UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460

OFFICE OF

PREVENTION, PESTICIDES

AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES

Date: 11/10/06

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:	Formetanate Hydrochloride: Response to Registrant’s Comments
on EPA’s Interim Reregistration Eligibility Decision for Formetanate
HCl.  PC Code 097301, Case #: 2450, DP # 332275.

FROM:	Danette Drew, Senior Scientist

		John Doherty, Toxicologist

		Reregistration Branch 3

		Health Effects Division (HED) (7509P)

THROUGH:	Catherine Eiden, Branch Chief

		Reregistration Branch 3

		Health Effects Division (HED) (7509P)

TO:		James Parker, Chemical Review Manager

		Reregistration Branch I

		Special Review and Reregistration Division (7508P)

As per SRRD request, the HED has prepared responses to the
registrant’s comments on the March 2006 “Interim Reregistration
Eligibility Decision for Formetanate Hydrochloride”. Excerpted
comments and HED’s response to those comments are presented in this
memorandum. See Gowan Company’s letter (dated 8/28/2006; Docket ID:
OPP-2004-0032) for specific science and policy considerations in support
of Gowan’s comments.

Gowan Comment:

“the IRED occupational assessments employed an inhalation hazard
endpoint

(cholinesterase NOAEL) derived from an acceptable acute oral
neurotoxicity study in rats (MRID 45314201, 2000). In this study, the
no-effect level for cholinesterase inhibition was 0.1 mg/kg, and the
LOAEL was 1 mg/kg. This allows for the conclusion that the true NOAEL
may be greater than 0.1 mg/kg.”

“We further note and agree with EPA’s own position in this case that
BMD data are preferable to NOAEL/LOAEL data.”

“we believe that the most appropriate inhalation hazard endpoint for
the relevant occupational assessments is the most sensitive BMDL10 value
for adults from the acute comparative cholinesterase study. We note
further that the IRED correctly describes [at Page 21] the use of an
oral endpoint with the assumption of 100% inhalation

absorption as “a high end default value”.”

“EPA calculated BMDL10 values of 0.18 mg/kg (adult males) and 0.31
mg/kg (adult females). The lowest value (0.18 mg/kg) is the appropriate
hazard input for the inhalation assessments. As a result, Margins of
Exposure (MOE) are 1.8x greater than those presented in the IRED, which
utilized the endpoint of 0.1 mg/kg.”

HED Response:

HED appreciates Gowan’s comment that BMD modeling is an appropriate
method for deriving points of departure in risk assessment.  HED agrees
that the BMD approach for determining the point of departure (PoD) for
inhalation risk assessment may have been appropriate in the
occupational/inhalation risk assessment. HED cannot conclude at this
time, however, that the most appropriate point of departure is the
BMDL10 of 0.18 mg/kg (adult males) calculated from the registrant’s
comparative cholinesterase (CCA) study (MRID 46618901). As described in
the Preliminary Cumulative Risk Assessment of the N-methyl Carbamates
(2005), a study in rats performed by EPA’s National Health and
Environmental Effects Research Laboratory (NHEERL) provides a BMDL10 of
0.05 mg/kg in adult, male brain cholinesterase inhibition suggesting
that a PoD lower than 0.1 mg/kg or 0.18 mg/kg may be more appropriate
for use in formetanate risk assessments.  Prior to the release of the
Revised Cumulative Risk Assessment of the N-methyl carbamates, the
Agency will perform an analysis where a BMD10 and BMDL10 can be
estimated using data from both the Gowan CCA study and the EPA study.

[Note that the requirement for a 28 day inhalation toxicity study
remains outstanding.]

Gowan Comment:

“Two dermal cholinesterase studies are available. MRID 44948501 (1999)
examined whole blood, plasma and brain cholinesterase inhibition in
rats, as well as FOB and motor activity endpoints one hour following the
last dose in a 21 day dosing regime. EPA concluded that the NOAEL for
cholinesterase inhibition in all compartments was 20 mg/kg/day, but
classified the study as supplemental because time-course data were not
available to confirm the time-of-peak effect, and because information on
the time of assays relative to blood sample collection was not reported
in the study. The NOAEL of 20 mg/kg/day determined in this study was not
used in the IRED assessments.

As discussed below, a subsequent and acceptable time-of-peak effect
dermal study (MRID 453119901, 2000) successfully addressed EPA’s first
concern. As stated in the December 22, 2005 revised Toxicology Chapter
for formetanate hydrochloride:

The time to peak effect was demonstrated to be from 0.5 hours to 3 hours
after removal.

Since the previous 21-day dermal study (MRID No. 44948501) assessed for
cholinesterase one hour post exposure, the assessment time is
appropriate for that study.

Regarding the Agency’s second concern, although a specific time
interval for the time of blood assays relative to collection was not
specified in the 21-day study, the report did specify that all blood
samples were kept on ice until assaying; and there is no mention in the
study of any atypical holding times for the samples. In summary, the
assays were conducted at the time-of peak-effect, and samples were
appropriately maintained on ice prior to assaying. We believe that with
these two concerns addressed, EPA can upgrade MRID 44948501 to
acceptable status and can utilize the NOAEL of 20 mg/kg/day as the
dermal hazard input for the occupational assessments.

EPA is currently using a dermal endpoint of 10 mg/kg/day from MRID
45311901 for the

occupational assessments. We reiterate our previously expressed concern
that this endpoint is inappropriate since it is derived from data which
the Agency itself describes as not statistically significant. As
detailed in our earlier submission, the only treatment-related effects
seen in this study are associated with the 500 mg/kg dose. The remainder
of the data reflect only random, baseline variation in cholinesterase
activity. In our view, use of statistically non-significant data is an
inappropriate basis for requiring risk mitigation. The data clearly
support a dermal hazard NOAEL of 20 mg/kg/day.”

HED Response:

The issue of the NOAEL and LOAEL for ChE inhibition by formetanate
following dermal exposure has been reevaluated by HED.  There are two
dermal toxicity studies with formetanate:  an original 21-day study
(1999, MRID No.: 44948501) with dose levels of 0, 10, 15 and 20
mg/kg/day that was determined to have problems related to optimal time
for assessment of ChE activity as well as problems with the assessment
of motor activity and FOB.  In response to HED’s concerns for
deficiencies in this study, a second study (2000, MRID No.: 45311901)
designed to determine the time to peak effect for ChE inhibition
following dermal applications of 0, 10, 20 or 500 mg/kg of formetanate
was submitted. In the 21-day repeat dose study, it was noted that there
was 6.9% (p<0.05) apparent inhibition at 20 mg/kg/day in males based on
the assessment made one hour after removal of the dermal application of
the test material.   The special time to peak effect study verified that
the optimal time for assessment of ChE inhibition was between 0.5 and 3
hours after removal of the dermal application of the test material.  The
time to peak effect study demonstrated that there was 12 to 18% lower
activity (although not statistically significant) at 1, 2 and 3 hours
after removal of the test material in the 20 mg/kg dose group males.
The activity of ChE for this group was essentially similar to the
control group prior to the optimal time for assessment of inhibition and
returned to the control level after the 3 hour assessment time to
indicate recovery.   Inhibition at 500 mg/kg occurred at the 1, 2 and 3
hour assessment times and also returned to control levels at 19 hours
indicating there was a dose response for inhibition including the 20
mg/kg dose group. The 10 mg/kg dose group was essentially similar to the
control group.  At 500 mg/kg, females were less (maximum 36%) inhibited
than males (maximum 56%) and at 20 mg/kg females did not demonstrate a
consistent lower activity at the critical times for inhibition.  Since
maximum inhibition at 500 mg/kg in males was higher than in females,
further support that the lower activity noted at the critical times in
males at 20 mg/kg is inhibition is evident.  Overall, both the 21 day
repeat dose study and the special time to peak affect study show
evidence of inhibition at 20 mg/kg/day or 20 mg/kg.  Thus, HED concludes
that 20 mg/kg is a LOAEL for a threshold effect on ChE inhibition
following dermal application.

HED considers that 20 mg/kg is a threshold effect and recognizes that
assigning this level as the LOEAL is a conservative call made in the
best interest of protecting the public from potential exposure and
inhibition of ChE by formetanate.  HED recognizes that assessment of
blood ChE by carbamates is problematic and subject to underestimation to
further justify the selection of 20 mg/kg as a LOAEL for potential
inhibition.

Since the registrant provided the special time to peak effect for
inhibition of ChE following dermal application and established that the
one hour interval that was used for sampling the blood in the 21-day
dermal toxicity study was within the time to peak effect, the ChE
aspects of the 21-day study can be upgraded to ACCEPTABLE. This assumes
that the conditions of sampling with regard to storage, dilution and
other factors related to the actual assessment of ChE were similar in
both studies.  However, since the registrant did not provide information
on the timing of the FOB and motor activity or positive control data
with a carbamate on FOB and motor activity following dermal exposure,
the FOB and motor activity aspects of this study cannot be upgraded.
Since carbamates are quick acting the window for detecting the effects
on motor activity and FOB is narrow and the study lacks details as to
how all of the animals were assessed at the critical times for observing
FOB and motor activity.

The dose levels for the 21-day repeat dose study were 0, 10, 15 and 20
mg/kg/day and the dose levels for the special time to peak effect study
were 0, 10, 20 and 500 mg/kg and both studies support the conclusion
that 20 mg/kg is a threshold LOAEL, a NOAEL of 15 mg/kg/day for
inhibition of ChE is supported.

Using the NOAEL of 15 mg/kg for dermal exposure, instead of  the 10
mg/kg used in the current risk assessment, results in total (combined)
MOEs above the level of concern for the three scenarios cited in the
comments when utilizing either a PoD of  0.1 mg/kg or 0.05 mg/kg for
inhalation exposure (see Table 1 below). However, if the inhalation PoD
of 0.18 mg/kg were used along with the dermal NOAEL of 15 mg/kg, two of
those scenarios would result in total MOEs of 100 or greater: orchard
airblast application (open cab, WSB, PPE) with an MOE of 120 and aerial
application to alfalfa/high acreage (open cab, WSB, PPE) with an MOE of
100 (note: not a viable scenario as double engineering controls are
assumed). As noted in the previous HED Response (p.2), the Agency will
be evaluating a BMD10 and BMDL10 using data from both the Gowan CCA
study and the EPA NHEERL study.

TABLE 1: Formetanate HCl: Comparison of example total (combined) MOEs
(first column represents current risk assessment)

SCENARIO	Inhalation 1

0.1	Inhalation 1

0.1	Inhalation 2

0.18	Inhalation 2

0.18	Inhalation 3

0.05	Inhalation 3

0.05

	Dermal 4

10	Dermal 5

15	Dermal 4

10	Dermal 5

15	Dermal 4

10	Dermal 5

15

Applicator: Orchard airblast

(extra PPE, respirator, hood, WSB)	73	90	91	120	51	59

Mix/Load: Orchard aerial

 (long sleeves/pants, gloves, WSB)	51	57	76	88	30	32

Mix/Load: Alfalfa aerial (high rate)

(extra PPE;WSB)6	57	74	75	100	41	48

1 Inhalation BMDL10 0.10 mg/kg from Gowan CCA (pups; used in current RA)

2 Inhalation BMDL10 0.18 mg/kg from Gowan CCA (adults; proposed by
registrant)

3 Inhalation BMDL10 0.05 mg/kg from EPA CCA (adults; used in NMC
cumulative)

4 Dermal NOAEL 10 mg/kg from dermal study (peak time and 21 day; used in
current RA)

5 Dermal NOAEL 15 mg/kg from dermal study (peak time and 21 day;
proposed new NOAEL)

6 Not a viable scenario; for mixer/loaders, should not use extra PPE
with WSB (2 engineering controls)

Gowan Comment:

“We note that the reentry assessments are based upon an incorrectly
low dermal toxicity endpoint, which is discussed in the previous
section. If the appropriate dermal endpoint is used, Margins of Exposure
would be double those calculated by the Agency for all scenarios and
reentry intervals would be shorter than those calculated by EPA.”

HED Response:

(see previous response regarding selection of dermal toxicity dose and
endpoint, pp. 3-4). Reentry activity MOEs were recalculated using the
dermal NOAEL of 15 mg/kg.  Reentry activity MOEs  equal to or over 100
are not achieved until 9 days after the second application of the ai to
citrus fruit trees, 5 days after application to pome and stone fruit
trees, and 4 days after application to alfalfa (see Table 2 below).

TABLE 2: Short-term Post Application Assessment for Formetanate Treated
Agricultural Crops (including ornamentals)

DAT (1)

Crop Groupings: MOEs for Activity Level (2,3)

ALFALFA

Field / row crops, low / medium

 (1 crop) (TC=1500 cm2/hr) (4)

POME and STONE

Trees, fruit, deciduous

 (2 crops) (TC=1500 cm2/hr) (5)

CITRUS

Trees, fruit, evergreen

(TC =1500 cm2/hr) (6)

(TC = 3000 cm2/hr)(7)

0	54	43	43	21

1	65	52	52	26

2	79	62	62	32

3	94	71	71	36

4	107	88	88	43

5	-	100	100	52

6	-	-	-	62

7	-	-	-	75

8	-	-	-	88

9	-	-	-	110

Footnote:-

  1. DAT = Days after treatment; DAT0 = On the day of treatment, after
sprays have dried; assumed approximately 12 hours.

  2. Crop groupings and transfer coefficients from Science Advisory
Council for Exposure: Policy Memo #003.1 'Agricultural Transfer
Coefficients', August 17, 2000.

  3. MOE = Dermal toxicity endpoint (mg/kg-day)/absorbed dermal dose
(mg/kg-d) where the absorbed dose = DFR (ug/cm2) x TC (cm2/hr) x
conversion factor (1 mg/1,000 ug) x exposure time (hrs) x dermal
absorption / body weight (kg).

  4. Medium exposure potential: Irrigation, Scouting, Weeding (hand)

  5. High exposure potential: Harvest (hand), Propping, Pruning (hand),
Training, Tying

  6.  Medium exposure potential: Bagging Fruit, Hand Labor (misc.),
Harvest (hand), Pollination, Staking,                     Topping,
Training, Tying

 7. High exposure potential: Pruning (hand), Thinning

Page   PAGE  6  of   NUMPAGES  6


[Federal Register: October 17, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 200)]
[Notices]
[Page 61042-61043]
[DOCID:fr17oc06-91]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-4-000]

Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC; Notice of Proposed Changes in
FERC Gas Tariff

October 11, 2006.
    Take notice that on October 5, 2006, Transwestern Pipeline Company,
LLC (Transwestern) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff,
Third Revised Volume No. 1, First Revised Sheet No. 15 to become
effective September 1, 2006.

    Transwestern states that the purpose of this filing is to add a
contract to the list of non-conforming agreements.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-17216 Filed 10-16-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 210 (Tuesday, November 1, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 65766]
[FR Doc No: 2022-23736]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 1773-000]

Moon Lake Electric Association, Inc.; Notice of Authorization for
Continued Project Operation

    The license for the Yellowstone Hydroelectric Project No.1773 was
issued for a period ending September 30, 2022.
    Section 15(a)(1) of the FPA, 16 U.S.C. 808(a)(1), requires the
Commission, at the expiration of a license term, to issue from year-to-
year an annual license to the then licensee(s) under the terms and
conditions of the prior license until a new license is issued, or the
project is otherwise disposed of as provided in section 15 or any other
applicable section of the FPA. If the project's prior license waived
the applicability of section 15 of the FPA, then, based on section 9(b)
of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 558(c), and as set forth
at 18 CFR 16.21(a), if the licensee of such project has filed an
application for a subsequent license, the licensee may continue to
operate the project in accordance with the terms and conditions of the
license after the minor or minor part license expires, until the
Commission acts on its application. If the licensee of such a project
has not filed an application for a subsequent license, then it may be
required, pursuant to 18 CFR 16.21(b), to continue project operations
until the Commission issues someone else a license for the project or
otherwise orders disposition of the project.
    If the project is subject to section 15 of the FPA, notice is
hereby given that an annual license for Project No.1773 is issued to
the Moon Lake Electric Association, Inc for a period effective October
1, 2022, through September 30, 2023, or until the issuance of a new
license for the project or other disposition under the FPA, whichever
comes first. If issuance of a new license (or other disposition) does
not take place on or before September 30, 2023, notice is hereby given
that, pursuant to 18 CFR 16.18(c), an annual license under section
15(a)(1) of the FPA is renewed automatically without further order or
notice by the Commission, unless the Commission orders otherwise.
    If the project is not subject to section 15 of the FPA, notice is
hereby given that the Moon Lake Electric Association, Inc. is
authorized to continue operation of the Yellowstone Hydroelectric
Project under the terms and conditions of the prior license until the
issuance of a new license for the project or other disposition under
the FPA, whichever comes first.

    Dated: October 26, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-23736 Filed 10-31-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 211 (Thursday, October 31, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 58341-58348]
[FR Doc No: 2019-23686]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 211 / Thursday, October 31, 2019 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0759; Product Identifier 2018-SW-075-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Various Experimental and Restricted
Category Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for various helicopters operating under experimental airworthiness
certificates and various type certificated restricted category
helicopters. This proposed AD was prompted by multiple accidents and
incidents involving failure of the tail boom attachment structure and
bolts. This proposed AD would require revising the Rotorcraft Flight
Manual (RFM) for your helicopter to incorporate pre-flight checks;
removing paint and sealant, and cleaning; repetitive inspections of
structural components that attach the tail boom to the fuselage; and
depending on the outcome of the inspections, repairing or replacing
components, or re-bonding the structure. The FAA is proposing this AD
to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by December
16, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For AST, Inc. service information identified in this NPRM, contact:
AST, Inc., 34976 Kamph Drive NE, Albany, OR 97322.
    For JJASPP Engineering Services, LLC service information identified
in this NPRM, contact: JJASPP Engineering Services, LLC, 511 Harmon
Terrace, Arlington, TX 76010; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; website:
www.jjaspp.com.
    For Northwest Rotorcraft, LLC service information identified in
this NPRM, contact: Northwest Rotorcraft, LLC, 1000 85th Ave. SE,
Olympia, WA 98501; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; website:
www.nwhelicopters.com.
    For Richards Heavylift Helo, Inc., service information identified
in this NPRM, contact: Richards Heavylift Helo, Inc., 1181 Osprey Nest
Point, Orange Park, FL 32073.
    For Robinson Air Crane, Inc., service information identified in
this NPRM, contact: Robinson Air Crane, Inc., 230 Bermuda Beach Drive,
Ft Pierce, FL 34949; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    For Rotorcraft Development Corporation service information
identified in this NPRM, contact: Rotorcraft Development Corporation,
P.O. Box 430, Corvallis, MT 59828; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For San Joaquin Helicopters service information identified in this
NPRM, contact: San Joaquin Helicopters, 1407 South Lexington Street,
Delano, CA 93215; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; website:
www.sjhelicopters.com.
    For Southwest Florida Aviation International, Inc. service
information identified in this NPRM, contact: Southwest Florida
Aviation International, Inc., 28000-A9 Airport Road, Bldg. 101, Punta
Gorda, FL 33982-9587.
    For Tamarack Helicopters Inc. service information identified in
this NPRM, contact: Tamarack Helicopters Inc, 2849 McIntyre Rd,
Stevensville, MT 59870; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; website:
www.tamarackhelicopters.com.
    You may view this service information at the FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy, Room 6N-321,
Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2019-
0759; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this NPRM, the special airworthiness information bulletins (SAIBs), the
supplemental type certificate, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Operations is listed above. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard R. Thomas, Aerospace Engineer,
Denver ACO Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, FAA, 26805 East
68th Ave., Room 214, Denver, CO 80249; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
(303) 342-1088; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2019-0759;
Product Identifier 2018-SW-075-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. The FAA will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
NPRM because of those comments.
    The FAA will post all comments received, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide.
The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this NPRM.

Discussion

    The FAA proposes to adopt a new AD for Model EH-1H, EH-1X, HH-1H,
HH-

1N, UH-1D, UH-1M, UH-1N, and UH-1V helicopters operating under
experimental airworthiness certificates; and for restricted category
type certificated Model HH-1K, TH-1F, TH-1L, UH-1A, UH-1B without STC
No. SR00026DE installed, UH-1E, UH-1F, UH-1H, UH-1L, and UH-1P
helicopters. The FAA plans to publish separate rulemaking to address
Model UH-1B with STC No. SR00026DE installed.
    The type certificate holders for the restricted category models are
Arrow Falcon Exporters Inc.; AST, Inc.; Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.;
California Department of Forestry; West Coast Fabrications; Global
Helicopter Technology, Inc.; Hagglund Helicopters, LLC; International
Helicopters, Inc.; JJASPP Engineering Services, LLC; JTBAM, Inc.;
Northwest Rotorcraft, LLC; Red Tail Flying Services, LLC; Richards
Heavylift Helo, Inc.; Robinson Air Crane, Inc.; Rotorcraft Development
Corporation; San Joaquin Helicopters; Smith Helicopters; Southwest
Florida Aviation International, Inc.; and Tamarack Helicopters, Inc.
    This proposed AD would require revising the RFM for your helicopter
to incorporate pre-flight checks; removing paint and sealant, and
cleaning structural components that attach the tail boom to the
fuselage; repetitive inspections of the cleaned structural components;
repairing scratches, nicks, gouges, tears, and corrosion within
allowable limits; replacing structural components with non-repairable
damage, cracks, buckling, or distortion; replacing loose or missing
rivets; re-bonding structures with dis-bonds; and removing loose bolts
and self-locking nuts from service and replacing them with new bolts
and new self-locking nuts.
    This proposed AD was prompted by a series of accidents and
incidents involving failure of the tail boom attachment structure on
several restricted category military surplus helicopters. This
condition, if not addressed, could result in separation of the tail
boom from the helicopter, and subsequent loss of control of the
helicopter.
    In January 1982, a tail boom separated from a UH-1B helicopter
engaged in logging operations, resulting in a fatal accident. The
National Transportation Safety Board's (NTSB) final report identified
structural fatigue and inadequate maintenance as probable causes. In
September 2013, a tail boom separated from another UH-1B helicopter
engaged in logging operations, resulting in another fatal accident. The
NTSB's final report for that accident identified the cause as fatigue
failure of the upper two tail boom attach points. Contributing to this
accident was poor maintenance throughout the helicopter's operational
life. In addition to these accidents, the FAA is aware of three forced
landings due to tail boom attachment structure failures, one in May
2014 on a UH-1H helicopter, one in August 2016 on a UH-1H helicopter,
and one in August 2018 on a UH-1F helicopter. The helicopter involved
in the May 2014 forced landing was engaged in construction operations.
The operations the helicopter was engaged in during the August 2016
forced landing are unknown. The helicopter involved in the August 2018
forced landing was engaged in firefighting operations.
    In the first fatal accident and two of the forced landings, a loud
pop or bang was heard in the rear of the aircraft at the moment of
failure. In the second fatal accident, the pilot indicated before the
flight that the helicopter felt like it ``shuffled'' during
translational lift. Four of the five incidents involved a failure of
the upper left hand tail boom attachment structure. In three cases it
was the attach fitting on the tail boom side. In one case it was the
longeron on the tail boom side. The upper left hand tail boom attach
point is the most heavily loaded of the four attach points.
    The FAA issued Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin SW-18-29
(SAIB SW-18-29) on October 1, 2018 to alert owners and operators of
Restricted Category Bell Model HH-1K, UH-1A, UH-1B, UH-1E, UH-1F, UH-
1H, UH-1L, UH-1P, TH-1F, and TH-1L helicopters of failure of the tail
boom attachment structure.
    SAIB SW-18-29 recommends adhering to the helicopter's Instructions
for Continued Airworthiness which includes a repetitive 100 hour time-
in-service (TIS) inspection of the tail boom attachment structure on
both sides of the four attachment points. SAIB SW-18-29 also specifies
the following supplemental recommendations: Keeping the fittings on
both sides of all four attachment points, the cap angles running
forward from the fuselage side fitting, and the longerons running aft
from the tail boom side fitting, clean and free of paint and any non-
faying sealant; and inspecting for cracks in the attachment structure
with a borescope since the tail boom side structure is difficult to
access. On the fuselage side, SAIB SW-18-29 recommends paying
particular attention to the most forward fitting fasteners, the cap
angle and the cap angle rivets just forward of the fitting as failures
in these areas are more common. On the tail boom side, SAIB SW-18-29
recommends paying particular attention to the most aft fitting
fasteners as failures in this area are more common. SAIB SW-18-29 also
advises that smoking rivets are an indicator of attachment point
issues. For helicopters that perform heavy lift operations, SAIB SW-18-
29 recommends performing a repetitive 20 hours TIS inspection of both
the fuselage and tail boom upper left-hand (LH) attach fittings,
fuselage side cap angle, and tail boom side longeron. Lastly, for all
affected helicopters, if a loud noise (typically a ``pop'' or ``bang'')
is heard in the rear of the aircraft during flight, SAIB SW-18-29
recommends minimizing hovering, slow flight, and pedal turns; reducing
power when possible to avoid left pedal input; jettisoning external
loads (if present) as soon as possible; and landing the aircraft as
soon as possible. If an external load must be landed, SAIB SW-18-29
recommends performing a forward descent until the load touches down.
    Based on input from a repair station, the FAA revised SAIB SW-18-29
to SAIB SW-18-29R1, dated February 19, 2019 (SAIB SW-18-29R1), to alert
all owners and operators of clarified paint and sealant removal
procedures and simplify the wording of recommendations to provide
clarity. In particular, it was necessary to correct the emphasized
inspection areas. The fuselage side fitting emphasis was revised to
focus on the fitting section through the rivets closest to the attach
bolt (the aft fitting fasteners) rather than through the most forward
fitting fasteners. The tail boom side fitting emphasis was revised to
focus on the fitting section through the rivets closest to the attach
bolt (the forward fitting fasteners) rather than through the most aft
fitting fasteners.

Related Service Information

    The FAA reviewed portions of the following related service
information:
     Garlick Helicopters Inc. Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness Report No. GH-H13WE-CA1H, UH-1H Helicopters, Revision 4,
dated August 9, 2012, available from Rotorcraft Development
Corporation. This report contains a Component Overhaul Schedule, an
Airworthiness Limitation Schedule, and a Continued Airworthiness
Documents Section that lists Army Technical Manuals required for
servicing, maintaining, inspecting, repairing, and overhauling the
helicopter, its engine, rotors, and appliances, and for special purpose
modifications.

     Garlick Helicopters Inc. Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness Report No. GH-H5NM-CA1, UH-1E, UH-1L, TH-1L and HH-1K
Helicopters, Revision Original, dated October 22, 2002, available from
Rotorcraft Development Corporation. This report contains a Component
Overhaul Schedule, an Airworthiness Limitation Schedule, and a
Continued Airworthiness Documents Section that lists Army Technical
Manuals required for servicing, maintaining, inspecting, repairing, and
overhauling the helicopter, its engine, rotors, appliances, and for
special purpose modifications.
     Headquarters, Department of the Army, Aviation Unit and
Intermediate Maintenance Instructions Model UH-1H/V/EH-1H/X
Helicopters, Technical Manual TM 55-1520-210-23-1, Change 42, dated
April 14, 2003, available from JJASPP Engineering Services, LLC,
Richards Heavylift Helo, Inc., and San Joaquin Helicopters. This
service information contains: Tail boom hoisting/handling instructions;
hard landing, tail rotor blade strike, and sudden stoppage due to
compressor stall tail boom inspection requirements; tail boom removal
and installation instructions including attachment bolt installation
and tightening instructions, tail boom attachment fitting inspection
instructions, tail boom and fuselage attachment fitting bolt hole wear
limits, allowable tail boom attachment fitting damage and corrosion
repair instructions; loose attachment fitting fastener inspection and
replacement instructions; tail boom attachment fitting replacement
instructions; classification of damage as negligible, repairable or
requiring replacement for tail boom structure including rivets,
fasteners, tail boom attachment fittings, stringers, and longerons;
tail boom structural material specifications; allowable area for damage
repair of tail boom attachment fittings; longeron damage limits and
repair criteria; and stringer repair instructions.
     Headquarters, Department of the Army, Aviation Unit and
Intermediate Maintenance Instructions Army Model UH-1H/V/EH-1H/X,
Technical Manual TM 55-1520-210-23-3, Change 8, dated June 14, 1996,
available from JJASPP Engineering Services, LLC, Richards Heavylift
Helo, Inc., and San Joaquin Helicopters. This service information
contains: A Maintenance Allocation Chart which assigns tail boom
maintenance functions to three levels, (1) high-frequency field tasks
requiring general knowledge to maintain the helicopter in an airworthy
condition or return the helicopter to an airworthy condition, (2) low-
frequency field tasks requiring specialized knowledge to return the
helicopter to an airworthy condition, and (3) helicopter or component
maintenance tasks which cannot be performed in the field; and
instructions for field manufacture of part number (P/N) 204-030-800-
443, Tail Boom Assembly Cover, and P/N 205-031-801-53, Tail Boom Cover.
     Headquarters, Department of the Army, Aviation Unit
Maintenance (AVUM) and Aviation Intermediate Maintenance (AVIM) Manual
for General Aircraft Maintenance (General Maintenance and Practices),
Volume 1, Technical Manual TM 1-1500-204-23-1, Change 5, dated May 31,
2006, available from Richards Heavylift Helo, Inc. This service
information contains general maintenance practice information.
     Headquarters, Department of the Army, AVUM and AVIM Manual
for General Aircraft Maintenance (Hardware and Consumable Materials)
Volume 6, Technical Manual TM 1-1500-204-23-6, Change 4, dated August
20, 2004, available from Richards Heavylift Helo, Inc. This service
information contains general information pertaining to the use and
identification of hardware and materials, specifically bolts, nuts,
rivets, clamps, fittings, plate nuts, torque values, lockwire
techniques, cotter pins, safety pins, and Hi-Shear rivets.
     Headquarters, Department of the Army, AVUM and AVIM Manual
for General Aircraft Maintenance (Nondestructive Testing and Flaw
Detection Procedures and Practices) Volume 7, Technical Manual TM 1-
1500-204-23-7, Change 1, dated December 30, 1993, available from
Richards Heavylift Helo, Inc. This service information contains general
information pertaining to nondestructive testing and flaws, and
nondestructive inspection procedures and practices, particularly
magnetic particle inspections, radiography, ultrasonic inspections, and
electromagnetic inspections.
     Headquarters, Department of the Army, AVUM and AVIM Manual
for General Aircraft Maintenance (Sheet Metal Shop Practices) Volume
10, Technical Manual TM 1-1500-204-23-10, Change 3, dated August 20,
2004, available from Richards Heavylift Helo, Inc. This service
information contains general information pertaining to the repair of
aircraft structures, structural metals, forming of replacement
structure, rivets and riveting techniques, airframe sheet metal repair,
and sandwich construction repair.
     Headquarters, Department of the Army, AVUM and AVIM Manual
Nondestructive Inspection Procedures for UH-1 Helicopter Series,
Technical Manual TM 1-1520-256-23, dated November 30, 1996, available
from Richards Heavylift Helo, Inc. This service information contains
instructions for accomplishing an eddy current inspection of the
fuselage structure, tail boom and fuselage tail boom attachment
fittings, and tail boom longerons.
     Headquarters, Department of the Army, Operator's Manual
Army Model UH-1B Helicopter, Technical Manual TM 55-1520-219-10, Change
20, dated May 16, 1983, available from Richards Heavylift Helo, Inc.,
and Rotorcraft Development Corporation. This manual contains operating
instructions and procedures for the UH-1B helicopter. It includes a
brief description of the tail boom structure.
     Headquarters, Department of the Army, Operator's Manual
Army Model UH-1H/V Helicopters, Technical Manual TM 55-1520-210-10,
Change 20, dated June 23, 2005, available from Northwest Rotorcraft,
LLC, Richards Heavylift Helo, Inc., and Rotorcraft Development
Corporation. This manual contains operating instructions and procedures
for the UH-1H/V helicopter. It includes a brief description of the tail
boom structure and a pre-flight check of the tail boom attachment
bolts.
     Headquarters, Department of the Army, Organizational
Maintenance Manual Army Model UH-1B Helicopter, Technical Manual TM 55-
1520-219-20, Change 28, dated August 2, 1982, available from Richards
Heavylift Helo, Inc., Rotorcraft Development Corporation, and Southwest
Florida Aviation International, Inc. This manual provides various
maintenance instructions for flight line maintenance crews, including
special inspections of the tail boom attachment structure. Following
hard landings, tail rotor blade strikes, or compressor stalls,
maintenance crews are required to inspect the area where the tail boom
attaches to the forward fuselage section, specifically the attachment
fittings, longerons and cap angles, for cracks, distortion, and loose
rivets, and the attachment bolts for torque.
     Headquarters, Department of the Army, Preparation for
Shipment of UH-1/EH-1 Helicopters, Technical Manual TM 55-1520-242-S,
Change 5, dated June 30, 1993, available from JJASPP Engineering
Services, LLC. This service information contains instructions to coat
attachment points and hardware with corrosion preventive when tail boom
is removed for transport.
     Headquarters, Department of the Army, Rotorcraft
Development

Corporation, UH-1B Aircraft Preventive Maintenance Services, Technical
Manual TM 55-1520-219-PMS, Change 7, dated August 9, 1976, available
from Rotorcraft Development Corporation. This service information
contains requirements: To inspect the tail boom attaching bolts for
security and the fittings for cracks daily and every 25, 50, 75, and
100 flight hours; and to inspect the tail boom interior structure and
longerons for damage, cracks, and corrosion every 100 flight hours.
     Headquarters, Department of the Army, UH-1B DS and GS
Maintenance Manual, Technical Manual TM 55-1520-219-34, Change 9, dated
June 5, 1972, available from Richards Heavylift Helo, Inc., Rotorcraft
Development Corporation, and Southwest Florida Aviation International,
Inc. This service information contains: Instructions to remove and
install the tail boom; attachment bolt exposed thread limits;
attachment bolt tightening instructions with instructions for
manufacturing a special torque wrench extension; allowable tail boom
attachment fitting hole diameters; damage classifications for tail boom
skin, stringers and longerons as negligible, reparable by patching,
reparable by insertion, or damage necessitating replacement; and
instructions for field manufacture of P/N 204-030-800-443, Tail Boom
Assembly Cover.
     Headquarters, Department of the Army, UH-1H/V and EH-1H/X
Aircraft Phased Maintenance Checklist, Technical Manual TM 55-1520-210-
PM, Changes 22, dated May 8, 2002, available from Northwest Rotorcraft,
LLC. This service information contains phased inspection requirements
for the tail boom interior and fuselage heater compartment to check for
damage, cracks, and corrosion.
     Headquarters, Department of the Army, UH-1H/V and EH-1H/X
Aircraft Preventative Maintenance Daily Inspection Checklist, Technical
Manual TM 55-1520-210-PMD, Preventive Maintenance Daily Inspection
Checklist UH-1H/V and EH-1H/X Helicopters, Change 11, dated April 11,
2003, available from JJASPP Engineering Services, LLC, and Northwest
Rotorcraft, LLC. This service information contains preventative daily
maintenance instructions to be accomplished prior to the first flight
of the day to inspect for loose or missing rivets, the tail boom
attachment bolts for security, and tail boom attachment fittings and
longerons up to 12 inches from the fittings for cracks.
     JJASPP Engineering Services Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness for Restricted Category UH-1H Rotorcraft Report No.
JJASPP-ICA-12-005, Revision IR, approved February 6, 2013, available
from JJASPP Engineering Services, LLC. This report contains a Component
Overhaul Schedule, an Airworthiness Limitation Schedule, and a
Continued Airworthiness Documents section that list documents and
reports required for servicing, maintaining, inspecting, repairing, and
overhauling the rotorcraft, its engine, rotors, and appliances.
     Northwest Rotorcraft, LLC, UH-1H Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness Report No. PH-106, Revision 7, approved March
15, 2012, available from Northwest Rotorcraft, LLC. This report
contains a Component Overhaul Schedule, an Airworthiness Limitation
Schedule, and a Continued Airworthiness Documents Section, which lists
Army Technical Manuals required for servicing, maintaining, inspecting,
repairing, and overhauling the helicopter, its engine, rotors, and
appliances, and for special purpose modifications.
     Rotorcraft Development Corporation Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness Report No. GH-H3NM-CA1, UH-1B Helicopters,
Revision 1, dated December 6, 2012, available from Rotorcraft
Development Corporation. This report contains a Component Overhaul
Schedule, an Airworthiness Limitation Schedule, and a Continued
Airworthiness Documents Section that lists Army Technical Manuals
required for servicing, maintaining, inspecting, repairing, and
overhauling the helicopter, its engine, rotors, and appliances, and for
special purpose modifications.
     Tamarack Helicopters, Inc., Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness Report No. ICA-1, UH-1F, UH-1P AND TH-1F Helicopters,
Revision 6, dated March 14, 2016, available from Tamarack Helicopters,
Inc. This report contains a Component Overhaul Schedule, an
Airworthiness Limitation Schedule, and a list of Air Force Technical
Orders required for servicing, maintaining, inspecting, repairing, and
overhauling the helicopter, its engine, rotors, and appliances.
     Tamarack Helicopters, Inc., UH-1H Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness Report No. TAM-102, Revision Original, dated
July 23, 2009, available from Tamarack Helicopter, Inc. This report
contains a Component Overhaul Schedule, an Airworthiness Limitations
Schedule and a Continued Airworthiness Documents section, which lists
documents and reports required for servicing, maintaining, inspecting,
repairing, and overhauling the helicopter, its engine, rotors,
appliances and special purpose modifications.
     U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command Depot Maintenance
Work Requirement DMWR 55-1560-222, All H-1Series Tailboom Structural
Assemblies, Change 6, dated June 18, 2002, available from JJASPP
Engineering Services, LLC. This service information contains
descriptions of the tail boom structure and guidance explaining tail
boom attachment fitting structural loads; tail boom differences between
helicopter models; required depot level modifications; tail boom
structure isometric figures identifying the structural components;
instructions to inspect the tail boom longerons for dents, cracks,
holes, tears, corrosion, and distortion; longeron repair limits and
repair instructions; instructions to inspect attachment fittings for
cracks and hole elongation; attachment fitting repair limits and repair
instructions; tail boom attachment fitting deburr before bonding to
longeron instructions; and a requirement to dye penetrant the tail boom
attachment fittings.
     U.S. Army Aviation and Troop Command Aircraft Depot
Maintenance Work Requirement DMWR 55-1520-210, UH-1H/UH-1V Helicopters,
Change 11, dated August 31, 1994, available from Northwest Rotorcraft,
LLC, and Southwest Florida Aviation International, Inc. This higher-
level document directs maintenance personnel to DMWR 55-1560-222 for
detail depot maintenance instructions. It also contains information
regarding differences between the two models, instructions for cleaning
and corrosion control, longeron and stringer allowable damage and
repair; requirements to check tail boom for alignment; general aircraft
repair procedures; guidance explaining tail boom attachment fitting
structural loads; and guidance regarding primary vs. secondary tail
boom structure.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is proposing this AD because the FAA evaluated all the
relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described
previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of these
same type designs.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require revising the RFM for your helicopter
to add before each flight and before first flight of the day pre-flight
checks; removing excess paint and sealant from, and cleaning certain
tail boom

attachment structures; repetitive inspections for scratches, nicks,
gouges, tears, corrosion, cracks, bond separation, loose, missing, and
smoking rivets, buckling, distortion, number of attachment bolt exposed
threads, and attachment bolt movement.
    This proposed AD would require repairing scratches, nicks, gouges,
tears, and corrosion within allowable limits. This proposed AD would
require removing from service components with scratches, nicks, gouges,
tears, and corrosion that exceed allowable limits, removing from
service components with any cracks, buckling, or distortion, and
removing from service loose, missing, or smoking rivets. This proposed
AD would also require re-bonding any structure with dis-bonds, and
removing loose bolts and self-locking nuts from service, and replacing
them with new bolts and new self-locking nuts.

