### 53024 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules

be generated at the higher assessment
rate for the committee to meet its anticipated expenses.

The major expenditures recommended by the committee for the 2015–16 crop year include: Salaries and employee-related costs of $1,402,906; administration costs of $610,000; compliance activities of $30,000; research of $129,000; operation and maintenance of generic marketing programs of $3,520,178; and a contingency of $355,503.

In comparison, last year’s approved budgeted expenditures included: Salaries and employee-related costs of $1,337,100; administration costs of $493,500; compliance activities of $30,000; research of $85,000; operation and maintenance of generic marketing programs of $3,296,800; and a contingency of $100,000. The total budget approved for the 2014–15 crop year was $5,175,540.

The committee believes that more funds should be spent in promoting raisins internationally, including China. For that reason, expenses for research and promotion activities have been increased: Operation and maintenance of generic marketing programs increased from $3,296,800 for the 2014–15 crop year to $3,520,178 for the 2015–16 crop year, and research has increased from $85,000 for the 2014–15 crop year to $129,000 for the 2015–16 crop year. In order to fund these additional proposed expenditures, the committee
recommended an increased assessment

rate.

Pursuant to § 989.81(a) of the order, any unexpended assessment funds from the crop year must be credited or
refunded to the handlers from whom
collected.

Prior to arriving at this budget and assessment rate, the committee
considered information from various sources, such as the committee’s Audit and Marketing Subcommittees. Alternative spending levels were discussed by the Marketing and Audit Subcommittees, which met on June 8, 2015 and June 11, 2015, to review the committee’s financial operations.

The committee ultimately decided that the recommended budget and
assessment rate were reasonable and necessary to properly administer the
order.

A review of statistical data on the California raisin industry indicates that assessment revenue has consistently been less than one percent of grower revenue in recent years. With a $17.00

assessment rate, assessment revenue would be expected to remain at less than one percent of grower revenue. Regarding the impact of this action on affected entities, this action would increase the assessment obligation imposed on handlers. While increased assessments impose additional costs on handlers regulated under the order, the rates are uniform on all handlers, and proportional to the size of their businesses. It is expected that these costs would be offset by the benefits derived from the operation of the order.

In addition, the meetings of the Audit and Marketing Subcommittees, and the full committee were widely publicized throughout the California raisin industry, and all interested persons were invited to attend the meetings and encouraged to participate in committee
deliberations on all issues. Like all subcommittee and committee meetings, the June 8, 2015 and June 11, 2015, meetings were public meetings, and all entities, both large and small, were able to express views on this issue. Finally, interested persons are invited to submit comments on this proposed rule, including the regulatory and informational impacts of this action on
small businesses.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), the order’s information collection requirements have been previously approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and assigned OMB No. 0581–0178, ‘‘Vegetable and Specialty Crops.’’ No changes in those requirements as a result of this action are necessary. Should any changes become necessary, they would be submitted to OMB for approval.

This proposed rule would impose no additional reporting or recordkeeping requirements on either small or large
California raisin handlers. As with all Federal marketing order programs, reports and forms are periodically
reviewed to reduce information requirements and duplication by industry and public sector agencies.

AMS is committed to complying with the E-Government Act, to promote the
use of the internet and other information technologies to provide increased opportunities for citizen
access to Government information and services, and for other purposes.

USDA has not identified any relevant Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with this action.

A small business guide on complying with fruit, vegetable, and specialty crop marketing agreements and orders may
be viewed at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/ MarketingOrdersSmallBusinessGuide. Any questions about the compliance guide should be sent to Jeffrey Smutny at the previously mentioned address in the **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT**
section.

A 30-day comment period is provided to allow interested persons to respond to this proposed rule. Thirty days is deemed appropriate because: (1) The 2015–16 crop year begins on August 1, 2015, and the order requires the rate of assessment for each crop year to apply to all assessable raisins handled during the crop year; (2) the committee needs to have sufficient funds to pay its expenses, which are incurred on a continuous basis; and (3) handlers are aware of this action, which was unanimously recommended by the committee at a public meeting.

