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). 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules 53025 

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. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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 N3 

helicopters 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. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules 53027 

(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 and 

paint 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 caliper 

gage 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. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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 Continued 

Airworthiness (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 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS