Comments Invited
This 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.
Discussion
On October 29, 2014, we issued EAD 2014-22-51, which requires, before further flight and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 10 hours time-in-service (TIS), visually inspecting the hopper for a crack at the four attachment points. If there is a crack, EAD 2014-22-51 requires replacing the hopper with an airworthy hopper, which is not terminating action for the repetitive visual inspections. EAD 2014-22- 51 was sent previously to all known U.S. owners and operators of these helicopters and resulted from several cases of a cracked MGB oil cooler hopper.
EAD 2014-22-51 was prompted by EAD No. 2014-0229-E, dated October 20, 2014, issued by EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Union, to correct an unsafe condition for the Airbus Helicopters Model EC130T2 helicopters. EASA advises of several cases of cracked MGB oil cooler fan attachments to the hopper. EASA EAD No. 2014-0229-E requires repetitive visual inspections of the MGB oil cooler fan attachment to the hopper and, depending on findings, replacement of cracked parts.
FAA's Determination
This helicopter has been approved by the aviation authority of France and is
[[Page 7289]]
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 the EASA EAD. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all information provided by EASA and determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other helicopters of the same type design.
Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51
Airbus Helicopters issued Emergency Alert Service Bulletin No. 05A020 Revision 0, dated October 20, 2014 (EASB), specifying periodic visual checks for cracks in the engine MGB oil fan hopper. The EASB states that a crack could lead to the total failure of the fan attachment and that this condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to interference of the fan with the control rod of the front servo-control or with the flight control bellcrank, possibly resulting in reduced control of the helicopter. Also, the EASB states that pending modification, the periodic visual check of the hopper is necessary. This service information is reasonably available; see ADDRESSES for ways to access this service information.
AD Requirements
This AD requires, before further flight and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 10 hours TIS, visually inspecting the hopper for a crack at the four fan attachment points. If there is a crack in the hopper, this AD requires replacing the hopper with an airworthy hopper. Replacing the hopper does not constitute terminating action for the repetitive visual inspections required by this AD.
Differences Between This AD and the EASA AD
We do not use the compliance time option of every 7 days.
Interim Action
We consider this AD to be an interim action. The design approval holder is currently developing a modification that will address the unsafe condition identified in this AD. Once this modification is developed, approved, and available, we might consider additional rulemaking.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this AD will affect 60 helicopters of U.S. Registry.
We estimate that operators may incur the following costs in order to comply with this AD. Labor costs are estimated at $85 per hour. We estimate 0.2 work hour to inspect the hopper at an estimated $17 per helicopter and a total cost of $1,020 for the fleet. If a hopper is replaced, we estimate 6 hours to replace it and $1,000 for required parts for a total of $1,510.
FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date
Providing 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 found and continue to find that the risk to the flying public justifies waiving notice and comment prior to the adoption of this rule because the previously described unsafe condition can adversely affect the controllability of the helicopter and the required corrective actions must be accomplished before further flight and in 10-hour intervals.
Since it was found that immediate corrective action was required, notice and opportunity for prior public comment before issuing this AD were impracticable and contrary to the public interest and good cause existed to make the AD effective immediately by EAD 2014-22-51, issued on October 9, 2014, to all known U.S. owners and operators of these helicopters. These conditions still exist and the AD is hereby published in the Federal Register as an amendment to section 39.13 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 39.13) to make it effective to all persons.
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 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.
For the reasons discussed, I certify that this AD:
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);
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 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.