List of subjects in 7 CFR Part 989

Grapes, Marketing agreements, Raisins, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 7 CFR part 989 is proposed to
be amended as follows:

**PART 989—RAISINS PRODUCED**
**FROM GRAPES GROWN IN**
**CALIFORNIA**

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR part 989 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.

■ 2. Section 989.347 is revised to read
as follows:

**§ 989.347 Assessment rate.**

On and after August 1, 2015, an assessment rate of $17.00 per ton is
established for assessable raisins produced from grapes grown in
California.

Dated: August 28, 2015.

Rex A. Barnes, Associate Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.

[FR Doc. 2015–21850 Filed 9–1–15; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2015–3657; Directorate Identifier 2012–SW–069–AD]** 

**RIN 2120–AA64**

**Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters (Previously Eurocopter**  **France (Eurocopter) Helicopters)**

**AGENCY :**  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

**ACTION :**  Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).


### 53025 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules

**SUMMARY :**  We propose to supersede airworthiness directive (AD) 2007–25– 08 for Eurocopter Model SA–365 N1, AS–365N2, AS 365 N3, SA–366G1, EC 155B, and EC155B1 helicopters. AD 2007–25–08 currently requires checking the tail rotor gearbox (TGB) oil level, inspecting the magnetic plug for chips and either replacing the TGB or further inspecting for axial play in the tail rotor hub pitch change control spider (spider), and if axial play is found in the spider, replacing the pitch control rod assembly double bearing (bearing). Since we issued the AD 2007–25–08, we have received reports of new occurrences of loss of yaw control due to failure of the control rod bearing. This proposed AD would retain some of the requirements of AD 2007–25–08, revise the inspections for play in the double bearing to improve the detection of play, require replacing the TGB control shaft guide bushes, clarify the criteria concerning particle detection, and change the inspection for play in the double bearing after the guide bushes have been replaced. The proposed actions are intended to prevent damage to the bearing resulting in end play, loss of tail rotor pitch control, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

**DATES :**  We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 2, 2015.

**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 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 proposed AD, contact Airbus Helicopters, Inc., 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75052; telephone (972) 641–0000 or (800) 232–0323; fax (972) 641–3775; or at http:// www.airbushelicopters.com/techpub. You may review service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Room 6N–321, Fort Worth, Texas

76177.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Matt Wilbanks, Aviation Safety Engineer, Rotorcraft Certification Office, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Fort Worth, Texas 76177; telephone (817) 222–5110; email matt.wilbanks@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

On November 27, 2007, we issued AD 2007–25–08, Amendment 39–15290 (72 FR 69604, December 10, 2007) for Eurocopter (now Airbus Helicopters) Model SA–365 N1, AS–365 N2, AS 365 N3, SA–366G1, EC 155B, and EC155B1 helicopters. AD 2007–25–08 requires repetitively checking the TGB oil level
to ensure it is at the maximum level. AD 2007–25–08 also requires repetitively inspecting the magnetic plug for chips, and depending on the quantity of chips found, either replacing the TGB or further inspecting for axial play in the spider. If axial play is found in the spider, AD 2007–25–08 requires replacing the bearing. AD 2007–25–08 was prompted by EASA Emergency AD No. 2006–0258R1–E, dated August 29, 2006, as well as the finding that metal chips were not detected on the magnetic plug due to insufficient oil flow because the oil in the TGB was being maintained
at the minimum level. The actions of
AD 2007–25–08 are intended to detect metal chips on the magnetic plug and to prevent damage to the bearing resulting in end play, loss of tail rotor pitch control, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

Actions Since AD 2007–25–08 Was
Issued

Since we issued AD 2007–25–08 (72 FR 69604, December 10, 2007), we have received reports of new occurrences of loss of yaw control due to failure of the control rod bearing.

EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has since superseded EASA Emergency AD No. 2006–0258R1–E with several ADs, the most recent being EASA AD No. 2012–0170R2, dated June 20, 2014, to correct an unsafe condition for these Airbus Model helicopters. After receiving reports of several new occurrences of damage to the bearings and subsequent investigations of the incidents, EASA advises of implementing additional, revised inspection and corrective actions; reducing the interval between inspections; a modification replacing both guide bushes and improving the
tolerance between the control shaft and
the TGB wheel to limit the friction loads on the control bearing; and requiring the play measurement of the TGB to control rod, shaft assembly double bearing to be measured according to the type of
fenestron installed. EASA AD 2012– 0170R2 also excludes helicopters
modified in accordance with modification (MOD) 07 65B63.

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 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 the same type design.


### 53026 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules

Related Service Information Under 1

CFR Part 51

We reviewed ASB No. AS365– 05.00.61, Revision 4, dated April 8, 2014, for FAA-certificated Model SA 365 N1, AS 365 N2, and AS 365 N3helicopters and for non-FAAcertificated Model AS355F, F1, and F2 helicopters; ASB No. SA366–05.41, Revision 4, dated April 8, 2014, for
FAA-certificated Model SA–366G1 and
non-FAA-certificated Model SA–366GA helicopters; and ASB No. EC155– 05A022, Revision 4, dated April 8, 2014,
for FAA-certificated Model EC 155B and EC155B1 helicopters. All three ASBs describe procedures for monitoring the behavior of the bearing by checking its axial play by dimensional measurement and by maintaining the operating oil at
the maximum level. EASA classified this service information as mandatory
and issued EASA AD No. 2012–0170R2
to ensure the continued airworthiness of these helicopters. This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified
in the **ADDRESSES** section of this NPRM.

Proposed AD Requirements

This proposed AD would require:

• Checking the TGB oil level at specified intervals. An owner/operator (pilot) may perform this visual check and must enter compliance into the helicopter maintenance records in accordance with 14 CFR §§ 43.9(a)(1) through (4) and 91.417(a)(2)(v). A pilot may perform this check because it involves only a visual check for the oil level in the TGB and can be performed equally well by a pilot or a mechanic. This check is an exception to our standard maintenance regulations.

• Inspecting the magnetic plug of the TGB for chips at specified intervals.

• Within 300 hours time-in-service(TIS), replacing each affected partnumbered TGB guide bush with an airworthy guide bush, inspecting the bearing of the TGB control shaft and rod assembly for M50 type particles, and performing measurements of play in the TGB control shaft and rod assembly.

• Within 110 hours TIS after replacing the guide bush, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 55 hours TIS, performing certain measurements for play in the TGB control shaft and rod assembly.

This proposed AD would not apply to helicopters with TGB part number
365A33–6005–09 installed. Airbus Helicopters refers to the installation of this part-numbered TGB as MOD 07

65B63. Differences Between the Proposed AD
and the EASA AD

The calendar times in the EASA AD have already passed and are not included in this proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 133 helicopters of U.S. Registry. We estimate that operators may incur the following costs in order to comply with this AD. The estimated labor cost is $85 per work-hour. We
estimate .5 work-hour to check the TGB oil level for a cost of $43 per helicopter and $5,719 for the fleet each inspection cycle. We estimate .5 work-hour to inspect the magnetic plug on the TGB for chips for a cost of $43 per helicopter and $5,719 for the fleet each inspection cycle. We estimate 3 work-hours to measure the play in the TGB control shaft and rod assembly for a cost of $255 per helicopter and $33,915 for the fleet each inspection cycle. Replacing the TGB control shaft guide bushes would take 4 work-hours and required parts would cost $565, for an estimated total of $905 per helicopter and $120,365 for the U.S. operator fleet. Inspecting the TGB control shaft and rod assembly for steel particles would take 6 work-hours for a cost per helicopter of $510 and a fleet cost of $67,830. If necessary, it would cost about $30,000 per helicopter to replace the TGB and $24,000 for overhaul of the TGB to replace the bearing.

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 removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2007–25–08, Amendment 39–15290 (72 FR 69604, December 10, 2007), and adding the following new AD:

Airbus Helicopters (Previously Eurocopter France Helicopters): Docket No. FAA– 2015–3657; Directorate Identifier 2012–

SW–069–AD.

(a) Applicability

This AD applies to Model SA–365N1, AS– 365N2, AS 365 N3, SA–366G1, EC 155B, and EC155B1 helicopters, with a tail rotor gearbox (TGB) pitch control rod assembly double bearing (bearing) installed, certificated in any category, except helicopters with TGB part number (P/N)
365A33–6005–09 installed.

(b) Unsafe Condition

This AD defines the unsafe condition as damage to the bearing, which could result in end play, loss of tail rotor pitch control, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.


### 53027 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules

(c) Affected ADs

This AD supersedes AD 2007–25–08, Amendment 39–15290 (72 FR 69604, December 10, 2007).

(d) Comments Due Date

We must receive comments by November

2, 2015.

(e) 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.

(f) Required Actions

(1) Check the TGB oil level at the following
intervals:

(i) For Model SA–365N1, AS–365N2, AS 365 N3 helicopters, at intervals not to exceed 10 hours time-in-service (TIS).

(ii) For Model SA366G1 helicopters, at each daily flight check.

(iii) For Model EC 155B and EC155B1 helicopters, at intervals not to exceed 15 hours TIS or 7 days, whichever occurs first.

(iv) The actions required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD may be performed by the owner/operator (pilot) holding at least a private pilot certificate and must be entered into the aircraft records showing compliance
with this AD in accordance with 14 CFR §§ 43.9(a)(1) through (4) and 14 CFR 91.417(a)(2)(v). The record must be maintained as required by 14 CFR §§ 91.417,

121.380, or 135.439.

(2) If the oil level is not at maximum, before further flight, a qualified mechanic
must fill it to the maximum level.

(3) Inspect the magnetic plug of the TGB for any chips as follows:

(i) At intervals not to exceed 25 hours TIS for helicopters with a magnetic plug without a chip electrical indication in the cockpit, or

(ii) At intervals not to exceed 100 hours TIS and after any illumination of the TGB ‘‘CHIP’’ warning light for helicopters with a chip electrical indication in the cockpit.

(4) If you find any chips during the inspection in paragraph (f)(3) of this AD, determine whether the quantity of chips is
within the removal criteria.

(i) If the quantity of chips on the magnetic plug is at or above the removal criteria, before further flight, replace the TGB with an airworthy TGB.

(ii) If the quantity of chips on the magnetic plug is below the removal criteria, comply with paragraph (f)(6) of this AD before further flight.

(5) Within 300 hours TIS, without removing the TGB:

(i) Replace each TGB control shaft guide bush (guide bush), P/N 365A33–6189–20 and 365A33–6189–21, with guide bush, P/N 365A33–6223–20, and replace each guide bush, P/N 365A33–6188–20, with guide bush, P/N 365A33–6222–20.

Note 1 to paragraph (f)(5)(i) of this AD: Airbus Helicopters refers to the replacement of the guide bushes as Modification 0765B58.

(ii) Inspect the bearing of the TGB control shaft and rod assembly for M50 type particles (particles) as shown in Figures 1 through 3 of Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. AS365–05.00.61, Revision 4, dated April 8, 2014, for Model SA 365 N1, AS 365 N2, and AS 365 N3 helicopters (AS365– 05.00.61); ASB No. SA366–05.41, Revision 4, dated April 8, 2014, for Model SA 366G1 helicopters (SA366–05.41); or ASB No. EC155–05A022, Revision 4, dated April 8, 2014, for Model EC 155B and EC155B1 helicopters (EC155–05A022). Inspect the bearing by separating the control shaft (item q of Figure 3) from the control rod (item p of Figure 3), rinse the bearing with white spirit or equivalent, collect the product on a blotting paper, and inspect for particles inside the control shaft, around the bearing, and on blotting paper.

(A) If there are no particles, clean the
control shaft and control rod with white spirit or equivalent and install the control
shaft and control rod.

(B) If there are any particles, replace the bearing with an airworthy bearing.

(iii) Perform measurements of play in the TGB control shaft and rod assembly bearing
as follows:

(A) For the TGB side: (1) Remove the cover and inspect the positioning of the locking of the 3 screws, as shown in the two positioning for measurement photographs in the Accomplishment Instructions under paragraph 3.B.4.a.(1) of ASB AS365– 05.00.61, SA336–05.41, or EC155–05A022. Correctly lock the screws if the positioning
is inconvenient for measurement. Set the pedal unit to the neutral position and rig the tail servo-control using a 6 mm diameter pin. Remove any primer and paint from the support casing face of the servo-control using 600 grit sand paper. Apply DOW 19 or equivalent protection and a coat of primer P05 or equivalent. Do not reapply primer andpaint to the support casing face of the servocontrol.

(2) Perform a measurement ‘‘M1’’ using a caliper gage, between the end of the control rod (item p in the three photographs in the Accomplishment Instructions under paragraph 3.B.4.a.(1) of ASB AS365– 05.00.61, SA336–05.41, or EC155–05A022) and the seating face of the servo-control on the casing. Mark the position of the calipergage on the support casing face of the servocontrol as ‘‘R1’’ using a permanent felt tip pen. Position the caliper gage on R1 (shown in the first of the three photographs in the Accomplishment Instructions under paragraph 3.B.4.a.(1) of ASB AS365– 05.00.61, SA336–05.41, or EC155–05A022) and on the screw (item ac in the first of the three photographs in the Accomplishment Instructions under paragraph 3.B.4.a.(1) of ASB AS365–05.00.61, SA336–05.41, or EC155–05A022) of the universal joint of the servo-control. Set the mobile part of the caliper gage against the end of the control rod. Shift the caliper gage against the control lever (item ab in the last photograph in the Accomplishment Instructions under paragraph 3.B.4.a.(1) of ASB AS365– 05.00.61, SA336–05.41, or EC155–05A022) while remaining in contact with the end of
the control rod.

(3) Record measurement M1 indicated on the caliper gage on the component history card or equivalent record.

(B) For the TRH side: (1) Perform a measurement ‘‘M2’’ using a caliper gage between the flat face of the center plate (item c in the photograph in the Accomplishment Instructions under paragraph 3.B.4.a.(2) of ASB AS365– 05.00.61, SA336–05.41, or EC155–05A022) and the face of the inner web (item ad in the photograph in the Accomplishment Instructions under paragraph 3.B.4.a.(2) of
ASB AS365–05.00.61, SA336–05.41, or EC155–05A022) of the rotor hub on which the inner bearings of the TRH blades are installed. Position the caliper gage flat across the opening (item ae in the photograph in the Accomplishment Instructions under paragraph 3.B.4.a.(2) of ASB AS365– 05.00.61, SA336–05.41, or EC155–05A022) of the pitch change spider. Mark the position of the caliper gage on the flat surface of the center plate as ‘‘R2’’ and on the opening as ‘‘R3’’ using a permanent felt tip pen.

(2) Record measurement M2 indicated on the caliper gage.

(3) Calculate a measurement ‘‘M0’’ by adding measurements M1 (required in paragraph (f)(5)(iii)(A) of this AD) and M2.

(4) Perform measurements M1 and M2 again by repeating the requirements in paragraphs (f)(5)(iii)(A) and (f)(5)(iii)(B) of
this AD and calculate a second measurement

M0.

(5) Calculate the difference between the
two M0 measurements. If the difference is not less than 0.25 mm (0.01 inch), calculate the two M0 measurements again.

(6) Calculate the mean value of the two M0
measurements and record it on the component history card or equivalent record.
This M0 measurement will be the reference measurement enabling you to evaluate any increase in the play in the bearing of the control shaft and rod assembly during later inspections.

(6) Within 110 hours TIS after replacing the guide bush, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 55 hours TIS, perform measurements for play in the TGB control shaft and rod assembly as follows.

(i) On the TGB side: (A) Remove the TGB fairing, set the pedal unit to the neutral position and rig the tail servo-control using a 6 mm diameter pin.

(B) Perform measurement ‘‘M1’’ using a caliper gage between the end of the control rod (item p in the three photographs in the Accomplishment Instructions under paragraph 3.B.4.b (1) of ASB AS365– 05.00.61, SA336–05.41, or EC155–05A022) and the seating face of the servo-control on the casing. Position the caliper gage on mark R1 and the bearing against the screw (item ac as shown in the first of the three photographs in the Accomplishment Instructions under paragraph 3.B.4.b.(1) of ASB AS365– 05.00.61, SA336–05.41, or EC155–05A022) of the universal joint of the servo-control. Set the mobile part of the caliper gage against the end of the control rod. Shift the caliper gage against the control lever (item ab as shown in the last of the three photographs in the Accomplishment Instructions under paragraph 3.B.4.b.(1) of ASB AS365– 05.00.61, SA336–05.41, or EC155–05A022) while remaining in contact with the end of
the control rod.


### 53028 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules

(C) Record measurement M1 indicated on the caliper gage on the component history card or equivalent record.

(ii) On the tail rotor hub (TRH) side: (A) Remove the fairing and perform a measurement ‘‘M2’’ using a caliper gage between the flat face of the center plate (item c in the photograph in the Accomplishment Instructions under paragraph 3.B.4.b.(2) of ASB AS365–05.00.61, SA336–05.41, or EC155–05A022) and the face of the inner web (item ad in the photograph in the Accomplishment Instructions under paragraph 3.B.4.b.(2) of ASB AS365– 05.00.61, SA336–05.41, or EC155–05A022) of the rotor hub on which the inner bearings of
the TRH blades are installed. Position the caliper gage flat across the opening of the pitch change spider on R2 and R3 as shown in the right photograph in the Accomplishment Instructions under paragraph 3.B.4.b.(2) of ASB AS365– 05.00.61, SA336–05.41, or EC155–05A022.

(B) Record measurement M2 indicated on the caliper gage on the component history card or equivalent record.

(C) Calculate a measurement ‘‘M3’’ by adding measurements M1 and M2.

(D) Calculate the difference between
measurement ‘‘M0’’ indicated on the TGB component history card or equivalent record
and M3.

(1) If the difference between measurement M0 and M3 is less than 0.5 mm (0.02 inch), perform an additional inspection for play in the bearing of the TGB control shaft and rod assembly by following the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraph 3.B.6., of ASB AS365–05.00.61, SA366–05.41, or EC155– 05A022. If there is no axial play at the TRH pitch change spider, record value M3 on the component history card or equivalent record. If there is axial play at the TRH pitch change spider, replace the bearing with an airworthy bearing and perform a new reference measurement by following the requirements of paragraph (f)(6) of this AD.

(2) If the difference between the measurements is equal to or greater than 0.5 mm (0.02 inch), replace the bearing with an airworthy bearing and perform a new reference measurement by following the requirements of paragraph (f)(6) 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: Matt Wilbanks, Aviation Safety Engineer, Rotorcraft Certification Office, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Fort Worth, Texas 76177; telephone (817) 222–5110;
email 9-ASW-FTW-AMOC-Requests@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 European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD No. 2012–0170R2, dated June 20, 2014. You may view the EASA AD on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov in Docket No.

FAA–2015–3657.

(i) Subject

Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC)
Code: 6520 Tail Rotor Gearbox.

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on August 21,

2015.

Lance T. Gant, Acting Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 2015–21689 Filed 9–1–15; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 39**

**[Docket No. FAA–2015–3659; Directorate Identifier 2014–SW–050–AD]** 

**RIN 2120–AA64**

**Airworthiness Directives; MD Helicopters Inc., Helicopters** 

**AGENCY :**  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

**ACTION :**  Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

**SUMMARY :**  We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for MD Helicopters Inc. (MDHI) Model 369A,
369D, 369E, 369FF, 369HE, 369HM, 369HS, 500N, and 600N helicopters with a certain part-numbered main rotor blade attach pin (pin) installed. This proposed AD would require ensuring the life limit of the pin as listed in the
Airworthiness Limitations section of
aircraft maintenance records and
Instructions for ContinuedAirworthiness (ICA). If the hours timein-service (TIS) of a pin is unknown, or if a pin has exceeded its life limit, this proposed AD would require removing the affected pin from service. This proposed AD is prompted by a report from an operator who purchased pins
that did not have life limit documentation. The proposed actions
are intended to document the life limit to prevent a pin remaining in service beyond its fatigue life, which could result in failure of a pin, failure of a main rotor blade, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

**DATES :**  We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 2, 2015.

**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 Aerometals, 3920 Sandstone Dr., El Dorado Hills, CA 95762, telephone (916) 939–6888, fax (916) 939–6555, www.aerometals.aero

. You may review the referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Room 6N–321, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Galib Abumeri, Aviation Safety Engineer, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, California 90712; telephone (562) 627–5324; email Galib.Abumeri@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