Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 12 / Thursday, January 18, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 4651

send it to the Manager, International Branch,

ANM–116.

(2) Alternative methods of compliance,

approved previously in accordance with AD

94–04–05, amendment 39–8823, are

approved as alternative methods of

compliance with paragraph (a) of this AD.

Note 4: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the International Branch,

ANM–116.

(f) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197

and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a

location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Incorporation by Reference

(g) The actions shall be done in accordance

with Airbus All Operator Telex 29–09, dated

November 16, 1993; Airbus Service Bulletin

A300–29–0101, Revision 02, dated June 28,

2000; Airbus Service Bulletin A310–29–2039,

Revision 02, dated June 28, 2000; Airbus

Service Bulletin A300–29–6030, Revision 02,

dated June 28, 2000; Airbus Service Bulletin

A300–29–0106, Revision 03, dated June 28,

2000; Airbus Service Bulletin A310–29–2078,

Revision 03, dated June 28, 2000; and Airbus

Service Bulletin A300–29–6039, Revision 03,

dated June 28, 2000; as applicable.

(1) The incorporation by reference of

Airbus Service Bulletin A300–29–0101,

Revision 02, dated June 28, 2000; Airbus

Service Bulletin A310–29–2039, Revision 02,

dated June 28, 2000; Airbus Service Bulletin

A300–29–6030, Revision 02, dated June 28,

2000; Airbus Service Bulletin A300–29–0106,

Revision 03, dated June 28, 2000; Airbus

Service Bulletin A310–29–2078, Revision 03,

dated June 28, 2000; and Airbus Service

Bulletin A300–29–6039, Revision 03, dated

June 28, 2000; is approved by the Director of

the Federal Register in accordance with 5

U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

(2) The incorporation by reference of

Airbus All Operator Telex 29–09, dated

November 16, 1993, was approved previously

by the Director of the Federal Register as of

March 2, 1994 (59 FR 7208, February 15,

1994).

(3) Copies may be obtained from Airbus

Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte,

31707 Blagnac Cedex, France. Copies may be

inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the Office of the Federal

Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite

700, Washington, DC.

Note 5: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French airworthiness directive 2000–259–

315(B), dated June 28, 2000.

Effective Date

(h) This amendment becomes effective on

February 22, 2001.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January

8, 2001.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–1076 Filed 1–17–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 98–NM–325–AD; Amendment

39–12075; AD 2001–01–05]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Dassault

Model Falcon 10 and Model MystereFalcon 50 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain Dassault Model

Falcon 10 and Model Mystere-Falcon 50

series airplanes. For certain airplanes,

this amendment requires modification

of the aircraft wiring to illuminate the

‘‘T/O CONFIG’’ red warning light on the

cockpit warning panel. For certain other

airplanes, this amendment requires

installation of a ‘‘NO TAKEOFF’’ red

light on each pilot’s instrument panel;

modification of the associated aircraft

wiring to activate the lights whenever

the aircraft is not in the proper

configuration for takeoff; and a revision

to the Airplane Flight Manual to check

that the ‘‘NO TAKEOFF’’ lights are out

prior to takeoff. This amendment is

prompted by issuance of mandatory

continuing airworthiness information by

a foreign civil airworthiness authority.

The actions specified by this AD are

intended to prevent takeoff with the

parking brake engaged, which could

result in an extended takeoff roll or a

rejected takeoff, and consequent runway

overrun.

DATES: Effective February 22, 2001.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of February

22, 2001.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Dassault Falcon Jet, P.O. Box 2000,

South Hackensack, New Jersey 07606.

This information may be examined at

the Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate,

Rules Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,

Renton, Washington; or at the Office of

the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Norman B. Martenson, Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2110;

fax (425) 227–1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to

include an airworthiness directive (AD)

that is applicable to certain Dassault

Model Falcon 10 and Model MystereFalcon 50 series airplanes was

published in the Federal Register on

July 22, 1999 (64 FR 39448). For certain

airplanes, that action proposed to

require modification of the aircraft

wiring to illuminate the ‘‘T/O CONFIG’’

red warning light on the cockpit

warning panel. For certain other

airplanes, that action proposed to

require installation of a ‘‘NO

TAKEOFF’’ red light on each pilot’s

instrument panel; modification of the

associated aircraft wiring to activate the

lights whenever the aircraft is not in the

proper configuration for takeoff; and a

revision to the Airplane Flight Manual

(AFM) to check that the ‘‘NO

TAKEOFF’’ lights are out prior to

takeoff.

Comments

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. Due

consideration has been given to the

comments received.

Request for Credit for Previously

Accomplished Work

One commenter, the manufacturer,

requests that a statement be added to the

proposed AD that would credit

operators for the prior accomplishment

of the original versions of the service

bulletins. (The proposed AD specified

that the modification be accomplished

in accordance with Revision 1 of the

corresponding service bulletins.)

The FAA concurs. Notes 2 and 4 have

been added to the final rule to credit

operators for the prior accomplishment

of the modification in accordance with

the original versions of the applicable

service bulletins.

Request to Revise Cost Estimate

One commenter, the manufacturer,

requests that the cost impact section of

the proposed AD be revised to reflect

certain information in its records: There

are 144 U.S.-registered Model Falcon 10

series airplanes, of which 110 have

already been modified; and 159 U.S.-

registered Model Mystere-Falcon 50

series airplanes, of which 90 have

already been modified. In addition, the

commenter reports that the parts cost for

Model Mystere-Falcon 50 series

airplanes is $226.

The FAA acknowledges the revised

information, and has revised the cost

4652 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 12 / Thursday, January 18, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

impact section of the final rule

accordingly.

Request to Revise Applicability: AD

Unnecessary for Falcon 50

One commenter, a pilot of Model

Falcon 50 series airplanes, considers

this AD to be unreasonable for those

airplanes. The commenter cites a lack of

incidents or accidents involving Model

Falcon 50 series airplanes resulting from

the parking brake being applied during

takeoff. The commenter further suggests

that the likelihood of such an event to

occur is remote, based on the following

considerations:

• The parking brake handle on the

Model Falcon 50 series airplane is in the

normal line of sight for the pilot.

• There are other cockpit indications

available to advise the pilot if the

parking brake is applied during takeoff.

• Except for one abnormal procedure,

the available operational procedures

(provided by the AFM, operating

manual, and formal instruction) direct

the use of the parking brake only full

forward or full aft (full on) when the

engine is operating.

The FAA infers that the commenter

requests that Model Falcon 50 series

airplanes be removed from the

applicability of the proposed AD.

The FAA does not concur. The FAA

disagrees with the commenter’s claim

that no incidents have occurred as a

result of the identified unsafe condition.

In fact, several incidents have been

reported, despite the considerations

identified by the commenter. In 1997 in

Bursa, Turkey, the flightcrew of a Model

Mystere-Falcon 50 series airplane

rejected a takeoff, resulting in damage to

the aircraft. The reported aircraft

behavior was analyzed in a flight

simulator, which indicated that the

takeoff was attempted with the parking

brake engaged at the first detent. In

addition, the FAA has received reports

of three similar occurrences on Model

Falcon 10 series airplanes, resulting in

four casualties and two injuries. In all

three incidents, the crew attempted

takeoff with the parking brake engaged

at the first detent. Therefore, because of

these incidents related to the unsafe

condition, the FAA finds it necessary to

require the actions for the identified

airplanes as proposed. No change to the

final rule is warranted in this regard.

Request to Revise Applicability:

Potential To Cause Unsafe Operation

This same commenter suggests that

the incorporation of Dassault Service

Bulletin F50–240, as proposed by the

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM),

could cause unsafe operation of Model

Mystere-Falcon 50 series airplanes. The

commenter states:

If the anti-skid system of the #1 brake

system is malfunctioning or inoperative, then

the use of the #2 brakes according to the

MMEL [Master Minimum Equipment List]

and Annex 4 of the AFM [Airplane Flight

Manual] is permitted. Inadvertent minor

touching of the brakes during take-off under

such conditions with Service Bulletin F50–

240 applied would cause the illumination of

the ‘T/O CONFIG’ red warning light; if this

were to occur near or above V1, it would

cause an aborted takeoff. This is because all

other meanings to the crew of the ‘T/O

CONFIG’ red warning light are dangerous to

flight.

The FAA infers that the commenter is

again requesting that Model MystereFalcon 50 series airplanes be removed

from the applicability of the proposed

AD.

The FAA does not concur. Data from

the manufacturer indicate the reliability

of the anti-skid system to be very high.

Thus, the risk of concurrent failure of

the anti-skid system and operation of

the #2 brakes, in accordance with

Annex 4 of the AFM, is remote. In light

of the incidents previously described,

the FAA considers the required change

to the airplane design a necessary

improvement in airplane safety and not

a design change that would result in

unsafe operations. No change to the

final rule is necessary in this regard.

Request for Alternative Solutions

This same commenter suggests that

the FAA consider alternative solutions

to indicate that the parking brake is

applied to the intermediate position

during takeoff. The commenter states

that the proposed actions would conflict

with procedures in Annex 4 (if

permitted) of the AFM. The commenter

suggests incorporating either a switch

on the parking brake handle or a

pressure switch in the parking brake

system before it joins the #2 brake

system. The commenter alternatively

suggests prohibiting use of Annex 4.

The FAA acknowledges the

commenter’s suggestions but has

determined that the actions as proposed

will adequately address the unsafe

condition. No change to the final rule is

necessary.

Request To Revise MMEL

The manufacturer suggests

incorporating the following sentence

into the Maintenance and Operating

procedures for the MMEL: ‘‘When

dispatching with anti-skid failed,

braking will illuminate the ‘T/O config’

Warning light when the aircraft is in

take-off configuration.’’ The commenter

requests the change to alert the pilot of

the pontential unsafe condition

identified by the proposed AD.

The FAA does not concur. While

there may be merit to the commenter’s

suggestions, this AD is not the

appropriate context in which to evaluate

those suggestions. Since the suggested

changes would alter the actions

currently required by this AD,

additional rulemaking would be

required. The FAA finds that to delay

this action would be inappropriate in

light of the identified unsafe condition.

No change to the final rule is necessary

in this regard.

Additional Change to Final Rule

The proposed AD inadvertently

referred to Dassault Service Bulletin

F10–280 as the appropriate source of

service information for accomplishment

of both the installation action of

paragraph (b)(1) and the AFM revision

of paragraph (b)(2). The service bulletin

provides accomplishment instructions

only for the installation required by

paragraph (b)(1). The final rule has been

revised accordingly.

Conclusion

After careful review of the available

data, including the comments noted

above, the FAA has determined that air

safety and the public interest require the

adoption of the rule with the changes

described previously. The FAA has

determined that these changes will

neither increase the economic burden

on any operator nor increase the scope

of the AD.

Cost Impact

The following table lists the estimated

costs to operators to accomplish the

requirements of this AD.

Model

Number of

affected

airplanes

Action Work hours

Average

labor rate

(hour)

Parts cost Per-airplane

cost Fleet cost

Falcon 10 ............................... 34 Install light ................... 50 $60 $2,280 $5,280 $179,520

.................... Revise AFM ................ 1 60 .................... 60 2,040

Falcon 50 ............................... 69 Modify wiring ............... 8 60 226 706 48,714

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 12 / Thursday, January 18, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 4653

The cost impact figures discussed

above are based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the requirements of this AD action, and

that no operator would accomplish

those actions in the future if this AD

were not adopted. The cost impact

figures discussed in AD rulemaking

actions represent only the time

necessary to perform the specific actions

actually required by the AD. These

figures typically do not include

incidental costs, such as the time

required to gain access and close up,

planning time, or time necessitated by

other administrative actions.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein will

not have a substantial direct effect on

the States, on the relationship between

the national Government and the States,

or on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government. Therefore, it is

determined that this final rule does not

have federalism implications under

Executive Order 13132.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this action (1) is not a

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under

Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a

‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 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. A final evaluation has

been prepared for this action and it is

contained in the Rules Docket. A copy

of it may be obtained from the Rules

Docket at the location provided under

the caption ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Incorporation by reference,

Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration amends 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 the following new airworthiness

directive:

2001–01–05 Dassault Aviation:

Amendment 39–12075. Docket 98–NM–

325–AD.

Applicability: Model Falcon 10 series

airplanes, serial numbers 1 through 152

inclusive, on which Dassault Modification

M801 (reference Dassault Service Bulletin

F10–280, Revision 1, dated February 10,

1999) has not been accomplished; and Model

Mystere-Falcon 50 series airplanes, serial

numbers 2 through 250 inclusive and 252, on

which Dassault Modification M1850

(reference Dassault Service Bulletin F50–240,

Revision 1, dated October 7, 1998) has not

been accomplished; certificated in any

category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in

the area subject to the requirements of this

AD. For airplanes that have been modified,

altered, or repaired so that the performance

of the requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in

accordance with paragraph (c) of this AD.

The request should include an assessment of

the effect of the modification, alteration, or

repair on the unsafe condition addressed by

this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not

been eliminated, the request should include

specific proposed actions to address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent takeoff with the parking brake

engaged, which could result in an extended

takeoff roll or a rejected takeoff, and

consequent runway overrun, accomplish the

following:

Model Mystere-Falcon 50 Series Airplanes:

Modification

(a) For Model Mystere-Falcon 50 series

airplanes, within 9 months after the effective

date of this AD, modify the aircraft wiring to

add the ‘‘park brake handle not pushed

forward’’ condition in the illumination

conditions of the ‘‘T/O CONFIG’’ red warning

light on the cockpit warning panel in

accordance with Dassault Service Bulletin

F50–240, Revision 1, dated October 7, 1998.

Note 2: Modification in accordance with

Dassault Service Bulletin F50–240, dated

April 5, 1995, is acceptable for compliance

with the requirements of paragraph (a) of this

AD.

Model Falcon 10 Series Airplanes:

Modification and Airplane Flight Manual

(AFM) Revision

(b) For Dassault Falcon 10 series airplanes,

within 9 months after the effective date of

this AD, accomplish the requirements of

paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this AD.

(1) Install a ‘‘NO TAKEOFF’’ red light on

each pilot’s instrument panel and modify the

associated aircraft wiring to activate the

lights whenever the aircraft is not in the

proper configuration for takeoff, in

accordance with Dassault Service Bulletin

F10–280, Revision 1, dated February 10,

1999.

(2) Revise the Normal Procedures Section

of the FAA-approved AFM to include the

information specified in Falcon 10 AFM

DTM722 Temporary Change No. 17, dated

March 31, 1995, which introduces

procedures for checking that the ‘‘NO

TAKEOFF’’ lights are out prior to takeoff; and

operate the airplane in accordance with those

limitations and procedures.

Note 3: This may be accomplished by

inserting a copy of Falcon 10 AFM DTM722

Temporary Change No. 17 in the AFM. When

these temporary revisions have been

incorporated into general revisions of the

AFM, the general revisions may be inserted

in the AFM, provided the information

contained in the general revision is identical

to that specified in Temporary Change No.

17.

Note 4: Modification in accordance with

Dassault Service Bulletin F10–280, dated

September 6, 1995, is acceptable for

compliance with the requirements of

paragraph (b)(1) of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(c) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager,

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, International Branch,

ANM–116.

Note 5: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the International Branch,

ANM–116.

Special Flight Permits

(d) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with 21.197 and 21.199 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197

and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a

location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Incorporation by Reference

(e) Except as provided by paragraph (b)(2)

of this AD: The actions shall be done in

accordance with Dassault Service Bulletin

F50–240, Revision 1, dated October 7, 1998;

and Dassault Service Bulletin F10–280,

Revision 1, dated February 10, 1999. This

incorporation by reference was approved by

the Director of the Federal Register in

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR

part 51. Copies may be obtained from

Dassault Falcon Jet, P.O. Box 2000, South

Hackensack, New Jersey 07606. Copies may

be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the Office of the Federal

Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite

700, Washington, DC.

Note 6: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French airworthiness directives 98–300–

022(B), dated July 29, 1998, and 98–547–

022(B), dated December 30, 1998.

4654 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 12 / Thursday, January 18, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

Effective Date

(f) This amendment becomes effective on

February 22, 2001.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January

8, 2001.

Dorenda D. Baker,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–1075 Filed 1–17–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 2000–SW–52–AD; Amendment

39–12074; AD 2001–01–04]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Sikorsky

Aircraft Corporation Model S–76A, S–

76B, and S–76C Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD) for

Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (Sikorsky)

Model S–76A, S–76B, and S–76C

helicopters. This AD requires initial and

repetitive inspections of the main

landing gear positioning rod assembly

(rod assembly) and the side brace rod

end (rod end) for corrosion. If any

corrosion is found, this AD requires

replacing any part that is corroded with

an airworthy part before further flight.

This amendment is prompted by a

landing gear collapse caused by

corrosion due to dissimilar metals in the

landing gear rod end. The actions

specified in this AD are intended to

detect corrosion of the threaded joint in

the rod assembly to prevent a collapse

of the landing gear, and subsequent loss

of control of the helicopter during

landing.

DATES: Effective February 2, 2001.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of February 2,

2001.

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

March 19, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), Office of the

Regional Counsel, Southwest Region,

Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–SW–

52–AD, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room

663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137. You may

also send comments electronically to

the Rules Docket at the following

address: 9-asw-adcomments@faa.gov.

The service information referenced in

this AD may be obtained from BF

Goodrich Landing Gear Division, Attn.:

Kenneth R. Madej, 8000 Marble Ave.,

Cleveland, OH 44105, telephone (216)

429–4461, fax (216) 429–4357. This

information may be examined at the

FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel,

Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham

Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas; or

at the Office of the Federal Register, 800

North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jeffrey Lee, Aviation Safety Engineer,

Boston Aircraft Certification Office, 12

New England Executive Park,

Burlington, MA 01803, telephone (781)

238–7161, fax (781) 238–7199.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

amendment adopts a new AD for

Sikorsky Model S–76A, S–76B, and S–

76C helicopters. This AD requires,

within 14 days, inspecting the rod

assembly, part number (P/N) 1945E–

31A or 2071–31, and rod end, P/N

1945E235 or 2071–235, for corrosion. If

the rod assembly and rod end were

inspected and reassembled in

accordance with BF Goodrich

Component Maintenance Manual with

Illustrated Parts List, 1945/2071 Series

Main Landing Gear, No. 32–10–01,

(formerly titled Cleveland Pneumatic

Maintenance Manual 32–10–01),

Revision 4, dated December 15, 1994,

within the past 24 months, this AD

requires an inspection within 90 days.

If any corrosion is found, this AD

requires replacing the unairworthy part

with an airworthy part before further

flight. This AD also requires, at intervals

not to exceed 90 days, a repetitive

inspection for corrosion on certain rod

ends. For other rod ends, this AD

requires a repetitive inspection for

corrosion at intervals not to exceed 12

months or 1,500 hours time-in-service,

whichever occurs first. This AD is

prompted by a landing gear collapse on

a helicopter that was in a hangar.

Analysis showed that corrosion due to

dissimilar metals in the rod end caused

the rod end to fail with subsequent

collapse of the landing gear. The actions

specified in this AD are intended to

detect corrosion of the threaded joint in

the rod assembly and prevent a collapse

of the landing gear and subsequent loss

of control of the helicopter during

landing.

The FAA has reviewed BF Goodrich

Landing Gear Service Bulletin No. 76A–

32–03, Revision 1, dated September 15,

2000, which describes procedures for

inspecting and repairing or replacing

the rod end and rod assembly.

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other Sikorsky Model S–

76A, S–76B, and S–76C helicopters of

the same type design, this AD is being

issued to detect corrosion of the

threaded joint in the rod assembly and

prevent a collapse of the landing gear.

This AD requires inspecting the rod

assembly and rod end for corrosion at

specified intervals and replacing, before

further flight, any component that has

corrosion. The actions must be

accomplished in accordance with the

service bulletin described previously.

The short compliance time involved is

required because the previously

described critical unsafe condition can

adversely affect the structural integrity

of the helicopter. Therefore, the actions

previously mentioned are required

within 14 days, and this AD must be

issued immediately.

Since a situation exists that requires

the immediate adoption of this

regulation, it is found that notice and

opportunity for prior public comment

hereon are impracticable, and that good

cause exists for making this amendment

effective in less than 30 days.

The FAA estimates that 180

helicopters will be affected by this AD

and that it will take approximately 4.5

work hours per helicopter to inspect the

rod assembly and rod end and 1.5 work

hours to remove and replace the rod

assembly and rod end, if necessary.

Required parts will cost approximately

$14,600 per helicopter. Based on these

figures, the total cost impact of the AD

on U.S. operators is estimated to be

$2,692,800 ($14,960 per helicopter,

assuming inspecting, removing, and

replacing the rod assembly and rod end

once).

Comments Invited

Although this action is in the form of

a final rule that involves requirements

affecting flight safety and, thus, was not

preceded by notice and an opportunity

for public comment, comments are

invited on this rule. Interested persons

are invited to comment on this rule by

submitting such written data, views, or

arguments as they may desire.

Communications should identify the

Rules Docket number and be submitted

in triplicate to the address specified

under the caption ADDRESSES. All

communications received on or before

the closing date for comments will be

considered, and this rule may be

amended in light of the comments

received. Factual information that

supports the commenter’s ideas and

suggestions is extremely helpful in