may view this service information 

at FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, 

Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., 

Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call (817) 222–5110. 

(5) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, call 

(202) 741–6030, or go to: http:// 

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on June 13, 

2013. 

Kim Smith, 

Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–16682 Filed 7–15–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0018; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–SW–060–AD; Amendment 

39–17483; AD 2013–12–05] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter 

Deutschland GmbH Helicopters 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES