22910 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

the general revisions may be incorporated in

the applicable AFM, and the TR’s may be

removed from the AFM’s.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(d) 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, Transport

Airplane Directorate, FAA. Operators shall

submit their requests through an appropriate

FAA Principal Operations Inspector, who

may add comments and then send it to the

Manager, International Branch.

Note 2: 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

(e) 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

(f) The actions shall be done in accordance

with Airbus A310 Flight Manual Temporary

Revision 5.03.00/01, dated January 22, 2001;

Airbus A310 Flight Manual Temporary

Revision 5.03.00/02, dated January 22, 2001;

and Airbus A300–600 Flight Manual

Temporary Revision 5.03.00/01, dated

January 22, 2001; as applicable. (Note: Only

the first page to each of these Temporary

Revisions are date stamped; no other pages

of the Temporary Revisions contain the

revision date.) 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 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 3: The subject of this AD is addressed

in French airworthiness directive 2001–

086(B), dated March 7, 2001.

Effective Date

(g) This amendment becomes effective on

May 22, 2001.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 23,

2001.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–10591 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–NM–74–AD; Amendment

39–12219; AD 2001–09–12]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing

Model 727–100, –100C, and –200 Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a

new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain Boeing Model 727–

100, –100C, and –200 series airplanes,

that, for certain airplanes, requires a

one-time inspection of certain fuselage

circumferential skin joints to determine

the type of fasteners installed, and

replacement of any aluminum fasteners

with steel fasteners, if necessary; or

modification of certain fuselage

circumferential skin joints; as

applicable. For certain other airplanes,

this amendment also requires repetitive

inspections to detect corrosion, sealant

deterioration, cracking, or disbonding;

repair, if necessary; and modification of

certain fuselage circumferential skin

joints. This amendment is prompted by

reports of corrosion between the body

skins and cold-bonded doublers at the

fuselage circumferential skin joints. The

actions specified by this AD are

intended to prevent delamination of the

cold-bonded doublers, which could

result in corrosion of the body skins and

doublers, and consequent reduced

structural capability of the fuselage

circumferential skin joints.

DATES: Effective June 11, 2001.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of June 11,

2001.

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Boeing Commercial Airplane

Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,

Washington 98124–2207. 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: Walt

Sippel, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe

Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2774;

fax (425) 227–1181.

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 Boeing

Model 727–100, –100C, and –200 series

airplanes was published in the Federal

Register on December 6, 1999 (64 FR

68062). For certain airplanes, that action

proposed to require a one-time

inspection of certain fuselage

circumferential skin joints to determine

the type of fasteners installed, and

replacement of any aluminum fasteners

with steel fasteners, if necessary; or

modification of certain fuselage

circumferential skin joints; as

applicable. For certain other airplanes,

that action also proposed to require

repetitive inspections to detect

corrosion, sealant deterioration,

cracking, or disbonding; repair, if

necessary; and modification of certain

fuselage circumferential skin joints.

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 To Delete Certain Sections of

Proposed AD

One commenter requests that Boeing

Model 727 series airplanes, line

numbers 153, 339, 416, and 540, be

deleted from the applicability section of

the proposed AD; and that paragraphs

(c) and (d) of the proposal, which apply

only to those airplanes, also be deleted.

The commenter states that the

manufacturer of those airplanes has

determined that they cannot be

repaired, and they were taken out-ofservice.

The FAA does not concur with the

commenter’s request; however, the FAA

agrees with the commenter’s intent. Part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(14 CFR part 39) states that, ‘‘No person

may operate a product to which an

airworthiness directive applies except

in accordance with the requirements of

that airworthiness directive.’’ The Part

39 regulation provides compliance relief

for airplanes that are not being operated,

because affected airplanes need only be

in compliance prior to return to

operation. In light of this fact, the

airplanes having the line numbers listed

above have been deleted from the Cost

Impact paragraph, below; however, the

applicability section and paragraphs (c)

and (d) will remain in the final rule

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 22911

should these airplanes be returned to

operation.