Differences Between This Proposed AD, the SAIB, and the Service
Information

    This proposed AD differs from SAIB SW-18-29R1 by expanding the
applicability to add various model helicopters operating under
experimental airworthiness certificates due to design similarity. This
proposed AD also updates part name nomenclature from SAIB SW-18-29R1 by
using ``attachment bolt'' and ``attachment fitting'' instead of
``attach bolt'' and ``attach fitting.''
    This proposed AD would require daily checks be performed with a
flashlight and 25 hour and 100 hour TIS inspections be performed with a
bright light and borescope. The service information does not specify
any items to assist with the required checks or inspections. The
proposed AD would require pushing on the tail boom while making certain
inspections. The service information does not. On the fuselage side,
this proposed AD would require paying particular attention to the
attachment fitting section near the rivets closest to the attachment
bolt, and the cap angle rivets next to the fitting. On the tail boom
side, this proposed AD would require paying particular attention to the
attachment fitting section near the rivets closest to the attachment
bolt. The service information does not single out these sections. This
proposed AD would require replacing any cracked components, while the
service information allows stop drilling of certain cracks. This
proposed AD would require removing any loose attachment bolts and their
self-locking nuts from service and replacing them with new bolts and
new self-locking nuts. The service information does not require
replacement of any loose attachment bolts.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD would affect 504
helicopters of U.S. registry. Labor costs are estimated at $85 per
work-hour. Based on these numbers, the FAA estimates the following
costs to comply with this proposed AD.
    Revising the RFM for your helicopter would take about 0.5 work-
hour, for an estimated cost of $43 per helicopter and $21,672 for the
U.S. fleet. The pre-flight check before each flight would take about
0.25 work-hour, for an estimated cost of $21 per helicopter per check
and $10,584 for the U.S. fleet per check. The pre-flight check before
first flight of the day would take about 0.5 work-hour, for an
estimated cost of $43 per helicopter per check and $21,672 for the U.S.
fleet per check.
    Removing excess paint and sealant, and cleaning all eight tail boom
attachment fittings would take about 5 work-hours and a nominal
materials cost, for an estimated cost of $425 per helicopter per
instance and $214,200 for the U.S. fleet per instance.
    Inspecting all four tail boom attachments for scratches, nicks,
gouges, tears, corrosion, cracks, bond separation, loose, missing or
smoking rivets, buckling, distortion, attachment bolt exposed thread,
and attachment bolt movement would take about 4 work-hours, for an
estimated cost of $340 per helicopter per inspection and $171,360 for
the U.S. fleet per inspection.
    Inspecting only the upper left hand tail boom attachment for
scratches, nicks, gouges, tears, corrosion, cracks, bond separation,
loose, missing or smoking rivets, buckling, distortion, attachment bolt
exposed threads, and attachment bolt movement would take about 0.5
work-hour, for an estimated cost of $43 per helicopter per inspection.
    The FAA cannot estimate the costs to do any allowable repair based
on the results of the inspections and the FAA has no way of determining
the number of aircraft that might need repair.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary
replacements based on the results of the inspections. The FAA has no
way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these
replacements.
     Replacing a tail boom attachment fitting would take about
33 work-hours and parts would cost about $1,500 for an estimated cost
of $4,305.
     Replacing a tail boom longeron bond assembly (attachment
fitting, longeron, and doubler) would take about 42 work-hours and
parts would cost about $7,000 (rebuilt) or $21,270 (new) for an
estimated cost of $10,570 (rebuilt) or $24,840 (new parts).
     Replacing a fuselage attachment fitting would take about
45 work-hours and parts would cost about $1,838 for an estimated cost
of $5,663.
     Replacing a fuselage cap angle would take about 42 work-
hours and parts would cost about $1,827 for an estimated cost of
$5,397.
     Replacing an attachment bolt and self-locking nut would
take about 1 work-hour and parts would cost about $313 for an estimated
cost of $398.

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.
    The FAA is proposing 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

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would 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 above, I certify that this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

Various Experimental and Restricted Category Helicopters: Docket No.
FAA-2019-0759; Product Identifier 2018-SW-075-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments by December 16, 2019.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the following helicopters, certificated in
any category, including experimental and restricted:
    (1) Model EH-1H, EH-1X, HH-1H, HH-1N, UH-1D, UH-1M, UH-1N, and
UH-1V helicopters;
    (2) Rotorcraft Development Corporation Model HH-1K helicopters;
    (3) Robinson Air Crane, Inc.; Rotorcraft Development
Corporation; and Tamarack Helicopters, Inc., Model TH-1F
helicopters;
    (4) Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.; JTBAM, Inc.; and Rotorcraft
Development Corporation, Model TH-1L helicopters;
    (5) Richards Heavylift Helo, Inc., Model UH-1A helicopters;
    (6) International Helicopters, Inc.; JTBAM, Inc.; Red Tail
Flying Services, LLC; Richards Heavylift Helo, Inc.; Rotorcraft
Development Corporation; San Joaquin Helicopters; and Southwest
Florida Aviation International, Inc., Model UH-1B helicopters
without Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) No. SR00026DE installed;
    (7) Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.; West Coast Fabrications;
JTBAM, Inc.; Rotorcraft Development Corporation; and Smith
Helicopters, Model UH-1E helicopters;
    (8) AST, Inc.; California Department of Forestry; Robinson Air
Crane, Inc.; Rotorcraft Development Corporation; and Tamarack
Helicopters, Inc., Model UH-1F helicopters;
    (9) Arrow Falcon Exporters Inc.; Global Helicopter Technology,
Inc.; Hagglund Helicopters, LLC; JJASPP Engineering Services, LLC;
JTBAM, Inc.; Northwest Rotorcraft, LLC; Richards Heavylift Helo,
Inc.; Rotorcraft Development Corporation; Southwest Florida Aviation
International, Inc.; and Tamarack Helicopters, Inc., Model UH-1H
helicopters;
    (10) Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.; JTBAM, Inc.; and Rotorcraft
Development Corporation, Model UH-1L helicopters; and
    (11) Robinson Air Crane, Inc.; and Rotorcraft Development
Corporation, Model UH-1P helicopters.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC): 5302, Rotorcraft Tail
Boom.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by multiple accidents and incidents
involving failure of the tail boom attachment structure and bolts.
The FAA is issuing this AD to address fatigue cracking of tail boom
attachment fittings, cap angles, longerons, and bolts. The unsafe
condition, if not addressed, could result in separation of the tail
boom from the helicopter and subsequent loss of control of the
helicopter.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Required Actions

    (1) Before further flight, revise the limitations section of the
Rotorcraft Flight Manual (RFM) for your helicopter by adding the
information in Figure 1 to paragraph (g)(1) of this AD or by
inserting a copy of this AD. This action may be done by the owner/
operator (pilot) holding at least a private pilot certificate and
must be entered into the aircraft records showing compliance with
this AD by following 14 CFR 43.9 (a)(1) through (4) and 14 CFR
91.417(a)(2)(v). The record must be maintained as required by 14 CFR
91.417, 121.380, or 135.439.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP31OC19.000

