### Docket No: LEAVE BLANK **Directorate ID: AD PROPOSAL WORKSHEET**  **This AD Worksheet contains som e questions that are applicable to**  **proposed ADs**  **that are related to ADs**  **issued by foreign airworthiness authorities.**  **Those questions are noted with a**  **. For ADs concerning**  **dom estic (U.S.**  **- ma**  **nufactured) products, you are not required to answer those questions. PROPOSED ACTION:**  **[Place an X on the appropriate line.]**



### Emergency AD **Is this action one of the following** ? 

### Final Rule; Request for Comments AD Supersedure (Docket No. ) X 

### Notice of Proposed Rulemaking AD Revision (Docket No. ) 

### Other Supplemental NPRM (Docket No. )
**1. Applicability (Make/Model/Com ponent/Part or Serial Num**  **ber).** Click here to do a search for the correct make/model designation. **All EC135 Models on TCDS ,**  **Specifically: EC135 P1, EC135 T1, EC135 P2, EC135 T2, EC135 P2+, EC135 T2+**  **2. Responsible Engineer:**  Name/Branch (Office)/Title: Joseph R. Holton, Jr., ASW
- 112, Aviation Safety Engineer Telephone: 817
- 222
- 4964 Fax: 817
- 222
- 5961 **3. Directorate Project Officer:** Name/Title/Branch: Chinh Vuong , Aviation Safety Engineer, ASW
- 112 **4 . What is**  **the unsafe condition AND its cause? (**  **What is the end -**  **level effect on the helicopter if the unsafe**  **condition is not detected/corrected? )**  The control of the tail rotor system is impaired by the binding of a bearing in the linear transducer linkage plate and the abrasion of the under side of the helicopter floor by a screw in the linear transducer linkage rod. **5 . What prom**  **pted this AD; i.e., an accident, incident, analysis, report?** EUROCOPTER DEUTSCHLAND GmbH (ECD) wa s informed of an incident in which an i mp aired controllability of the tail rotor w as detected. Examinations have shown that the bearing of the linear transducer was subject to binding and the control range was limited
.2

**6 . If this action relates to a non**  **- U.S. product (foreign m**  **anufacturer), h as the foreign airworthiness authority**  **issued an AD concerning the sam e unsafe condition? If not, explain**  **why we are issuing a unilateral AD .**  **If yes, provide the following inform ation and attach a copy of the foreign airworthiness authority’s AD:**  **Foreign Authority:**  **EASA AD Num**  **ber: 2006**  **- 0318 R1**  **Date of issuance: 27 October 2006**  **, Revision 1 7**  **. What are the differences between the m anufacturer's service inform**  **ation, other ADs (foreign or U.S.), and the requirem**  **ents of this AD? State all the differences between our AD and other ADs or service**  **inform ation and the reasons for each difference, such as why we are requiring a different com**  **pliance tim**  **e, or state that we do not require returning the part to the m anufacturers for repair.**  This AD differs from th e MCAI and/or service information as follows: (1) EASA AD 200 6
- 0 318 R1, Revision 1, dated 27 October 2006, specifies that the initial inspection of the affected bearing take place no later than October 31, 2006 (Compliance Paragraph (1)). This AD requires that th is inspection take place within 45 days from the effective date of this AD. (2) EASA AD 2006
- 0318 R1, Revision 1, dated 27 October 2006, Compliance Paragraph (5) , states that certain modifications will be made to parts held as spares. This AD will not inclu de instructions to modify or inspect spare parts. (3) EASA AD 2006
- 0318 R1, Revision 1, dated 27 October 2006, Compliance Paragraph (2) specifies that certain repairs be made according to ECD Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) EC135
- 67A
- 12, dated 2006
- 09
- 01, Revisio n 01. In describing these repairs the ASB in Paragraph 3.D says to “contact ECD customer support” if a certain damage area is exceeded. This AD will instead say to repair the component with an airworthy unit if the damage limit is exceeded.

**8 . What are y**  **our proposed corrective actions? Com plete the following table**  **. SERVICE**  **INFORMA**

**TION REFERENCE**  **D (A**  **ttach a clean original.)**  **WHA T A** **CTION IS REQUIRED?**  **(List specific**  **action or A SB**  **paragraph .)**  **WHA T IS THE**  **INITIA L**  **COMPLIA NCE**  **TIME FOR THE AC**  **TION? I**  **F AC**  **TION IS** 

**REPEA TED?**  **At WHA**  **T INTERVA**  **L? IS THIS A** **CTION**

**TERMINA**

**TING AC**  **TION? IF SO, FOR WHA** 

**T?** Yes

– See ECD ASB EC135
- 67A
- 0 12, dated 2006
- 10
- 18 , Revision 01. See the O: \

AD and Docket Information

\2010
- SW
- 07
- AD folder for the ASB. Initial inspection 45 days after effe ctive date of AD. Replacement of bearing, repair of floor, one - time mo dification of rod. 45 days. Inspection of bearing at 800 inspection cycle time (i.e. coincides with a 800 periodical inspection in the ECD MSM) No. Inspections

continue at 800 hour intervals and parts are replaced/repaired as described in the ASB.3

**9. I**  **f this AD is considered interim action, is the m**  **anufacturer developing term inating action? What is the**  **source of your inform ation?**  **Provide any details such as description of the te**  **rm inating action,**  **ma nufacturer’s**  **projected release date, etc.**  This is not an interim action. The AD and ASB have not been revised in over 3 years. There is no terminating action. There is an initial inspection and then a periodical 800 hour inspection th at coincides with the ECD MSM. **10 .**  **If there is a reporting requirem**  **ent in this AD, what office should receive the response? (Norm**  **ally, this will be the sam**  **e as the office subm itting this AD Worksheet.)**  **Provide nam e and contact inform**  **ation (address, tele**  **phone, fax) of the FAA em ployee responsible for receiving the reports.**  There is no reporting requirement, but questions are to be directed to: Name/Branch (Office)/Title: Joseph R. Holton, Jr., ASW
- 112, Aviation Safety Engineer Telephone: 817
- 222
- 4 964 Fax: 817
- 222
- 5961 **11 . If this action is related to an NTSB safety recom**  **me ndation, attach a copy of that recom**  **me ndation and**  **the FAA response.** No NTSB safety recommendation is related to this AD. **12 . If replacem**  **ent parts are required, are they a vailable for all aircraft? Indicate your source for obtaining**  **this inform ation (nam**  **e, organization, phone num ber).**  Replacement kits and bearings are available from American Eurocopter located in Grand Prairie, Texas. I contacted Mr. Dave Vogel (phone 97 2
- 641
- 3573) at American Eurocopter on March 12, 2010 to gather this information. **15. Num ber of helicopters/products that will be affected?**  **(Use numerical figures .**  **)** Click here to do a search on the number of aircraft. All EC135 Models = 214 **16. For the econom ic analysis, answer the following questions. Be as specific as possible.**  **a. How m any hours will it take to perform** **each action? List each required action separately (for exam ple,**  **give total hours for an inspection, then total hours for a m odification, etc). Also**  **state how long it will take**  **to m ake changes to lim**  **itation sections, etc.** The w orst case is approximately 13 hours for the modification of the LVDT rod and floor and the replacement of the bearing. If the bearing does not require replacement, the modification of the LVDT rod and floor will take approximately 10 hours. Follow on 800 hour periodic inspections will take approximately 10 hours. **b. What is the total cost for each replacem**  **ent part required for this AD?** T he cost of the bearing is approximately $ 35 (USD) . The cost of the replacement kit (minus the bearing) is $15 (USD). Total cost, if replacing the bearing is required, is then approximately $50 (USD).4

**c. Has the m**  **anufacturer given any warranty considerations? If yes, where is that inform ation stated? Will**  **the warranty cover costs for parts, labor, or both? Provide**  **detailed, total costs, required in Questions 16a**  **and 16b, even if the m**  **anufacturer is off ering som**  **e type of warranty .**  There are no w arranty considerations. **d . What is the cost of term**  **inating action, if any? Include**  **the num ber of hours to accom**  **plish the AD requirem**  **ents; cost of parts; etc.).** The initial inspection and the follow
- on 800 hour periodic inspections will take approximately 10 hours. Worst case labor costs are approximately 13 hours if the LVDT rod and floor require modifications are needed and the bearing must be replaced. The worst case labor costs are then: 13 hours x $85/hour = $1 , 105 .00. The w orst case parts cost (i.e. if modification of the LVDT rod and floor is required and replacement of the bearing is indicated) is $50. After the initial inspection, follow
- on inspections will take place at regularly scheduled 800 flight hour intervals as called out in the ECD MSM. These 800 hour inspections would likely not take place more than once per year. The estimated yearly cost per helicopter would then be: $1 ,105.00 (labor) + $50 (parts) = $1 ,155.00 Fleet cost w ould then be: $1 ,155.00 x 214 helicopters = $2 47,170.00 This estimate is wo rst case as it assumes all 214 helicopters will require all modifications and repairs and it does not take into account that there will already be 800 hour periodic maintenance taking place in the area concurrently, i.e. the area will be opened up and being looked for other regularly occurring maintenance.
**e . Does this AD require a one**  **- tim**  **e inspection or repetitive inspections? If repetitive, how m**  **any inspections do you anticipate per year? (If**  **the inspections are based on hours TIS, assum e 200**  **hours per year for Part 91 operators and 600 hours per year for com**  **me rcial operators (133, 135, 137).**  **State how m any**  **inspections you assum e they will need to conduct per year, and provide any inform**  **ation that supports**  **your assum ption**  This AD calls for a one
- time inspection and then 800 hour follow
- on inspections that coincide with regularly scheduled maintenance in the ECD MSM. **f . What rationale or assum**  **ptions were used for determ ining the cost im**  **pact? For exam**  **ple, if you’re proposing a m**  **odification to a possible unairworthy part, how m any aircraft are you assum**  **ing will need the m**  **odification? How did you determ**  **ine the num ber of aircraft**  **that will require the m odification** 

**— what**  **inform ation or data did y**  **ou use to m ake the assum**  **ption?** Action Tim e to Accomplis h (Hours) Labor

Rate Parts

Cost Cost per

Aircraft Affected

fleet size Fleet Cost Inspect bearing for binding and rough running but only modify rod and floor. 10 $85.00 $15.00 (kit only) $ 865.00 21 4 * (assume 100% of fleet) $ 185,110 .00
Inspect bearing for binding or rough running. Modify the rod and floor if needed and replace bearing. 13 $85.00 $50.00 (kit and bearing) $1,155.00 214* (assume 100% of fleet) $2 47,170 .00

Follow
- on 800 hour inspection , assuming no modifications or replacements (worst case once per year) 10 $85.00 0 $850.00 214* (assume 100% of fleet) $ 181,900 .00

**(conservative**

**– can be**  **com bined**  **with 800 insp.)** 5

**17. Should a special flight perm it be perm**  **itted?**

Permitted

**___ X** 

**__** Permitted with limitations **(List the limitations.) One time flight permit permitted with only essential**  **flight crew on board**

**.**

**_____** Prohibited **18. If this is an Em ergency AD, in general, how is the product utilized?**  This is not an Emergency AD.

External Loads (Logging) Firefighting Other Offshore Support Agriculture Air Ambulance Airtaxi **19. Do you have reason to believe that this action would be considered " sensitive?” If**  **yes, explain below.** Maybe, the owner/operator was very wealthy and connected politically to the Republican Party. **20. Indicate Yes or No to the following questions: No**  **Are other Directorates involved in any sim ilar actions?**  No **Does this action affect the Presidential fleet? (**  **i.e. not S -**  **61)** Not likely **Does this action affect the FAA fleet?**  **( unless rented or leased)**  No **Have the proposed procedures been verified (i.e., by MIDO, AEG, FSDO)?** No t likely **Does this AD affect intrastate aviation in Alaska?** No **If so, are regulatory distinctions appropriate to accom mo**  **da te the extent to which** 

**Alaska is not served by transportation m odes other than aviation?**  **21. Check each category that describes the cause of the unsafe condition addressed by this AD:** X Design Problem X Maintenance Unapproved Parts /Gas Other X Qual ity Control Problem **22. If this is a QC problem , notify the MIDO. Indicate your point**  **- of**  **- contact, their phone num**  **ber, and date of conversation, or include a copy of**  **any em**  **ail me**  **ssage regarding this action. List the enforcem ent status**  **and EIR Num ber, i**  **f applicable.** I have coordinated this with Fort Worth AEG personnel. The ASB essentially make a design change to correct the issue. **23. JASC Code. State the Joint Aviation Safety Com**  **ponent code num**  **ber and subject. For exam**  **ple: “JASC Code: 7100: Powerplant System**  **.”** J ASC Code = 6720 Tail Rotor Control System6 

## Signature Section **Signature indicates concurrence with proposed action.**
J.R. Holton, Jr. March 15, 2010 Responsible Engineer Date ACO Manager ( not applicable if based on Date foreign, or MCAIAD) Chinh Vuong March 15, 2010 Project Officer ( EC135 ) Date March 15, 2010 AEG Representative (EC135) Date