39192 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 130 / Thursday, July 8, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

07–22 R1, Amendment 39–15326, for 

structural significant item (SSI) F–4B of the 

Boeing Document No. D6–35022, 

‘‘Supplemental Structural Inspection 

Document (SSID) for Model 747 Airplanes,’’ 

Revision G, dated December 2000. 

(3) Within 1,500 flight cycles after the 

effective date of this AD. 

(s) If any cracking is found during any 

inspection required by paragraph (r) of this 

AD, before further flight, repair in accordance 

with the Accomplishment Instructions of 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2305, 

Revision 2, dated January 15, 2009, except as 

required by paragraph (t) of this AD. Within 

6,000 flight cycles after doing the repair, do 

the inspections specified in paragraph (r) of 

this AD, and repeat the inspections thereafter 

at intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight cycles. 

Service Bulletin Exception 

(t) If any cracking is found during any 

inspection required by this AD, and Boeing 

Alert Service Bulletin 747–53A2305, 

Revision 2, dated January 15, 2009, specifies 

to contact Boeing for appropriate action: 

Before further flight, repair the crack using a 

method approved in accordance with the 

procedures specified in paragraph (u) of this 

AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(u)(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. Send information to ATTN: Ivan 

Li, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, 

ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., 

Renton, Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 917–6437; fax (425) 917–6590. 

Information may be e-mailed to: 9-ANMSeattle-ACO-AMOC-Requests@faa.gov. 

(2) To request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 

39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your principal maintenance inspector 

(PMI) or principal avionics inspector (PAI), 

as appropriate, or lacking a principal 

inspector, your local Flight Standards District 

Office. The AMOC approval letter must 

specifically reference this AD. 

(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. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 29, 

2010. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–16551 Filed 7–7–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0564; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–SW–13–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Arrow 

Falcon Exporters, Inc. (Previously Utah 

State University), et al., Model HH–1K, 

TH–1F, TH–1L, UH–1A, UH–1B, UH–1E, 

UH–1F, UH–1H, UH–1L, and UH–1P 

Helicopters; and Southwest Florida 

Aviation Model UH–1B (SW204 and 

SW204HP) and UH–1H (SW205) 

Helicopters 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration, DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This document proposes 

adopting a new airworthiness directive 

(AD) for the specified type-certificated 

military surplus helicopters. The AD 

would require: Creating a component 

history card or equivalent record for 

each main rotor grip (grip); determining 

and recording the total hours time-inservice (TIS) for each grip; visually 

inspecting the upper and lower tangs of 

the grip for a crack; inspecting the grip 

buffer pads for delamination and if 

delamination is present, inspecting the 

grip surface for corrosion or other 

damage; inspecting the grip for a crack 

using ultrasonic (UT) and fluorescentpenetrant inspection methods; and 

establishing a retirement life for certain 

grips. This proposal is prompted by 

three in-flight failures of grips installed 

on Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (BHTI) 

Model 212 helicopters, which resulted 

from cracks originating in the lower 

main rotor blade bolt lug. The actions 

specified by the proposed AD are 

intended to prevent failure of the grip, 

separation of a main rotor blade, and 

subsequent loss of control of the 

helicopter. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 7, 2010. 

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. 

You may get the service information 

identified in this proposed AD from Bell 

Helicopter Textron, Inc., P.O. Box 482, 

Fort Worth, TX 76101, telephone (817) 

280–3391, fax (817) 280–6466, or at 

http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/. 

You may examine the comments to 

this proposed AD in the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

DOT/FAA Southwest Region, Michael 

Kohner, ASW–170, Aviation Safety 

Engineer, Rotorcraft Directorate, 

Rotorcraft Certification Office, 2601 

Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 

76137, telephone (817) 222–5170, fax 

(817) 222–5783. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to submit any written 

data, views, or arguments regarding this 

proposed AD. Send your comments to 

the address listed under the caption 

ADDRESSES. Include the docket number 

‘‘FAA–2010–0564, Directorate Identifier 

2010–SW–13–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of the proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend the 

proposed AD in light 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 our 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 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 130 / Thursday, July 8, 2010 / Proposed Rules 39193 

(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 

This document proposes adopting a 

new AD for Model HH–1K, TH–1F, TH– 

1L, UH–1A, UH–1B, UH–1E, UH–1F, 

UH–1H, UH–1L, and UH–1P 

helicopters; and Southwest Florida 

Aviation Model UH–1B (SW204 and 

SW204HP) and UH–1H (SW205) 

helicopters. The AD would require 

creating a component history card or 

equivalent record for each grip; 

determining and recording the total 

hours TIS for each grip; visually 

inspecting the upper and lower tangs of 

the grip for a crack; inspecting the grip 

buffer pads for delamination, and if 

delamination is present, inspecting the 

grip surface for corrosion or other 

damage; inspecting the grip for a crack 

using UT and fluorescent-penetrant 

inspection methods; and establishing a 

retirement life for grips, part number (P/ 

N) 204–011–121–009, ASI–4011–121–9, 

and P/N 204–011–121–121. This 

proposal is prompted by three in-flight 

failures of grips, P/N 204–011–121–009 

and –121, installed on BHTI Model 212 

helicopters, which resulted from cracks 

originating in the lower main rotor 

blade bolt lug. Grips with these same P/ 

Ns, and those produced under an FAA 

Parts Manufacturing Approval (PMA) 

that have a design approval based on 

their being identical to the original 

BHTI-manufactured grips, are eligible 

for installation on certain modified 

Model HH–1K, TH–1F, TH–1L, and 

UH–1 helicopters. These helicopters 

have an FAA-approved modification 

which increases their power rating to 

the equivalent of the twin-engine Model 

212 helicopter power rating. Grips, P/N 

204–011–121–005, and –113, are also 

affected by the proposed AD if they 

were ever installed on a Model 205B or 

Model UH–1N helicopter; and grip, P/N 

204–011–121–117, is also affected if it 

was ever installed on a Model 205B 

helicopter. Additionally, BHTI has 

developed a new, improved 

replacement grip that will not require 

the repetitive UT inspections and will 

have a 25,000 hour TIS and 500,000 

Retirement Index Number (RIN) 

retirement life for the BHTI Model 212 

helicopters. The RIN count accumulated 

for the new replacement grips will be 

increased by one for each take-off or 

each external lift event. The actions 

specified by the proposed AD are 

intended to prevent failure of the grip, 

separation of a main rotor blade, and 

subsequent loss of control of the 

helicopter. 

We have reviewed the following 

service information: 

• BHTI Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) 

205B–02–39, Revision B, dated 

November 22, 2002, applicable to Model 

205B helicopters; and 

• BHTI ASB 212–02–116, Revision A, 

dated October 30, 2002, applicable to 

Model 212 helicopters. 

Both ASBs contain BHTI 

Nondestructive Inspection Procedure, 

Log. No. 00–340, Revision E, dated 

April 9, 2002, which describes 

procedures for an UT inspection of the 

grip. We have also reviewed BHTI 

Operations Safety Notice (OSN) 204– 

85–6, OSN 205–85–9, and OSN 212–85– 

13, all dated November 14, 1985, which 

describe a cracked Model 212 helicopter 

grip that was returned to BHTI. 

This unsafe condition is likely to exist 

or develop on other helicopters of the 

same type designs. Therefore, the 

proposed AD would require: 

• Within 10 hours TIS, creating a 

component history card or equivalent 

record for the grip, and determining and 

recording the total hours TIS of each 

grip; 

• Within 10 hours TIS, and then at 

intervals not to exceed 25 hours TIS, 

visually inspecting the upper and lower 

tangs of the grip for a crack using a 10- 

power or higher magnifying glass; 

• Within 30 days, and then at 

intervals not to exceed certain specified 

hours TIS or a certain number of engine 

start/stops, whichever occurs first, for 

grips with certain specified hours TIS, 

inspecting the grip for a crack using a 

UT inspection method; 

• At intervals not to exceed 1,200 

hours TIS or 24 months, whichever 

occurs first, inspecting the grip buffer 

pads for delamination, and if 

delamination is present, inspecting the 

grip surface for corrosion or other 

damage; 

• Within 2,400 hours TIS or at the 

next main rotor hub overhaul, 

whichever occurs first, and then at 

intervals not to exceed 2,400 hours TIS, 

removing the grip buffer pads, visually 

inspecting the grip surface for corrosion 

or other damage, and fluorescentpenetrant inspecting the grip for a crack; 

• Before further flight, removing from 

service any grip, P/N 204–011–121–009 

or ASI–4011–121–9, with 15,000 or 

more hours TIS; 

• Before further flight, removing from 

service any grip, P/N 204–011–121–121, 

with 25,000 or more hours TIS; 

• Before further flight, replacing any 

unairworthy grip; and 

• Establishing a retirement life of 

15,000 hours TIS for grip, P/N 204–011– 

121–009 or ASI–4011–121–9, and 

25,000 hours TIS for grip, P/N 204–011– 

121–121. 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

would affect 20 helicopters of U.S. 

registry, and the proposed actions 

would take the following approximate 

number of work hours per helicopter to 

accomplish at an average labor rate of 

$85 per work hour: 

• Create new component history 

cards or equivalent: 2 work hours; 

• Maintain records: 5 work hours per 

year; 

• 24 visual inspections using a 

magnifying glass: 12 work hours per 

year; 

• 1⁄2 of a buffer pad inspection: 1.5 

hours per year; 

• 1⁄4 of a fluorescent penetrant 

inspection: .5 work hour per year; 

• 4 UT inspections: 4 work hours per 

year; and 

• Remove and replace grip set: 20 

work hours per year. 

Required parts would cost 

approximately $37,590 per set of grips. 

Based on these figures, we estimate the 

total cost impact of the proposed AD on 

U.S. operators to be $828,300, if one set 

of grips is installed on the total affected 

fleet of helicopters at the end of the first 

year. 

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); and 

3. 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 draft economic 

evaluation of the estimated costs to 

comply with this proposed AD. See the 

AD docket to examine the draft 

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, 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
39194 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 130 / Thursday, July 8, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

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, pursuant to the 

authority delegated to me by the 

Administrator, the Federal Aviation 

Administration proposes to amend part 

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations 

(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 to 

read as follows: 

Arrow Falcon Exporters, Inc. (Previously 

Utah State University); Firefly Aviation 

Helicopter Services (Previously Erickson 

Air-Crane Co.); California Department of 

Forestry; Garlick Helicopters, Inc.; 

Global Helicopter Technology, Inc.; 

Hagglund Helicopters, LLC (Previously 

Western International Aviation, Inc.); 

International Helicopters, Inc.; Precision 

Helicopters, LLC; Robinson Air Crane, 

Inc.; San Joaquin Helicopters 

(Previously Hawkins and Powers 

Aviation, Inc.); S.M.&T. Aircraft 

(Previously US Helicopters, Inc., UNC 

Helicopter, Inc., Southern Aero 

Corporation, and Wilco Aviation); Smith 

Helicopters; Southern Helicopter, Inc.; 

Southwest Florida Aviation 

International, Inc. (Previously Jamie R. 

Hill and Southwest Florida Aviation); 

Tamarack Helicopters, Inc. (Previously 

Ranger Helicopter Services, Inc.); US 

Helicopter, Inc. (Previously UNC 

Helicopter, Inc.); West Coast 

Fabrication; and Williams Helicopter 

Corporation (Previously Scott Paper 

Co.). Docket No. FAA–2010–0564; 

Directorate Identifier 2010–SW–13–AD. 

Applicability: Model HH–1K, TH–1F, TH– 

1L, UH–1A, UH–1B, UH–1E, UH–1F, UH–1H, 

UH–1L, and UH–1P helicopters, and 

Southwest Florida Aviation Model UH–1B 

(SW204 and SW204HP) and UH–1H (SW205) 

helicopters, with main rotor grip (grip), part 

number (P/N) 204–011–121–009, –121, or 

ASI–4011–121–9, installed; or with grip, P/ 

N 204–011–121–005 or –113, if the grip was 

ever installed on a Model 205B or a Model 

UH–1N helicopter, or P/N 204–011–121–117, 

installed, if the grip was ever installed on a 

Model 205B helicopter, certificated in any 

category. 

Compliance: Required as indicated. 

To prevent failure of a grip, separation of 

a main rotor blade, and subsequent loss of 

control of the helicopter, accomplish the 

following: 

(a) Within 10 hours time-in-service (TIS), 

unless accomplished previously, create a 

component history card or equivalent record 

and determine and record the total hours TIS 

for each grip. If the total hours TIS cannot be 

determined from the helicopter records, 

assume and record 50 hours TIS for each 

month for which the hours cannot be 

determined with the grip installed on any 

helicopter. Continue to count and record the 

hours TIS and begin to count and record the 

number of times the helicopter engine(s) are 

started (engine start/stop cycles). 

(b) Within 10 hours TIS, unless 

accomplished previously, and then at 

intervals not to exceed 25 hours TIS, without 

removing the main rotor blades: 

(1) Clean the exposed surfaces of the upper 

and lower tangs of each grip with denatured 

alcohol and wipe dry. 

(2) Using a 10-power or higher magnifying 

glass, visually inspect the exposed surfaces of 

the upper and lower tangs of each grip for a 

crack. Pay particular attention to the lower 

surface of each lower grip tang from the main 

rotor blade bolt-bushing flange to the leading 

and trailing edge of each grip tang. See Figure 

1 of this AD. 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 130 / Thursday, July 8, 2010 / Proposed Rules 39195 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–C 

(c) At the intervals shown in Table 1 of this 

AD, ultrasonic (UT) inspect each grip for a 

crack in accordance with the Bell Helicopter 

Textron, Inc. (BHTI) Nondestructive 

Inspection Procedure, Log No. 00–340, 

Revision E, dated April 9, 2002. 

TABLE 1 

UT inspect grip, P/N 

Within 30 

days, for a 

grip with the 

following or 

more hours 

TIS: 

Thereafter, at intervals not to 

exceed the following number 

of hours TIS or the engine 

start/stop cycles, whichever 

occurs first: 

Hours TIS Engine start/ 

stop cycles 

204–011–121–009 or ASI–4011–121–9 ...................................................................................... 4,000 400 1,600 

204–011–121–121 ....................................................................................................................... 500 150 600 

204–011–121–005 or –113, if the grip was EVER installed on a Model 205B or Model UH– 

1N helicopter ............................................................................................................................ 4,000 400 1,600 

204–011–121–117, if the grip was EVER installed on a Model 205B helicopter ....................... 500 150 600 

The UT inspection of the grip must be 

performed by a Nondestructive Testing 

(NDT) UT Level I Special, Level II, or Level 

III inspector who is qualified under the 

guidelines established by MIL–STD–410E, 

ATA Specification 105, AIA–NAS–410, or an 

FAA-accepted equivalent for qualification 

standards of NDT Inspection/Evaluation 

Personnel. 

Note 1: You can find the Nondestructive 

Inspection Procedure attached to BHTI Alert 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALSep08jy10.000</GPH>
39196 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 130 / Thursday, July 8, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Service Bulletin (ASB) 205B–02–39, Revision 

B, dated November 22, 2002, or BHTI ASB 

212–02–116, Revision A, dated October 30, 

2002. 

(d) At intervals not to exceed 1,200 hours 

TIS or 24 months, whichever occurs first: 

(1) Remove each main rotor blade, and 

(2) Inspect each grip buffer pad on the 

inner surfaces of each grip tang for 

delamination (see Figure 1 of this AD). If 

there is any delamination, remove the buffer 

pad and inspect the grip surface for corrosion 

or other damage. 

Note 2: This inspection interval coincides 

with the main rotor tension-torsion strap 

replacement times. 

(e) Within 2,400 hours TIS or at the next 

overhaul of the main rotor hub, whichever 

occurs first, and then at intervals not to 

exceed 2,400 hours TIS: 

(1) Remove each main rotor blade. 

(2) Remove each grip buffer pad (if 

installed) from the inner surfaces of each grip 

tang. 

(3) Visually inspect the grip surfaces for 

corrosion or other damage. 

(4) Fluorescent-penetrant inspect (FPI) the 

grip for a crack, paying particular attention 

to the upper and lower grip tangs. When 

inspecting a grip, P/N 204–011–121–005, 

–009, or –113, or ASI–4011–121–9, pay 

particular attention to the leading and 

trailing edges of the grip barrel. 

Note 3: FPI procedures are contained in 

BHTI Standard Practices Manual, BHT–ALL– 

SPM. 

(f) Before further flight: 

(1) Replace any cracked grip with an 

airworthy grip. 

(2) Replace any grip with any corrosion or 

other damage with an airworthy grip, or 

repair the grip if the corrosion or other 

damage is within the maximum repair 

limitations found in the applicable 

Component and Repair Overhaul Manual. 

Note 4: BHTI ASB 212–94–92, Revision A, 

dated March 13, 1995, and BHTI Operations 

Safety Notice (OSN) 204–85–6, OSN 205–85– 

9, and OSN 212–85–13, all dated November 

14, 1985, also pertain to the subject of this 

AD. 

(3) Remove any grip, P/N 204–011–121– 

009 or ASI–4011–121–9, that has been in 

service for 15,000 or more hours TIS. 

(4) Remove any grip, P/N 204–011–121– 

121, that has been in service for 25,000 or 

more hours TIS. 

(g) Revise the Airworthiness Limitations 

section of the applicable maintenance 

manual or the Instructions for Continued 

Airworthiness (ICA) by establishing a new 

retirement life of 15,000 hours TIS for grip, 

P/N 204–011–121–009 or ASI–4011–121–9, 

and 25,000 hours TIS for grip, P/N 204–011– 

121–121, by marking pen and ink changes or 

inserting a copy of this AD into the 

maintenance manual or ICA. 

(h) Record a 15,000 hour TIS life limit for 

each grip, P/N 204–011–121–009 or ASI– 

4011–121–9, and a 25,000 hour life limit for 

each grip, P/N 204–011–121–121, on the 

applicable component history card or 

equivalent record. 

(i) 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, Rotorcraft 

Certification Office, Attn: Michael Kohner, 

Aviation Safety Engineer, Rotorcraft 

Directorate, FAA, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort 

Worth, Texas 76137, telephone (817) 222– 

5170, fax (817) 222–5783, for information 

about previously approved alternative 

methods of compliance. 

(j) The Joint Aircraft System/Component 

(JASC) Code is 6220: Main Rotor Head. 

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on June 5, 

2010. 

Mark R. Schilling, 

Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–16511 Filed 7–7–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 91 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0667] 

Proposed Legal Interpretation 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) 

ACTION: Proposed interpretation. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is considering 

revising its broad prohibition on pro 

rata reimbursement for the cost of 

owning, operating and maintaining a 

company aircraft when used for routine 

personal travel by senior company 

officials and employees under certain 

conditions. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 9, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments 

identified by Docket Number FAA– 

2010–0667 using any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and follow 

the online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Mail: Send comments to Docket 

Operations, M–30; U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Room W12–140, West 

Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 

20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: Bring 

comments to Docket Operations in 

Room W12–140 of the West Building 

Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 

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

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

• Fax: Fax comments to Docket 

Operations at 202–493–2251. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rebecca B. MacPherson, Assistant Chief 

Counsel, Regulations Division, Office of 

the Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone: 202 267–3073. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) generally prohibits aircraft 

operators from seeking reimbursement 

for the costs associated with flights 

conducted under part 91 of Title 14 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). 

Certain exceptions to this general 

prohibition may be found in 14 CFR 

91.501. One of the exceptions, located 

in § 91.501(b)(5), provides for limited 

reimbursement for the ‘‘carriage of 

officials, employees, guests, and 

property of a company on an airplane 

operated by that company, or the parent 

or a subsidiary of the parent, when the 

carriage is within the scope of, and 

incidental to, the business of the 

company (other than transportation by 

air) and no charge, assessment or fee is 

made for the carriage in excess of the 

cost of owning, operating, and 

maintaining the airplane, * * *. ’’ 

In 1993, the FAA’s Office of the Chief 

Counsel issued a legal interpretation of 

this provision that addressed officials 

and employees of a company using the 

company aircraft for personal travel. 

Interpretation 1993–17, August 2, 1993. 

This letter is commonly referred to as 

the ‘‘Schwab Interpretation.’’ In the 

Schwab Interpretation, the FAA noted 

that the personal travel was not within 

the scope of the company’s business and 

so did not meet the two-part test set 

forth in § 91.501(b)(5), i.e., that it be 

within the scope of and incidental to the 

company’s business. 

On March 1, 2010, the National 

Business Aviation Association (NBAA) 

requested the FAA consider revising the 

long-standing Schwab Interpretation to 

address highly placed officers and 

employees of a company who could be 

recalled at any moment, or whose travel 

plans could be altered immediately 

prior to the individual going on 

personal travel. The FAA is considering 

narrowing the broad prohibition 

provided in the Schwab Interpretation; 

the agency is publishing this notice to 

seek comment on its revised 

interpretation. 

In the Schwab Interpretation, the FAA 

rejected the argument that a need to 

communicate with a senior company 

official justified an assertion that the 

personal travel was within the 

company’s business. Instead, the FAA 

noted that ‘‘[i]t may very well be that the 

Company wants to maintain prompt 

communications with Mr. Schwab when 

he is on pleasure trips. That desire, 

however, does not alter the fact that he 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS