Comments Invited \n\n\n\tThis AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight safety, and we did not provide you with notice and an opportunity to provide your comments prior to it becoming effective. However, 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 resulted from adopting this AD. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the AD, 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 them 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 rulemaking duringthe comment period. We will consider all the comments we receive and may conduct additional rulemaking based on those comments. \n\nDiscussion \n\n\n\tOn November 27, 2007, we issued AD 2007-25-08, Amendment 39-15290 (72 FR 69604, December 10, 2007) for Eurocopter France (now Airbus Helicopters) Model SA-365 N1, AS-365 N2, AS 365 N3, SA-366G1, EC 155B, and EC155B1 helicopters. AD 2007-25-08 required repetitively checking the TGB oil level to ensure it is at the maximum level. AD 2007-25-08 also required 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 required replacing the bearing. AD 2007- 25-08 was prompted by AD No. 2006-0258R1-E, dated August 29, 2006, issued by EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, as well as the finding that metal chips were not detected on themagnetic 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 were 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. \n\nActions Since AD 2007-25-08 Was Issued \n\n\n\tAfter we issued AD 2007-25-08, we received reports of new occurrences of loss of yaw control due to failure of the control rod bearing and EASA superseded AD No. 2006-0258R1-E with several ADs, including AD No. 2012-0170R2, dated June 20, 2014, to correct an unsafe condition for these model helicopters. Therefore, we issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by removing AD 2007- 25-08 and adding a new AD. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on September 2, 2015 (80 FR 53024). The NPRM proposed to retain the pilot checks of the TGB oil level and the magnetic plug inspections of AD 2007-25-08. The NPRM also proposed to 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. \n\tOn May 23, 2016, EASA issued Emergency AD No. 2016-0097-E, which superseded AD No. 2012 0170R2. EASA Emergency AD No. 2016-0097-E was subsequently revised by EASA AD No. 2016-0097R1, dated May 25, 2016, to correct a paragraph reference. EASA AD No. 2016-0097R1 advises that after AD No. 2012-0170R2 was issued, a technical investigation of an AS 365 N3 accident revealed a damaged TGB bearing. EASA further states that the affected control rod had been repetitively inspected as required by EASA AD 2012-0170R2, and that the investigation is still ongoing to determine the root cause of the damage and why the damage was not discovered during previous inspections. EASA AD No. 2016-0097R1 requires repetitive inspections of the TGB oil level and magnetic chip detector. EASA AD No. 2016-0097R1 also requires replacing bearing part number (P/N) 704A33-651-093 or P/N 704A33-651-104, with an improved bearing, P/N 704A33-651-245 or 704A33-651-246, which is terminating action for the repetitive inspections of the magnetic chip detector but not of the oil level. The EASA AD also describes an alternative repetitive inspection for play that would defer replacing the bearing for an additional 110 hours TIS. Lastly, the EASA AD requires that helicopters with an improved bearing P/N 704A33-651-245 or 704A33-651- 246 (identified as post-modification 07 65B57 configuration) replace the bearing at intervals not to exceed 500 hours TIS. \n\tIn light of EASA AD No. 2016-0097R1 and the corrective actions required by this final rule, we are issuing a separate action to withdraw the NPRM (80 FR 53024, September 2, 2015). \n\nFAA's Determination \n\n\n\tThese 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 issuing 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. \n\nRelated Service Information \n\n\n\tWe reviewed Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. AS365-01.00.67, Revision 0, dated May 4, 2016, for FAA type- certificated Model SA-365N1, AS-365N2, and AS 365 N3 helicopters and for non-FAA type-certificated Model AS365F, Fi, and K helicopters; ASB No. EC155-04A014, Revision 0, dated May 4, 2016, for FAA type- certificated Model EC 155B and EC155B1 helicopters; and ASB No. SA366- 01.29, Revision 0, dated May 4, 2016, for FAA type-certificated Model SA-366G1 and non-FAA type-certificated Model SA-366GA helicopters. Each ASB describes procedures for ensuring the TGB oil level is at maximum capacity; reducing the inspection interval for the TGB magnetic plug pending initial replacement of the bearing; removing the control rod assembly to inspect the bearing; and periodically replacing the bearing. \n\n((Page 85128)) \n\nAD Requirements \n\n\n\tThis AD applies to the affected model helicopters with bearing P/N 704A33-651-093 or P/N 704A33-651-104 and requires: \n\tChecking 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. \n\tReplacing the bearing part number (P/N)704A33-651-093 or P/N 704A33-651-104 with a bearing, P/N 704A33-651-245 or 704A33-651- 246. \n\tThis AD also prohibits installing bearing P/N 704A33-651-093 or P/N 704A33-651-104 on any helicopter. \n\nDifferences Between This AD and the EASA AD \n\n\n\tThe EASA AD requires replacing bearing P/N 704A33-651-093 and P/N 704A33-651-104 that have 335 or more hours TIS within 15 hours TIS; this AD requires replacing these bearings within 15 hours TIS regardless of the amount of time the bearing has accumulated. The EASA AD requires a repetitive TGB magnetic chip detector inspection, while this AD does not. The EASA AD allows an alternative repetitive inspection for play to defer replacing the bearing for an additional 110 hours TIS, while this AD does not. Lastly, the EASA AD requires replacing the improved bearing at intervals of 500 hours TIS; an AD for this action is not necessary because it is specified in the manufacturer's Instructions for Continued Airworthiness, and therefore mandatedby other regulatory requirements. \n\nCosts of Compliance \n\n\n\tWe estimate that this AD affects 43 helicopters of U.S. Registry. We estimate that operators may incur the following costs in order to comply with this AD. At an average labor rate of $85, checking the TGB oil level will require about 0.5 work-hour, for a cost per helicopter of $43 and a total cost of $1,849 for the fleet, per inspection cycle. Replacing the bearing will require 16 work-hours and parts costing $1,125, for a total cost of $2,485 per helicopter and $106,855 for the fleet. \n\nFAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date \n\n\n\tProviding an opportunity for public comments prior to adopting these AD requirements would delay implementing the safety actions needed to correct this known unsafe condition. Therefore, we find that the risk to the flying public justifies waiving notice and comment prior to the adoption of this rule because the initial inspections required by this AD must be accomplished before further flight, and the bearings must be replaced within 15 hours TIS, a very short interval for these model helicopters. \n\tSince an unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD, we determined that notice and opportunity for public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days. \n\nAuthority for This Rulemaking \n\n\n\tTitle 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. \n\tWe 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 forpractices, 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. \n\nRegulatory Findings \n\n\n\tWe determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD 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. \n\tFor the reasons discussed, I certify that this AD: \n\t1. Is not a ''significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; \n\t2. Is not a ''significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); \n\t3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and \n\t4. 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. \n\tWe prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. \n\nList of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 \n\n\n\tAir transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.