BILLING CODE 4910-13-C
    (2) Within 25 hours time in service (TIS):
    (i) Open the oil cooler/baggage compartment door on the right
hand side of the helicopter to gain access to the interior of the
tail boom.
    (ii) Remove paint and stray sealant and clean the eight
attachment fittings (four on the tail boom side and four on the
fuselage side). Remove paint and stray sealant and clean the four
cap angles, forward of the fuselage fittings, for at least 12 inches
from

the end of the fittings. Remove paint and stray sealant and clean
the four longerons, aft of the tail boom fittings, for at least 12
inches from the end of the fittings. It is only necessary to remove
the topcoat. Primer may be left in place and edge and fillet sealant
may be left in place. If any primer or edge or fillet sealant is
removed, before further flight, reapply the removed primer and
sealant.
    Note 1 to paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of this AD: On some models, the
baggage compartment floor and net must be removed to gain access to
the lower fuselage attachment fittings and cap angles.
    (iii) With an additional person pushing on the tail boom at the
third vertical rivet line aft of the trailing edge of the elevator
with both hands and gradually applying and relieving pressure using
body weight a minimum of three times in each of the following
directions: Inboard pushing from the left; inboard pushing from the
right; and upward pushing from the bottom; and using a bright light
and borescope, inspect each of the four tail boom attachment
structures for cracks, bond separation, and loose rivets. On the
fuselage side, inspect the fittings and the cap angles running
forward from the fittings, paying particular attention to the
fitting sections near the rivets closest to the attachment bolts and
the cap angle rivets next to the fittings. On the tail boom side,
inspect the fittings and the longerons running aft from the
fittings, paying particular attention to the fitting sections near
the rivets closest to the attachment bolts. Without pushing on the
tail boom, and using a bright light and borescope, inspect each of
the four tail boom attachment structures for scratches, nicks,
gouges, tears, corrosion, buckling, and distortion, and for loose,
missing, and smoking rivets. If there are any scratches, nicks,
gouges, tears, or corrosion within allowable limits, before further
flight, repair the affected components. If there are any scratches,
nicks, gouges, tears, or corrosion that exceed allowable limits, or
any cracks, buckling or distortion, or loose, missing, or smoking
rivets, before further flight, remove the affected components from
service. If there is any bond separation, before further flight, re-
bond the affected components.
    Note 2 to paragraph (g)(2)(iii) of this AD: It is not required
to push on the tail boom on helicopters with 39-inch extended
landing gear installed per STC SR01742NY while checking for cracks,
bond separation, and loose rivets.
    (iv) Inspect each of the four tail boom attachment bolts for
exposed threads. If there is less than one full thread or more than
three threads exposed, before further flight, remove the bolt and
self-locking nut from service and replace with a new bolt and new
self-locking nut.
    (v) Inspect each of the four tail boom attachment bolts for
movement by either applying the required installation torque in the
tightening direction only, or by inspecting for torque stripe
misalignment if present and attempting to rotate the bolt by hand.
If a bolt is under-torqued, a torque stripe is misaligned, or a bolt
moves, before further flight, remove the bolt and self-locking nut
from service and replace with a new bolt and new self-locking nut.
    (vi) After the first flight following any bolt replacement as
required by paragraph (g)(iv) or (v) of this AD, retighten any
replaced bolt by applying torque in the tightening direction only
and then apply a torque stripe on the bolt head.
    (3) At intervals not to exceed 25 hours TIS, perform the actions
required by paragraph (g)(2)(i) through (vi) of this AD, except you
are only required to perform the actions on the upper left hand tail
boom attachment structure and bolt.
    (4) At intervals not to exceed 100 hours TIS, perform the
actions required by paragraph (g)(2)(i) through (vi) of this AD at
all four tail boom attachment locations.

(h) Special Flight Permit

    Special flight permits are prohibited.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Denver ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request
to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District
Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the
manager of the certification office, send your proposal to: Richard
R. Thomas, Aerospace Engineer, Denver ACO Branch, Compliance &
Airworthiness Division, FAA, 26805 East 68th Ave., Room 214, Denver,
CO 80249; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and 2910046d4c475f4c5b0468405b4a5b484f5d046a4c5b5d694f4848074e465f.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Richard R. Thomas,
Aerospace Engineer, Denver ACO Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, FAA, 26805 East 68th Ave., Room 214, Denver, CO 80249;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on October 23, 2019.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-23686 Filed 10-30-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 84 (Monday, May 4, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 20475]
[FR Doc No: E9-10101]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13372-000]

Hydrodynamics, Inc.; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application
Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and
Competing Applications

April 23, 2009.
    On February 11, 2009, Hydrodynamics, Inc. filed an application for
a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power
Act, proposing to study the feasibility of the Tongue River Reservoir
Hydroelectric Project, which would be located at the existing Tongue
River Reservoir dam on the Tongue River near the town of Decker in
Bighorn County, Montana. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if
issued, is to grant the permit holder priority to file a license
application during the permit term. A preliminary permit does not
authorize the permit holder to perform any land disturbing activities
or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by others without the
owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would consist of the following:
    (1) An existing 1,824-foot-long, 91-foot-high earthen dam; (2) an
existing reservoir with a surface area of 3,700 acres and a storage
capacity of 79,071 acre-feet at the normal water surface elevation of
3,138 feet mean sea level; (3) an existing concrete outlet works
tunnel, which would be lined with steel; (4) a new 84-inch, 520-foot-
long steel penstock in the tunnel; (5) a new 40-foot-long penstock
extending from the tunnel to the powerhouse; (6) a new powerhouse
containing two generating units with a combined installed capacity of
2.0 megawatts; (7) a new tailrace discharging flows into the Tongue
River at the base of the dam; (8) a new substation; (9) a new 125-
kilovolt, 8.5-mile-long transmission line; and (10) appurtenant
facilities. The proposed project would have an average annual
generation of 11.0 gigawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Ben Singer, Project Manager, Hydrodynamics,
Inc., P.O. Box 1136, Bozeman, MT 59771; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Dianne Rodman,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. If unable to be filed electronically,
documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an original and eight
copies should be mailed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. For
more information on how to submit these types of filings please go to
the Commission's Web site located at http://www.ferc.gov/filing-comments.asp. More information about this project, including a copy of
the application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-13373) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3372.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-10101 Filed 5-1-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 99 (Thursday, May 22, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29449-29450]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11822]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4174-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2014-0003]

Arkansas; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Arkansas (FEMA-4174-DR), dated April 29, 2014, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: May 12, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Arkansas is hereby amended to include the following
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by
the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration
of April 29, 2014.

    Faulkner County for Public Assistance [Categories C-G] (already
designated for Individual Assistance and assistance for debris
removal and emergency protective measures [Categories A and B],
including direct federal assistance, under the Public Assistance
program).
    Clay, Cleburne, Fulton, Independence, Izard, Jackson, Lawrence,
and Sharp Counties for Public Assistance (Categories A-G).
    Randolph and White Counties for Public Assistance [Categories A-
G] (already designated for Individual Assistance).

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households in Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2014-11822 Filed 5-21-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P