Request To Delay or Revise Final Rule

One commenter requests that issuance

of the final rule be delayed until the

FAA and the B–727 Working Group

(Cargo Airline Association members)

can develop a solution for the airplanes

that have been converted from a

passenger configuration to an all-cargo

configuration. The commenter states

that, if the FAA and industry are to

work cooperatively to enhance safety,

the more appropriate course of action

would have been to place the issues

addressed in the proposed rule before

the Working Group, in lieu of issuing

the proposed rule. The commenter notes

that the FAA has worked successfully

with this group in the past to identify

and correct any cargo conversion

problems.

The FAA does not concur. To delay

this action would be inappropriate,

since the FAA has determined that an

unsafe condition exists and that

inspections must be conducted to

ensure continued safety.

A second commenter requests that the

proposed AD be revised to allow for the

structural benefits of the installation of

the freighter conversion external

doubler and the numerous inspections

that are currently part of the basic

airplane maintenance program, as well

as the additional inspections required

by AD 98–23–51, amendment 39–10932

(63 FR 67771, December 9, 1998). (That

AD requires inspection/modification of

fuselage skin longitudinal lap joints and

is applicable to Model 727 series

airplanes.) This revision of the proposal

would be specific to those areas covered

by the external doubler and, as such,

would exempt converted freighters from

the requirements of the proposed rule in

the area covered by the external cargo

door doubler. The commenter states that

the report provided with its comments

was used to obtain approval of an

alternative method of compliance

(AMOC) for AD 98–23–51. The report

shows that the external doubler used in

the cargo door modification is able to

carry the loads that the skin and lap

joints currently carry, even in the event

that the lap joints in that area were to

fail. The commenter notes that these

same data can be used for the

circumferential skin joints that are the

subject of this AD.

The FAA does not concur to revise

the final rule for the following reasons:

1. Paragraph (a) is applicable to

airplanes on which the modification

recommended in Boeing Service

Bulletin 727–53–0084, Revision 2, dated

June 5, 1972, and the additional actions

(including additional fastener

replacement locations) specified in

Boeing Document No. D6–54860,

Revision C, dated December 11, 1989,

‘‘Aging Airplane Service Bulletin

Structural Modification Program—

Model 727;’’ or the modification

specified in Boeing Service Bulletin

727–53–0084, Revision 3, dated

September 28, 1989; HAS been

accomplished. Operators that have

modified their airplanes in accordance

with Revision 3 of the service bulletin

may have had the steel fasteners

removed and replaced with aluminum

rivets. Paragraph (a) requires operators

to inspect their airplanes to determine

the type of fastener installed, and, if

aluminum fasteners are found, replace

them with the correct steel fasteners.

The need to accomplish these actions is

not affected by the freighter conversion

referenced by the commenter.

2. The actions specified in paragraph

(b) of the final rule are essentially the

same as those required by paragraph (a)

of AD 90–06–09 amendment 39–6488

(55 FR 8370, March 7, 1990). But

paragraph (b) of this final rule requires

that future modifications be

accomplished in accordance with

Revision 4 of the referenced service

bulletin, which ensures that the correct

steel fasteners will be installed. If the

installation of the cargo conversion

interferes with the ability to accomplish

these actions, the operator should

request approval of an AMOC, as

provided by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.

3. The AMOC approved for AD 98–

23–51 was for the longitudinal lap

joints. The report the commenter

provided supports that AMOC request

and addresses the structural integrity of

the longitudinal lap joints with the

cargo door doubler, but it does not

demonstrate that the cargo door doubler

provides an acceptable level of safety for

the circumferential skin joints. Based on

this, the FAA finds that the technical

data presented does not justify revising

the final rule. The FAA will consider

approval of AMOC’s if the appropriate

technical justification is submitted.

4. Paragraphs (c), (d), and (f) of the

final rule address four airplanes that

were inadvertently omitted from the

applicability specified in AD 90–26–09.

AD 90–26–09 requires that inspections

be accomplished, and cracks repaired,

in the same areas specified in this AD.

The FAA has reviewed its files

regarding AMOC’s to this AD and has

found several that pertain to airplanes

that have been converted from a

passenger configuration to an all-cargo

configuration. Because the four

airplanes that were omitted from the

applicability of AD 90–26–09 have not

been converted to an all-cargo

configuration (some have the original

equipment manufacturer’s cargo door,

not an after-market door), there is no

concern about inspecting through the

doubler to the lower skin on those

airplanes. No change to the final rule is

necessary in this regard.

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 as proposed.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 549

airplanes of the affected design in the

worldwide fleet. Based on a records

review, the FAA estimates that only 374

of those airplanes are still in service.

The FAA estimates that 280 airplanes of

U.S. registry still in service will be

affected by this AD.

The number of airplanes that will be

subject to the required one-time

inspection to determine the type of

fasteners installed is unknown. For

affected airplanes, it will take

approximately 45 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the required onetime inspection, at an average labor rate

of $60 per work hour. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of this

inspection on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $2,700 per airplane.

For affected airplanes, it will take

approximately 192 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the required

modification of the cold-bonded

doublers of certain fuselage

circumferential skin joints, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour.

Required parts will cost approximately

$1,250. Based on these figures, the cost

impact of this modification on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $12,770 per

airplane.

The cost impact figures discussed

above are based on assumptions that no

operator has yet accomplished any of

the proposed requirements of this AD

action, and that no operator would

accomplish those actions in the future if

this AD were not adopted.

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.

22912 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

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:

2001–0912 Boeing: Amendment 39–12219.

Docket 99–NM–74–AD.

Applicability: Model 727–100, –100C, and

–200 series airplanes; line numbers 1 through

549 inclusive; certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

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 (g)(1) 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 delamination of the coldbonded doublers, which could result in

corrosion of the body skins and doublers, and

consequent reduced structural capability of

the fuselage circumferential skin joints,

accomplish the following:

Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a

detailed visual inspection is defined as: ‘‘An

intensive visual examination of a specific

structural area, system, installation, or

assembly to detect damage, failure, or

irregularity. Available lighting is normally

supplemented with a direct source of good

lighting at intensity deemed appropriate by

the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror,

magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface

cleaning and elaborate access procedures

may be required.’’

One-Time Inspection/Replacement

(a) For airplanes on which the modification

specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 727–53–

0084, Revision 2, dated June 5, 1972, and the

additional actions (including additional

fastener replacement locations) specified in

Boeing Document No. D6–54860, Revision C,

dated December 11, 1989, ‘‘Aging Airplane

Service Bulletin Structural Modification

Program—Model 727’’; or the modification

specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 727–53–

0084, Revision 3, dated September 28, 1989;

has been accomplished: Within 36 months

after the effective date of this AD, perform a

one-time inspection of the fuselage

circumferential skin joints to determine the

type of fastener installed, in accordance with

Figure 7 of Boeing Service Bulletin 727–53–

0084, Revision 4, dated August 2, 1990.

(1) If no aluminum fasteners are found, no

further action is required by this AD.

(2) If any aluminum fasteners are found,

prior to further flight, replace with steel

fasteners, in accordance with Boeing Service

Bulletin 727–53–0084, Revision 4, dated

August 2, 1990.

Modification

(b) For airplanes listed in Boeing

Document No. D6–54860, Revision C, dated

December 11, 1989, ‘‘Aging Airplane Service

Bulletin Structural Modification Program—

Model 727’’ on which the modification

specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 727–53–

0084, Revision 2, dated June 5, 1972, and the

additional actions specified in Boeing

Document No. D6–54860, Revision C, dated

December 11, 1989; or the modification

specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 727–53–

0084, Revision 3, dated September 28, 1989;

has not been accomplished prior to the

effective date of this AD: Prior to the

accumulation of 60,000 total flight cycles,

modify the fuselage circumferential skin

joints in accordance with Part IV of the

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing

Service Bulletin 727–53–0084, Revision 4,

dated August 2, 1990. Such action constitutes

terminating action for the modification in

that area required by AD 90–06–09,

amendment 39–6488.

Repetitive Inspections

(c) For airplanes having line numbers 153,

339, 416, and 540: Accomplish the

requirements of paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and

(c)(3) of this AD at the compliance time

specified in those paragraphs.

(1) Within 15 months after the effective

date of this AD, perform an external detailed

visual inspection and a low frequency eddy

current (LFEC) inspection of the fuselage

circumferential skin joints to detect corrosion

or sealant deterioration, in accordance with

Parts II.A. and II.B. of the Accomplishment

Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 727–

53–0084, Revision 4, dated August 2, 1990.

Repeat the external detailed visual inspection

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 15

months, and repeat the LFEC inspection

thereafter at intervals not to exceed 30

months.

(2) Within 3,000 flight cycles or 30 months

after the effective date of this AD, whichever

occurs first, perform a high frequency eddy

current (HFEC) inspection of the fuselage

circumferential skin joints to detect cracking,

in accordance with Part II.D. of the

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing

Service Bulletin 727–53–0084, Revision 4,

dated August 2, 1990. Repeat the HFEC

inspection thereafter at intervals not to

exceed 4,000 flight cycles or 48 months,

whichever occurs first, until accomplishment

of paragraph (f) of this AD.

(3) Within 48 months after the effective

date of this AD, perform an internal detailed

visual inspection of the fuselage

circumferential skin joints to detect cracking,

disbonding, or sealant deterioration; in

accordance with Part II.C. of the

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing

Service Bulletin 727–53–0084, Revision 4,

dated August 2, 1990. Repeat the internal

detailed visual inspection thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 48 months.

Repair

(d) For airplanes having line numbers 153,

339, 416, and 540: If any discrepancy is

detected during any inspection required by

paragraph (c) of this AD, accomplish

paragraph (d)(1) or (d)(2) of this AD, as

applicable.

(1) If any corrosion, cracking, or

disbonding is detected during any inspection

required by paragraph (c) of this AD, prior to

further flight, repair in accordance with Part

III of the Accomplishment Instructions of

Boeing Service Bulletin 727–53–0084,

Revision 4, dated August 2, 1990, except as

provided by paragraph (e) of this AD. No

further action is required by this AD for that

area.

(2) If the sealant has deteriorated but no

corrosion, cracking, or disbonding is detected

during any inspection required by paragraph

(c) of this AD, prior to further flight, reseal

in accordance with Figure 5 or 6, as

applicable, of Boeing Service Bulletin 727–

53–0084, Revision 4, dated August 2, 1990.

(e) Where the service bulletin specifies that

the manufacturer may be contacted for

disposition of certain repair conditions, prior

to further flight, repair in accordance with a

method approved by the Manager, Seattle

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA; or

in accordance with data meeting the type

certification basis of the airplane approved

by a Boeing Company Designated

Engineering Representative (DER) who has

been authorized by the Manager, Seattle

ACO, to make such findings. For a repair

method to be approved by the Manager,

Seattle ACO, or a Boeing DER, as required by

this paragraph, the approval letter must

specifically reference this AD.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 88 / Monday, May 7, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 22913

Modification

(f) For airplanes having line numbers 153,

339, 416, and 540: Prior to the accumulation

of 60,000 total flight cycles, or within 3,000

flight cycles after the effective date of this

AD, whichever occurs later, modify the

fuselage circumferential skin joints in

accordance with Part IV of the

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing

Service Bulletin 727–53–0084, Revision 4,

dated August 2, 1990. Such action constitutes

terminating action for the requirements of

paragraph (c)(2) of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

(g)(1) 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, Seattle

ACO. Operators shall submit their requests

through an appropriate FAA Principal

Maintenance Inspector, who may add

comments and then send it to the Manager,

Seattle ACO.

(2) An alternative method of compliance

for paragraph (f) of this AD that provides an

acceptable level of safety may be used in

accordance with data meeting the type

certification basis of the airplane approved

by a Boeing Company DER who has been

authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to

make such findings.

Note 3: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

Special Flight Permits

(h) 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

(i) Except as provided by paragraph (e) of

this AD, the actions shall be done in

accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin

727–53–0084, Revision 4, dated August 2,

1990. 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 Boeing Commercial Airplane Group,

P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124–

2207. 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.

(j) This amendment becomes effective on

June 11, 2001.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 26,

2001.

Donald L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–10939 Filed 5–4–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 99–SW–27–AD; Amendment

39–12217; AD 2001–09–11]

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bell

Helicopter Textron, Inc. Model 412

Helicopters and Agusta S.p.A. Model

AB412 Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes

an existing airworthiness directive (AD)

that applies to certain serial-numbered

Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (Bell)

Model 412 helicopters and Agusta

S.p.A. (Agusta) Model AB412

helicopters. That AD currently requires

a temporary reduction of the neverexceed velocity (Vne) limitation until an

inspection of the tail rotor yoke (yoke)

assembly for fatigue damage and

installation of a redesigned yoke

flapping stop are accomplished.

Recurring periodic and special

inspections to detect occurrences of

yoke overload are also required. This

amendment requires the same actions as

the previous AD but expands the

applicability of the AD to all Bell Model

412, 412CF, 412EP, and Agusta Model

AB412 helicopters. This amendment is

prompted by the determination that the

unsafe condition exists on all Bell

Model 412 and all Agusta Model AB412

helicopters, regardless of serial number.

The actions specified by this AD are

intended to prevent static and dynamic

overload damage to the yoke that could

result in loss of the tail rotor and

subsequent loss of control of the

helicopter.

DATES: Effective June 11, 2001.

The incorporation by reference of

certain publications listed in the

regulations was approved previously by

the Director of the Federal Register as of

April 8, 1998 (63 FR 14026, March 24,

1998), as corrected on July 20, 1998 (63

FR 38742).

ADDRESSES: The service information

referenced in this AD may be obtained

from Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., P.O.

Box 482, Fort Worth, Texas 76101,

telephone (817) 280–3391, fax (817)

280–6466 for the Bell Model 412

helicopters; and Agusta S.p.A., 21017

Cascina Costa di Samarate (VA), Italy,

Via Giovanni Agusta 520, telephone 39

(0331) 229111, fax 39 (0331) 229605–

222595 for the Agusta Model AB412

helicopters. 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:

Uday Garadi, Aviation Safety Engineer,

FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Rotorcraft

Standards Staff, 2601 Meacham Blvd.,

Fort Worth, Texas 76137, telephone

(817) 222–5123, fax (817) 222–5961.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A

proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39)

by superseding AD 98–07–03,

Amendment 39–10421 (63 FR 14026,

March 24, 1998), which applies to

certain serial-numbered Bell Model 412

helicopters and Agusta Model AB412

helicopters, was published in the

Federal Register on January 22, 2001

(66 FR 6494). That action proposed to

require a reduction of the Vne limitation

until an inspection of the yoke assembly

for static and dynamic overload damage

and installation of a redesigned yoke

flapping stop are accomplished and

includes periodic and special

inspections to detect a yoke overload. A

correction to a technical bulletin date

referenced in that AD was issued on

July 10, 1998 (63 FR 38742, July 20,

1998).

Interested persons have been afforded

an opportunity to participate in the

making of this amendment. No

comments were received on the

proposal or the FAA’s determination of

the cost to the public. The FAA has

determined that air safety and the

public interest require the adoption of

the rule as proposed except for

clarifying changes that were made in

paragraph (a) to better explain the intent

of the AD and editorial changes in

paragraph (d). The FAA has determined

that these changes will neither increase

the economic burden on any operator

nor increase the scope of the AD.

The FAA estimates that 135

helicopters of U.S. registry will be

affected by this AD, that it will take

approximately 6.5 work hours per

helicopter to install the placard, inspect

the yoke assembly, and install the yoke.

Required parts will cost approximately

$511 per helicopter. Based on these

figures, the total cost impact of this AD

on U.S. operators is estimated to be

$121,635.

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